was invited at the UN (the house of peace)then; so what is so unusual for a raven demagogue to follow suit today. This same (house of peace ) is still standing erect at the same glorious Manhattan spot. That only 3 countries left this ' Hall of wanders' ,only shows that the islamization of the civilized and not so civilized world is making in-row as planned. While France and Britain are in a advanced stage, the US of A is still on the minaret mode, with the acquiescence of the new White House

Iran has been denied many of its rights under the NPT to get access to nuclear tech over the last 30yrs. Iran has not tried to make nukes so far but has been trying to gain the ability to make then if needed or threatened. The real problem with Iran having nukes is not the nukes themselves but it acts as a counter to other countries using nukes against them and could shift the balance of power in other Muslims countries, like Egypt and Turkey. I think Israel should be forced to sign the NPT along with other countries like India, Pakistan and Cuba. I also believe that Egypt will soon become a nuclear power but Turkey would have problems with Russia.

He makes a complete mockery of the UN and NPT. The fact that Iran is a signatory to the NPT demonstrates supreme hypocrisy. If Iran was pursuing nuclear power for peaceful purposes, Ahmadinejad would not be threatening to wipe Israel off the map since he assumed office in 2005. He would not be arming terrorist proxies to the teeth and provoking war against Israel as #45 points out. If the nuclear program was for peaceful purposes, Iran would be marketing it as such and they might even have considered technological collaboration with Israel for purposes of advancement. If a Palestinian state was Iran's objective, Ahmadinejad would take a leadership role in bringing the Palestinians and Israelis together. Peaceful coexistence is at odds with Iran's quest for supremacy. Chaos is what he believes will bring about the return of the Mahdi which Ahmadinejad acknowledged early on in his speech.

That have also signed the NPT,but have still maintained their nukes(they could have got rid of them after signing the pact). Even if as you state iran has signed the NPT and is violating it,there would be no surprise there. You should in other words,first acknowledge the fact that the US,Russia and China also signed the fact but still maintain those weapons,and then yes,then your words regarding iran would be valid. Other than that,it would be known as double standards,and would not be credible at all. And by the way,at least iran signed the the NPT and has allowed full inspection on the Natanz facility,where as israel has not only not joined the club,but with holds the regions largest nuke arsenal.

israel you so often see talk backers talking about. Not to mention those ridiculous statements about the end times,Armageddon and the survival of the jewish state. Do keep in mind that the CIA predicted that in 20 years time there would be no israel left(that doesn't mean its going to happen by war).

Israel indeed wants peace, a real peace. This is why Israeli Knesset accepted the Clinton peace plan that would create a Palestinian Arab state next to Israel but Arafat was the one who rejected the plan. It was Hamas in Gaza that refused to take the good offer from Turkish businessmen who wanted to build an industrial infrastructure in Gaza. Instead Hamas launched rockets to Israel from Gaza.

When did Jews live in peace with Muslims? MY parents were subject to discrimination and Antisemitism in Turkey long before there was the state of Israel. In 1936 Jews were attacked in the city of Kirklareli, in 1941 the Turkish government passed a tax law called VARLIK VERGISI that took away all the belongings up to their pots and pans of the Jews, sending those who could not pay these huge and unfair taxes to labor camps. Same year a so called military draft (20th draft - 20 CI KURA ASKERLIK) only for Jewish young men was established sending Jewish men to labor camps. Same year in Iraq 170Jews were executed in the streets of Baghdad resulting with over 100 thousand Iraqi Jews leaving the country. As you see you can not blame the Muslim hatred of Jews in Israel since Muslims were already hating Jews even before there was a state of Israrel.

I replied to Geroge about the fact that Muslim hated Jews even before there was a state of Israel. It goes all the way to the Holly Quran. In 1948 Arabs could have accepted the partition plan and they would have had a state then. But they wanted no Israel and attacked, then lost.

"The Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT), of 1968 (opened for signature on 1st of July,1968, entered into force on 5th of March, 1970) is essentially as it sounds. It is a treaty designed primarily to curb, and ultimately to stop or rewind the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Proliferation can either refer to the spread of something, or its increase in number, thereby covering both what is known as 'horizontal' proliferation (more states with nuclear weapons) and what is known as 'vertical' proliferation (states with more nuclear weapons). The NPT more adequately addresses horizontal proliferation than it does vertical proliferation. Nevertheless, it may still be said that "The [nuclear non-proliferation] Treaty represents the only binding commitment in a multilateral treaty to the goal of disarmament by the nuclear-weapon States.". (quoted from United Nations Disarmament - WMD - NPT)" Note: The primary purpose of the treaty is to STOP proliferation of nukes in the NWS and prevent signatories who don't yet have them, from acquiring them. There's no mention of a time-frame for NWS signatories to rewind proliferation. Israel, didn't sign and is not in breach of this treaty. Iran signed, is attempting to acquire nukes and is therefore breaching it. What don't you understand? Your opinion is addled by your challenged intellect.

President Ahmadinejad speaks frankly and tells it likt it is. It clearly hurts the "feelings" of those wh do not want the truth be spoken as they acted like silly childs and left while he was speaking. The world needs more leaders like Ahmadinjead if we ever going to see peace. And Iran's slogan is perfect: Nuclear power for all, Nuclear weapons for none! Can not argue with that one can you?

Like Jon at 32 says...if Iran drops out of the treaty...I think they'll have to face the consequences. I think there's a difference between.. not signing and ...signing and then dropping out...the latter is not very good for trade ; ) I think you're right that Iran would 'drop out with pleasure'..... But why haven't they done so...hmmm? Shalom and have a nice evening

A big fuss about it. Come clean with your nukes and then we can talk about iran. That's what the Obama administration also has in store. Which is an excellent plan.

It's plain for all to see, except you, because you don't want to.Do you seriously believe Iran should acquire Nuclear weapons? Or are you so naive that you think those who have them will scrap them completely?( nice in theory) Anyway, Israel is not breaking any rules,Iran is. Period. Here's some further info on why Israel is not breaking any rules ie your would-be occupation.. Dr. Jacques Gauthier: Sovereignty over Jerusalem and Its Old City The central point of this lecture was to distinguish between political rights and legal rights. Legal rights are binding, and Gauthier's thesis claims that the Jewish people were given legal rights to Jerusalem through the formalization of the Balfour Declaration of the San Remo Conference by the Supreme Council of Nations, which was the precursor to the League of Nations, and the United Nations. Gauthier invoked the legal principle of "la chose jugée" (judged issue) in his discussion of how all legal rights and claims recognized by the Supreme Council became irreversible, binding forever in a "sacred trust", and could not be changed with further legislation by the creation of the League of Nations that followed, and the UN after that. * A solution to the issue of sovereignty over Jerusalem must be made in order for peace to be achieved * Israel has claimed sovereignty over all of Jerusalem; the Palestinian Authority has claimed sovereignty over East Jerusalem (including the Old City) * The Green Line is from a 1949 Armistice Agreement between Israel and Jordan * Based on the Green Line, if Israel were divided today, the western part of Jerusalem would go to Israel, and East Jerusalem and the Old City would go to Palestine * Maps from the 1st Century CE and onward show that the borders of Jerusalem have remained almost identical up to today * It is important to distinguish between legal and non-legal claims * Herzl, 1896 - Published his thesis, The Jewish State - In 1897, organized the first Zionist Conference in Basel * Balfour Declaration, 1917 - Turning point of legal rights of Jews over Palestine - Approved by the British War Cabinet during World War I - Britain was reaching out for Jewish support and made a binding commitment to help establish a Jewish state in Palestine * Paris Peace Conference, 1919 - Five nations formed the Supreme Council of Allied Powers – United States, Britain, Italy, France, Japan - Listened to different country claims over the defeated nations - Zionist organization presented their statement of claim (political document), stating what they wanted recognized by the Supreme Council + The Jews wanted a state, a home, and independence in due course + Wanted Britain as their trustee, to help them until they were in a position to declare independence + Weizman presented at the conference an request for recognition of the Jewish title to Palestine and the right of the Jews to reconstitute their national home in Palestine - Arab delegation + Represented by the Hashemite family (controlled Mecca) - The Arab and Jewish delegations met before the conference. The Arabs agreed to support the Jewish claim to Palestine if the Jews helped the Arabs achieve independence

* Article 22 of the League of Nations - Refers to territories that are not ready to govern themselves - Victors of the war set up mandates (trusts) over these territories * Every treaty signed at the Paris conference dealt with rights and titles; the defeated nations had to renounce their rights and title to the victors - This was binding by international law * San Remo, Italy, 1920 - The Supreme Council did not have time at the Paris conference to make a decision regarding the Ottoman territories - Came to San Remo to make this decision - April 25, 1920: Decided to give recognition to the title of the Jewish claim over Palestine and to the Arab claim over Mesopotamia (Iraq) - Mandate for Palestine – political rights given to the Jewish people, and civil rights were given to the current inhabitants + Preamble recognises the Jewish connection to Palestine and the grounds for the Jews to reconstitute their national homeland in Palestine #This turns the political claim of the Balfour Declaration into a legal claim # 14 million Jews were deemed to have rights in Palestine if they chose to immigrate * 1921: The Hashemites became angered by the French. To appease them, the British give the Hashemites the throne over Iraq and the throne of Trans-Jordan. - The land that had been granted to the Jews was divided up, the western portion became Trans-Jordan - Britain pledges support in establishing a Jewish state with the remaining land * Partition Resolution, 1947, by the General Assembly of the UN - Not binding - The Jews accept the Partition Resolution (West Palestine would become an Arab state, Jerusalem would be an international city) + As part of the Resolution, a referendum would occur after 10 years to modify the rights to Jerusalem * The Jewish people are not occupiers of Jerusalem because they were given the right to establish themselves there * Conclusion: From the perspective of international law, there are binding decisions from the League of Nations that have been reneged and forgotten' What do you have to say about this, Peter?

What does it have to do with what I had to say?? Have something good to offer and then you will be heard.

Reading information and learning facts seem to make you yawn and you seem to prefer to rant based on your personal feelings instead of information and facts. Keep on yawning.

Not of Natanz, Bushehr or any other nuclear facility. Once again, the fact that Iran signed the NPT yet is not in compliance with the NPT makes Ahmadinejad's speech a total farce.

Thank you for your clarification regarding the NPT. Peter is familiar to me as Bandar of Hezbollah. He posts under various names on this site including Avi, Alex, Mark, Marco, Arash etc. If you pay attention, you'll notice the writing style is the same. I'm afraid Peter is challenged by his conflict of interest.

premature postings? Of course not!! Just proves that you have nothing new to offer and use slander to cover up your weakness. Too bad there is no way I can prove that I am who I am. TATA!!!!

You're doin' swell : )