'
Complete
Transcript
[Historic
Speech
of
Gaddafi
to UN
General
Assembly,
2009]
Note:
United
Nations
removed
the
English
transcript
of his
speech
from its
website
and
western
media
removed
the
transcript
from all
types of
media
resources.
MetaExistence
Organization
made an
effort
to
restore
the
original
transcript
from his
video
speech.
Gaddafi
showed a
actual
evil
face of
UN and
security
council
to the
world.
Truth
always
be truth
. . . .
You
never
hide it
Here
is
complete
transcript
of what
he said:
Distinguished
members
of the
General
Assembly
of the
United
Nations,
in the
name of
the
African
Union, I
would
like to
welcome
you.
This
gathering
will be
an
historic
one in
the
world
and the
history
of the
world.
And in
the name
of the
General
Assembly
that is
presided
by Libya
now, in
the name
of the
African
Union,
and in
the name
of 1,000
traditional
African
kingdoms
in your
own
name, I
would
like to
seize
this
opportunity
to
present
congratulations
to
our son,
Obama,
because
this is
the
first
time
that he
is
attending
the
General
Assembly
in this
capacity
as the
president
of the
United
States,
and we
greet
him
because
it is
the
hosting
country
of this
gathering.
This
meeting
comes at
the
corner
at the
(inaudible)
of so
many
challenges
that
face us,
and that
the
whole
world
should
come
together
and
unite
and
should
put all
efforts
together.
Serious
efforts
should
be put
together
by the
world so
that the
world
will
defeat
these
challenges
which
constitute
the main
common
enemy to
all of
us
challenges
of
climate,
challenges
of
international
crises,
or the
economic
capitalist
deterioration,
and the
food
crisis
(inaudible).
Perhaps
this
swine
virus
may be
one of
those
viruses
that was
created
in the
laboratory
and it
got out
of
control
because
it was
meant in
the
beginning
to be
used as
a
military
weapon,
as well
as the
military,
the
nuclear
proliferations,
as well
as the
hypocrisy,
the
deteriorations,
and the
control
of
(inaudible).
Dear
brothers,
as you
know,
the
United
Nations
was
established
and
founded
by
countries
where
against
the
Germans
at the
time.
The
United
Nations
that we
have
today is
different
today.
But the
United
Nations
it is
the
countries
or the
nations
that
would
come
together
against
Germany
during
the
Second
World
War.
These
countries
constituted
(inaudible)
and give
members
seats
its own
members.
And
granted
we were
not
present
at the
time.
And the
United
Nations
was
tailored
according
to these
countries
and
wanted
from us
to wear
the
clothes
or the
suit
that was
tailored
against
Germany.
That is
the real
substance
and
context
of the
United
Nations
as it
was
founded
40
years
or 60
years
ago.
This
happened
during
the
absence
of over
165
countries
where
the
ratio
was one
of
eight.
And one
was
present
and
eight
were
absent.
Those
they
created
or they
made the
charter,
and you
know I
have the
charter,
a copy
of it.
And one
should
read the
charter
of the
United
Nations.
The
preamble
of the
United
Nations
is
different
from the
provisions
and the
articles.
How this
came to
existence,
those
who
attended
in San
Francisco
in 1945,
they all
participated
in the
preamble,
but they
left
articles
and the
provisions
and the
procedures
the
(inaudible).
They
left it
to the
job of
the
experts
and the
countries
who are
interested,
which
are the
countries
who
created
the
Security
Council,
which
countries
came
together
united
against
Germany.
The
preamble
is very
tempting,
and no
one is
objecting
to the
preamble,
but
everything
that
came
after
that is
completely
in
contradiction
with the
preamble.
This is
what we
have now
this is
what we
are
injecting,
and we
should
never
continue.
This
came to
an end
during
the
Second
World
War. The
preamble
says
that the
nations
are
equal
whether
they are
small or
big.
Are we
equal in
the
permanent
seats.
No. We
are not
equals.
And the
preamble
says
that all
nations
are
equal
whether
they are
small
nations
or
whether
they are
big
nations
as far
as
rights.
Do
we have
rights
of a
veto.В Are
we
equals.В The
preamble
says
that we
are
equals
in our
rights
whether
we are
big or
small.В This
is what
is
stated,
and this
is what
we have
agreed
in the
preamble.
So, the
veto is
against
the
charter.В The
permanent
seats
are
against
the
charter.В We
do not
accept
it and
we do
not
acknowledge
it,
neither
do we
recognize
it.
(Gaddafi
ripped
up a UN
charter
at this
point)
The
charter
states
that we
in the
preamble,
I mean
that we
should
not
resort
to
military
force
unless
it is a
common
interest.
This is
the
preamble
which we
were
happy
and we
signed,
and we
joined
the
United
Nations
because
we
wanted
the
charter
to be
like
that.
It says
that the
armed
forces
only use
it when
it is a
common
interest
to all
nations.
But
after
that,
what
happened?
Sixty
five
wars
broke
out
after
the
establishment
of the
United
Nations
and
after
the
establishment
of the
Security
Council,
and
after
this
establishment.
Sixty
five,
and the
victims
are
millions
more
than
victims
of the
Second
World
War.
Are
these
wars and
the
aggressions
and the
force
that was
used,
and the
power
(ph) in
the 65
wars, in
the
common
interest
of all
of us?
No. It
was the
interest
of one
country
or three
countries
or four
countries
or one
country.
But it
was not
in the
interest
of all
the
nations.
And we
shall
come and
discuss
about
the
wars,
whether
these
wars
broke
out was
in the
interest
of one
country
or were
in the
whole
nations.
This is
in full
contradictions
and full
intervention
of the
United
Nation
charters,
and we
signed
that.
And
unless
we do
things
in the
charter
of the
United
Nations,
according
to which
we
agreed,
otherwise
we don't
speak
diplomatically,
we are
not
afraid.
We don't
(inaudible),
and we
were not
being
nice to
anybody.
Now we
are
talking
about
the
future
of
(inaudible).
There is
no
hypocrisy,
no
diplomacy,
because
it is a
decisive
and
important
matter.
(inaudible)
of
understanding
and
hypocrisy
created
to 65
wars
after
the
establishment
of the
United
Nations.
The
preamble
states
also
that if
there is
a use of
force,
then
there
must be
then it
must be
the
United
Nations
force,
or the
United
Nations
military
interventions,
according
to the
joint
ventures
of the
United
Nations,
not
country,
or one,
two
country,
or three
country,
using
the
force or
the
military
power.
The
United
Nations,
all of
it, will
decide
to go to
war to
maintain
peace
and
world
security.
And if
there's
any
aggression
by one
country
against
another
after
the 45
after
the
establishment
of this
United
Nations,
if there
is any
aggression
against
any
country,
the
United
Nations,
all
together,
should
deter
and stop
this
aggression,
and
should
check
this
aggression.
I mean,
if a
country,
any
country,
Libya,
for
instance,
makes an
attack
or an
aggression
against
France,
then the
whole
United
Nations
should
check
the
Libyan
aggression
against
France,
because
France
is a
member
state,
an
independent
state in
the
United
General
Assembly,
that is
a
sovereign
country,
a member
state of
the
United
Nations.
And all
of us,
we have
to
protect
the
sovereignty
of all
nations
collectively.
But 65
wars,
aggressive
wars,
took
place
without
any
actions
from the
United
Nations
to stop
and
check
these
wars.
And
eight
fierce,
big wars
and
victims
of these
wars
among 2
(ph)
million
made or
initiated
by the
countries
who have
member
states
and
veto.
Those
countries
who are
believed
that
they
would
maintain
the
sovereignty
and
independence
of the
people,
these
countries
actually
use
aggressive
force
against
people.
We
wanted
to
believe
that
these
countries
will
make
peace
and
security
in the
world
and
protect
the
people.
These
countries
actually
resorted
to
aggressive
wars and
(inaudible)
wars.
And as a
matter
of fact,
they
enjoyed
the veto
that was
given to
them by
themselves
and
enjoyed
the
member
states
of the
Security
Council.
But in
the
meantime,
they
actually
initiated
the war
which
amounted
to
millions
of
victims.
So, in
this
charter,
there is
nothing
that the
United
Nations
will
interfere
which
will be
the pure
business
of the
internal
affairs
I mean,
the
government.
It is
the
internal
affairs
of a
certain
government.
No
country
has the
right to
interfere
in this
affair,
the sort
of
government
whether
it is a
socialist,
capitalist
system,
or
whether
it is a
reactionary
progressive.
This is
the
responsibility
of the
society.
It is an
internal
matter
of the
people
concerned
of a
certain
country.
Rome
one day
the
senators
of Rome
they
gave him
(ph) the
amendment
(ph) to
be a
dictator,
because
at the
time it
was good
for
Rome. No
one can
say to
Rome at
the time
that you
give
Caesar
this
veto.
The veto
is not
mentioned
in the
charter.
(inaudible)
we
joined
the
United
Nations
because
we
thought
we are
equals.
And then
there is
one
country
that can
object
to all
of the
decisions
that we
make,
and it
has a
member
seat.
And who
has
given
this
country
this
member
seat?
These
four
countries,
they
have
given
themselves
member
states.
The only
country
that we
have
voted in
this
General
Assembly
is China.
China,
we have
voted to
give
China a
member
state in
the
Security
Council.
This was
done
democratically,
but the
other
member
seats
was not
Democratic,
was
imposed
upon us.
This
should
not be
accepted
by us,
and it
was a
dictatorial
procedure
that was
done
against
our
will.
United
(ph)
reform
is not
increasing
of the
member
states.
It is
just
making
things
worse. I
don't
know how
this
will be
translated,
but if
we add
more
water,
it will
be more
muddy.
This is
a
typical
expression
(ph) to
add
insult
to
injury.
I mean,
to make
things
worse,
and to
make
things
even
worse by
how?
Because
many big
countries
will be
added
further
to the
former
big
countries
that we
already
have,
and like
this it
will be
(inaudible).
So we'll
have
more
superpowers.
Then
from
here we
reject
having
any more
seats
done in
this
way. The
solution
is not
in
having
more
seats.
And the
most
dangerous
one, if
we have
more
superpowers
already,
the
superpowers
that we
already
have
this
will
crash
down the
peoples
of all
small
peoples
of
third-world
countries
which
now are
coming
together
in what
may be
called
the
G100.
There
are 100
small
countries
coming
together
in a
forum
that is
called a
forum of
small
states.
These
countries
will be
crushed
by
superpowers,
because
further
superpowers,
further
big
countries
will be
added to
already
(inaudible).
This
door
should
be
closed,
and we
reject
that
strongly
and
categorically.
Then you
open the
door to
have
more
seats in
the
Security
Council.
This
will add
more
poverty,
more
injustice,
more
tension
at the
world
level,
and more
competition
and the
level of
the
Security
Council.
And then
we shall
have
there
will be
high
competition
between
certain
countries
between
Italy,
Germany,
Indonesia,
India,
Pakistan,
the
Philippines,
Japan,
Brazil,
Nigeria,
Argentina,
Brazil,
Nigeria,
Libya,
Egypt,
Congo,
South
Africa,
Tanzania,
Turkey,
Iran,
Greece,
Ukraine
(ph).
All of
these
countries
will ask
to have
a seat
at the
Security
Council.
And like
this, we
shall
have a
raise
(ph) of
competitions,
then it
will be
impractical.
So, what
is the
solution?
The
solution
is that
for the
solution
presided
for the
General
Assembly
by
(inaudible),
which
will be
a
binding
resolution
taken by
the
General
Assembly,
which
will not
(inaudible)
any
other
quarter.
The
solution
is that
we shall
close
the
admission
of the
member
states
and we
don't
have
anymore
member
states.
This is
an item
that is
provided
for the
General
Assembly,
presided
by Dr.
Thratcher
(ph)
right
now.
And in
place of
that
will be
the
achievement
of the
democracy
based on
equality
between
member
states.
There
should
be
equality
between
member
states
and
instrumentation
of the
powers
and
demanded
of the
Security
Council,
the
General
Assembly.
And the
membership
will be
for the
associations,
not for
countries,
because
if we
open the
door for
more
members
and more
memberships
for the
countries
because
this
will
give the
right to
any
country
to have
a member
seat in
the
country.
And the
preamble
allowed
that.
No
country
can say,
for
instance,
you
don't
have a
seat in
the
Security
Council
if a
seat is
given to
Germany.
Italy
will
Germany,
maybe
for the
argument
of
Italy,
will say
it was
not
Germany
was an
aggressive
country,
was
(inaudible),
and was
defeated
in the
Second
World
War. And
if we
give
India a
seat,
then
Pakistan
will say
we are a
nuclear
country
and we
are at
war, and
then
Pakistan
that
would be
a danger
thing.
If we
give it
to
Japan,
then we
should
give
Indonesia,
being
the
biggest
Muslim
country
in the
world.
And then
Turkey
or Kenya
will
have the
same
rights.
What can
we say
to them?
Argentina,
Brazil,
Libya.
Libya,
that has
discarded
the WMD
program,
because
it will
deserve
a member
state
because
then it
then has
done
service
to
security
by
discarded
this
program.
And
South
Africa
will do
the same
and
Tanzania
will do
the
same.
All
these
countries
are
important,
and
(inaudible).
This
door
should
be this
is
falsehood,
and this
is a
trick,
and if
we went
to
reform
the
United
Nations,
and then
we bring
more
superpowers,
more
countries,
and then
we add
more to
the
already
big
superpowers
which
did
quite a
lot of
suffering
to us.
And then
the
solution
is to
achieve
democracy
at the
level of
the
general
congress
of the
world,
which is
the
General
Assembly,
which is
transformation
of the
Security
Council
power to
the
General
Assembly.
And the
Security
Council
will be
just an
instrument
to
implement
the
decisions
taken by
the
General
Assembly.
It will
be the
parliament
of the
world
and the
legislative
assembly
of the
world,
and this
is
democracy,
and the
Security
Council
should
be
responsible
before
the
General
Assembly,
and we
should
not
accept
it.
These
are the
legislators
which
are the
members
of the
General
Assembly
and the
resolution
should
be
binding.
It is
said
that the
General
Assembly
should
do this
and this
at the
recommendation
of the
Security
Council.
The
Security
Council
should
do this
and that
according
to the
rules
and the
orders
of the
United
Nations.
These
are the
United
Nations,
are
including
all the
members
of the
world,
not the
Security
Council,
which
include
only 10
member
states.
How can
we be
happy
about
the
world
peace
and
security
if the
four
countries
or 10
countries
controlled
the
whole
world?
We are
190
nations
and
countries,
and we
are like
the
(inaudible).
I mean,
we just
speak
and
nobody
is
implementing
our
decisions.
We are
just
like
decor.
You are
made
like
decor.
You are
like a
Hyde
Park.
You were
I mean,
without
any real
substance.
It's
just
according
to
speaker
like the
speakers
of the
Hyde
Park
corner.
No more,
no less.
You just
make a
speech
and then
disappear.
This is
who you
are
right
now.
The
Security
Council
is an
executive
body for
the
resolution
taken by
the
General
Assembly
only.
And in
this
case,
there
will be
no
competition
for the
Security
Council
member
states,
because
once the
Security
Council
becomes
a tool
to
implement
the
resolution
taken by
the
General
Assembly,
there
will be
no need
for any
competition.
The
Security
Council
should
just be
a
representative
for all
nations,
but not
by a
state
this is
what is
submitted
now to
the
General
Assembly
but a
permanent
seat for
all
space,
for all
union, I
mean.
Twenty-seven
countries
for
European
Union.
They
should
have a
permanent
seat at
the
Security
Council.
The
African
Union
should
have a
member
seat in
the
Security
Council,
53
countries.
And
Latin
Americans
should
have a
permanent
seat and
the
(inaudible)
should
have a
permanent
seat.
And the
(inaudible),
plus two
or
countries,
should
have a
permanent
seat.
The
Russian
federation
should
have a
permanent
seat.
The
United
States
of
America,
which is
50
states,
it has
already
a
permanent
member
seat at
the
Security
Council.
(inaudible),
once it
is
established
or is
about to
be
established
should
have a
member
state.
(inaudible)
should
have a
member
seat, 22
countries.
The
Islamic
Conference,
45
countries,
should
have
also a
member
seat.
Then
(inaudible)
should
have a
permanent
member
seat in
the
Security
Council.
Then we
have the
G 100.
Then we
think
about
that
perhaps
all
small
countries,
the
forum
(ph) of
small
countries,
perhaps
they
would
have a
permanent
member
seat
also. If
there
are
countries
outside
of the
(inaudible)
that I
mentioned,
maybe we
can
assign a
permanent
seat
will be
given to
them by
rotation
every
six
months.
Japan,
Australia,
may be
outside
any
union,
or
Australia,
or in
other
countries.
Perhaps
they
would
not join
the
(inaudible)
or the
Russian
Federation,
or not a
member
in the
European
Union or
the
Latin
American
Union,
or in
the
African
Union.
Perhaps
any
country
will be
given
this is
the
solution,
that now
this is
meant
for a
vote for
the
Security
Council
for the
General
Assembly
to take
a vote.
This is
a vital,
important
issue.
And I
mentioned,
the
General
Assembly
is the
congress
of the
world,
the
parliament
of the
world,
the
master
of the
world,
and no
one
should
object.
No one
should
we are
the
nations.
Anyone
outside
this
General
Assembly
we do
not
recognize.
(inaudible)
and Ban
Ki moon,
his
Excellency,
the
secretary
general
of the
United
Nations,
will
make the
draft,
the
legal
draft,
and set
up the
necessary
committees
to
submit
this for
voting.
The
Security
Council
from now
will be
made of
unions.
This is
justice.
This is
democracy.
And then
we put
an end
to the
Security
Council
will be
occupied
by the
countries
which
one has
nuclear
weapons,
which
one has
technology.
This is
terrorism.
We
cannot
have the
Security
Council
and the
countries
which
have the
superpowers.
This is
terrorism
in
itself.
If you
went a
world
that
lives in
peace,
united,
we
should
do that.
If we
want a
world,
then
it's up
to you.
Then we
have
conflict,
and then
we
should
continue
fighting
each
other,
or
conflict
until
doomsday
or until
the end
of the
world.
These
members
which
have a
veto or
they
don't
have a
veto.
All the
Security
Council,
they
should
have the
right of
the
veto.
All of
these
unions
belonging
to the
seats.
Or we
should
cancel
the
whole
veto
with the
new
formation.
This is
the real
Security
Council.
And
anyhow,
the new
Security
Council
that is
submitted
to the
new
proposals,
submitted
to the
General
Assembly
for
voting,
will be
an
executive
council
which
will be
under
the
control
of the
General
Assembly.
The
General
Assembly,
which
will
have the
real
power
and the
real
(inaudible),
like all
countries
will be
equal in
the
Security
Council
in the
same way
they are
equal in
the
General
Assembly.
We are
in the
General
Assembly.
We have
equal
votes.
We
should
also be
equals
next
door,
which is
the
Security
Council.
A
country
has a
veto, a
country
doesn't
have a
veto, a
country
has a
member
seat,
and then
a
country
should
not have
a member
seat, we
should
not
accept
it and
it
should
be a
mandate
(ph)
from
now. And
we
should
not be
subjected
to it,
and we
should
not
accept
any
resolution
taken by
the
Security
Council
according
to the
composition
right
now.
We were
(inaudible).
We are
independent.
And now
we are
here to
decide
the
future
of the
world in
a
democratic
way that
will
maintain
world
and
peace
security.
All
people,
small
and big,
are
equals.
This is
terrorism,
like the
terrorism
of the
Al Qaida.
This is
terrorism.
Terrorism
is not
just Al
Qaida,
but it
can be
also in
other
forms.
We
should
resort
to the
maturity
of the
votes of
the
General
Assembly
alone,
and we
should
not vote
(ph). If
the
General
Assembly
takes a
vote,
then it
should
be
implemented
and
should
be
taken,
and
taken
into
decision.
And it
should
be
enforced.
And no
one
should
say I am
above
and
higher
than the
General
Assembly.
Anyone
who says
that I'm
higher
than or
above
the
General
Assembly
should
leave
the
United
Nations
and be
alone.
Democracy
is not
for the
rich or
for the
for the
rich or
for the
one who
terrorizes.
So, for
the one
who is
more
powerful
than us,
(inaudible)
democracy?
No.
The
higher
(inaudible)
should
be their
own
nations
at equal
footing.
Now the
Security
Council
is
security
feudalism,
political
feudalism
for
those
who have
permanent
seats
protected
by them.
And they
are used
against
us.
It
should
not be
called
the
Security
Council.
It
should
be
called
the "
Terror
Council.
"
You see,
my
brothers,
that in
our
life, in
our
political
life,
that
if the
Security
Council
is used
against
us,
then
they go
to the
Security
Council,
they
resort
to the
Security
Council.
If they
have no
need to
use it
against
us, then
they
ignore
the
Security
Council.
If the
charter,
they
have
interests,
an ax to
grind to
use
against
us, they
respect
the
charter.
They
look for
the
seven
chapters
of the
Security
charter
(inaudible).
But if
they
want to
violate
the
charter,
they
would
ignore
the
charter
as if it
doesn't
exist at
all.
If the
veto on
the
permanent
seat is
given to
the one
who has
the
power is
injustice
and
terrorism
that
will not
be
accepted
by us,
and we
should
not live
under
the
shadow
of this
injustice
and this
terror.
Superpowers
have
interests,
complicating
(ph)
interests,
and they
use the
interests,
they use
the
(inaudible),
they use
the
power of
the
United
Nations
to
protect
their
interests.
And
these
terrorized
and
intimidated
the
Third
World.
The
Third
World is
terrified
and
being
terrorized
and
living
under
the fear
of
terror.
The
Security
Council
ever
since it
was
established
in 1949
did not
provide
us with
security,
but
provided
us, on
the
contrary,
terror
and
sanctions.
It is
used
against
us only.
For this
reason,
we are
not
committed
to
adhere
to the
Security
Council
resolutions
after
this
speech
of the
fortieth
anniversary.
Sixty-four
wars
took
place
broke
out
against
the war
(ph)
against
the
world,
against
small
(inaudible).
That it
is
fighting
between
small
countries
or
aggression
in wars
against
by
superpowers
against
countries,
big
countries
against
us. And
United
Nations
or the
Security
Council
did not
take any
actions
to stop
these
wars and
aggressions
in
violation
of the
charter
of the
United
Nations
against
small
nations
and
small
peoples.
And the
General
Assembly
will
vote for
these
historic
resolutions.
Either
we
continue
together
in one
nations
or we go
into
break
into two
equal
nations,
have its
own
general
assembly,
its own
security
council
belonging
to it,
where
they
have
equal
footing,
standing
on equal
footing
or and
the big
countries
who have
the
permanent
seats,
who have
their
rights,
will
stay in
their
own
councils,
whether
there
are four
or
three,
as they
wish
(inaudible).
And they
should
exercise
veto
against
themselves,
and this
is not
of our
interest.
And if
they
want to
stay in
permanent
seats,
OK,
that's
OK, but
permanent
is a
threat
for
(inaudible)
but we
shall
never
stay
under
the
supervision
or the
control
of the
veto and
the
right of
veto to
given
countries.
We are
not
(inaudible)
to give
we are
not fool
to give
the
right of
a veto
to big
powers
to use
us, and
we are
treated
like
second
class
and like
despised
nations.
We have
not
decided
that
these
are big
nations,
(inaudible)
nations,
respected
nations.
These
are the
nations
of the
world
which
represent
190
countries.
We know
that now
ignoring
the
resolutions
of the
Security
Council
is now
though
it is
injustice,
and it
is only
used
against
us. It
is not
used
against
the big
countries
who have
the
permanent
seats or
those
countries
who have
the
right of
veto.
They
never
use any
resolution
against
them. In
the
countries,
it is
used
against
us.
So, any
resolutions
taken
against
us, it
has
become a
travesty
of the
United
Nations,
and it
has
become
wars and
violations
of
independent
states
authorities
(ph) and
committing
war
crimes
and
genocides.
And
these
are all
in
violation
of the
Security
Council,
even
though
there is
a
Security
Council,
and
nobody
cares
about
the
Security
Council
and even
though
now each
now,
each
country
has each
(inaudible)
community
have
become
security
councils,
establishing
its own
security
councils
and with
the
security
councils
in its
own
formation.
Now it
has the
Security
Council
(inaudible)
has
become
isolated.
The
African
Union
has
already
established
MASS
(ph),
which is
the
peace
and
security
for
Africa,
and the
European
Union
has
already
established
the
security
council.
The
(inaudible)
already
establishing
its own
security
councils.
America
will
have its
own
concerns,
non-alignment
(ph).
One
hundred
twenty
countries
will
have its
own
peace
and
security
council.
This
means
that we
have
already
lost the
trust in
the
Security
Council,
which
have not
provided
us with
security.
And now
that's
why we
are
creating
regional
peace
securities
or
regional
security
councils.
We are
not
committed
to obey
the
rules or
the
resolutions
of the
security
councils
in this
formation
because
it is
undemocratic,
unjust,
and no
one can
force us
to be a
member
of the
security
councils
and to
obey or
adhere
to
resolutions
or all
of this
given by
Security
Council
in its
composition
as it is
right
now.
Now,
brothers,
there is
no
respect
to the
United
Nations.
No
regard
to the
General
Assembly,
which
constitutes
(ph)
actually
the real
substantive
(inaudible),
and
which
it has
no
decisions
that is
abiding.
The
International
Court of
Justice,
it is a
judicial
international
body,
and
resolutions
only
implemented
against
the
small
countries,
the
small
nations.
And big
countries
are
rejected
to be
implemented
against
the big
countries.
There
are
resolutions
or court
orders
taken
against
these
big
countries,
but they
have
been
refused
to be
implemented
against
them.
The
International
the IAEA
(ph), an
important
one in
the
United
Nations,
are not
big
countries
are not
responsible
for it,
or are
not
under
control.
And we
have
discovered
that
this is
only
used
against
us. It
is a
(inaudible)
against
us. You
told us,
this is
an
international
one, so
if it is
an
international
one,
then all
the
countries
of the
world
should
be under
jurisdictions
of this
one.В
If it's
not
international,
then we
close
the door
and
arrive
from
this
now,
from
this
speech,
we shall
close
the
door,
and we
should
not
accept
it.
And
adopt a
(inaudible)
president
of the
General
Assembly.
He will
talk to
the
director
of the
Baradei
(ph) or
the
(inaudible).
They
will ask
him,
do you
inspect
the
nuclear
supplies
of all?
Do you
supervise
the
increase
of this
nuclear
storage?
Then if
he says,
yes,
then OK,
then we
accept
that
we'll be
under
control.
But if
he says
that we
cannot
go to
these
countries
who have
the
nuclear
powers,
and I
cannot
have any
jurisdiction,
then we
should
close
the
door,
and we
not
accept
it to be
under
its
control.
For your
information,
I told
Baradei
when we
had the
problem
(inaudible)
nuclear
bomb,
and
predecessor,
I called
them and
I told
them,
Mr.
Baradei,
the
agreements
to
increase
to
decrease
the
nuclear
supplies
between
the
superpowers,
is it
under
control?
Is there
any
provisions
that if
it's in
a
country
increased
its
nuclear
heads,
are you
aware of
that?
He said
to me,
no.
These
big
powers I
cannot
go so
close to
it. I
cannot
ask
them. I
cannot....
so, you
are only
coming
to us???
I said
that
this is
not an
international
organization.
So, it
is meant
only for
us.
Security
Council
against
us.
International
IAEA
against
us.
International
Court of
Justice
against
us. And
they
(world
powers)
are
free.
This is
not
justice.
This is
not
United
Nations.
This is
rejected
totally.
As
regards
Africa,
Dr.
(inaudible),
if you
want to
reform
whether
they
reform
the
United
Nations
or not,
and even
before
you take
any
historic
decisions
or vote
against
Africa,
a need
is now
for now
a
permanent
member
seat in
the
Security
Council
because
this is
(inaudible).
Even if
we are
not
talking
about
the
United
Nations
reform,
Africa
was
colonized,
was
isolated,
was
persecuted,
was
usurped
(ph),
was
treated
like
animals,
was
treated
like
slaves,
was
treated
colonies,
was
colonized,
was put
under
the
trusteeship.
These
countries,
the
African
Union
deserves
a
permanent
seat for
the
past.
It's an
outstanding
bill to
be paid,
like
(inaudible).
And it
has
nothing
to do
with the
United
Nation
reforms.
This is
a
priority
and high
on the
agenda
for the
General
Assembly,
and no
one can
say that
the
African
Union
does not
deserve
a
permanent
seat.
Who has
the
argument?
Anyone
can talk
to me
even
right
now or
argue
with me.
Any
proof
that the
African
Union
does not
deserve
a
permanent
seat or
that the
African
continent
does not
deserve
a
permanent
seat. No
one can
argue,
or no
one can
refute
what I
am
saying.
It is
also for
voting
for the
General
Assembly
for
compensation
to
countries
who were
colonized.
And why?
So that
no more
repetition
of
colonizations
and no
more
usurpation
and
stealing
of the
wealth
of the
people.
And why
the
Africans
should
go to
Europe?
Why do
Africans
go to
Europe?
Why do
Asians
go to
Europe?
Why do
Latin
American
people
go to
Europe?
Because
Europe
was
colonized
by they
took the
mines
(ph),
the
wealth,
all the
resources
of
Africa,
of Asia,
of Latin
America.
And they
took all
the oil,
the
fruit,
the
vegetables
and the
stock
and the
people,
and they
used
them.
Now, the
new
generation,
the
African
generations
whether
it is
Asian,
whether
it is
Latin
America
or it is
in
Africa,
now they
are
looking
for
these
ones
which
have
been
usurped
and
stolen.
Now,
when I
stop one
African
(inaudible)
going to
Europe
(inaudible),
I told
them
where
are you
going?
They
told me,
I'm
going to
take my
usurped
wealth.
If you
bring my
reserved
wealth,
then I
don't
go. I
stop.
Who can
bring
back the
wealth
that was
taken to
me? Make
a
decision
to bring
all
these
resources
and
wealth
so that
no more
immigration
from the
Philippines
to Latin
America,
to
Mauritius,
to
India.
Let us
have the
wealth
that was
taken
from us
and
looted
from us.
Africa
deserves
compensation
trillion
$7.7,
$7.77
trillion.
That's
the
compensation
Africa
deserves
from the
countries
who
colonized
Africa.
Africa
will
call for
that.
And if
you don’t
give us
this
amount,
7.77,
the
Africans
will go
to where
you have
taken
these
trillions.
They
have the
right.
They
have to
follow.
Bring
the
money
back.
And then
they can
be
(inaudible).
No
Libyan
immigration
to
Italy,
even
though
Libya's
so
(inaudible).
Why
there is
no
Libyan
immigration
to
Italy?
Because
Italy
(inaudible)
compensation
for the
Libyan
people
(inaudible)
and
accepted
the
compensations
and
signed
the
(inaudible),
a
treaty,
an
agreement
with the
Italian
with
Libyan,
and it
was
endorsed
by the
Italian
parliament,
and
accepted
that the
colonization
was
wrong,
and we
should
not be
repeated
again.
And
Italy
would
not
accept
to be
attacked
whether
by air,
sea
against
the
Libyan
people
and that
Libya
will
compensate
for the
next 20
years,
will pay
a
quarter
of
billions
and will
build
hospitals
for the
Libyans
who are
lost
their
members
of their
hands or
their
fingers
because
of the
mines
during
the
Second
World
War when
the
mines
were
laid
upon the
Libyan
land.
Italy
made
apology
and was
sorry
and said
that it
will
never be
a
country
will
occupy
other
country,
the
territories
of other
countries.
And it
was
Italy
when it
was a
kingdom
and it
was
Italy
during
the
fascist
regime.
And
Italy
has done
a
glorified
thing
and a
civilized
thing
and
should
be
commended
during
the
Berlusconi
and even
the
predecessor
to
Berlusconi
did
their
own
contribution
until we
achieved
this
result.
The
Third
World
calls
for
compensation,
why? So
that we
don't
have any
more
colonizations,
so we
don't
have a
repeat
of
colonizations.
And so
that no
country
will be
big and
will
covet
(ph) to
colonize
another
country.
So that
this
country
will
know
that
there
will be
compensation,
and will
not go
on
(inaudible).
Colonization
should
be
eliminated,
and
countries
should
pay
compensations
who have
done
damage
to the
peoples
during
the
colonization
area,
and they
should
be
compensated
for the
damage
and the
suffering
that
they
have
inflicted
during
their
colonial
power.
The
other
point I
would
hope
that we
have to
face
patiently
but
before I
say this
point,
it’s
is
rather
sensitive
to a
certain
extent.
There
are
sentences
between
two
brackets
I would
like to
shed
some
light
upon and
mention.
We as a
matter
of fact
that we
Africans
are
happy,
proud,
that one
son of
Africans
governs
the
United
States
of
America,
of
Africa.
This is
a
historic
event.
One day
that the
black
doesn't
go where
the
white go
and
cannot
be in a
bus
where
the
white
is. Now,
the
American
people,
the
black
African
Kenyan,
young
voted
for him
and made
him a
president.
This is
a great
thing,
and we
are
proud of
that.
You are
the
beginning
of a
change.
He did
go for a
change.
But as
far as
I'm
concerned,
Obama is
a
glimpse
in the
dark for
the four
years or
the next
eight
years,
and I’m
afraid
that we
may go
back to
square
one. How
can you
guarantee
America
after
Obama?
Can you
guarantee
after
Obama
how
America
will be
governed?
No one
can
guarantee
America.
We are
content
and
happy if
Obama
can stay
forever
as the
president
of the
United
States
of
America.
The
speech
made by
Obama
just
before
me, it
is
completely
different
when
(ph) an
American
president
that we
have
witnessed
or that
we have
lived
with or
the
former
Americans,
they
used to
say, and
I quote,
they
say, We
shall
send you
the all
the
weapons.
We shall
send you
the road
clusters
and the
sandstorms
and the
rolling
thunder,
and we
shall
send you
the
poisonous
roses to
the
Libyan
children.
This was
the
logic.
The
American
presidents
used to
say to
us, they
shall
terrorize
us. We
shall
send you
the like
rolling
thunder
like the
one was
sent to
Vietnam.
We shall
send you
rolling
thunder
the same
way that
was sent
to
Vietnam,
and the
sandstorm
like it
was sent
to Iraq.
We shall
send you
the
night
(ph) as
it was
sent to
Egypt in
1956
even
though
America
was
against
the
night
operations.
And we
shall
send you
the
poisonous
rose
that
Reagan
sent to
the
Libyan
children.
Can you
imagine
the
president
of a
permanent
country,
a big
country
has a
permanent
seat at
the
Security
Council,
has a
right to
veto? We
thought
that
America
will
protect
us and
send us
peace.
What is
it?
These
are
lesser-guided
bombs
sent to
us
according
to the
carried
on the
F-1
airplanes.
This was
the
logic.
And we
shall
lead the
world,
and we
shall
punish
anyone
who
anyone
whether
they
like it
or not.
We shall
punish
anyone
who will
be
against
us. Now,
what our
son
Obama
said is
completely
different
today.
He's
calling
for the
seriously,
for
discardment
(ph) or
the
deproliferation
(ph) of
nuclear
weapons,
and we
should
applaud
that.
America
cannot
solve
the
problem
alone,
and the
whole
world
should
come
together.
And he
said
that the
position
we are
at now,
we
should
not
continue.
Now we
are meet
(ph) and
making a
speech
it
should
not be
like
that. We
accept
it. We
applaud
it. And
then the
United
Nations
also we
come
here to
United
Nations
to talk
against
each
other.
It's
true
that we
come
here, we
should
have
equal
footing
and
equal
unions
and
equal
associations,
and he
says
that
democracy
we
should
not be
imposed
from
outside.
So, the
reason
there is
the
American
president
who
recently
says
that we
should
impose
democracy
against
Iraq and
against
so on,
so on,
so on.
He did
say that
this is
an
(inaudible)
of
everybody.
This was
lost
(ph)
words,
and what
we hear
right
now is
the true
sense of
the word
when he
said
that
democracy
cannot
be
imposed
from
outside.
So, we
have to
be
cautious,
and
before I
just say
my
sensitive
remark
or the
whole
the
whole
world
has so
many
problems
(ph).
Shh,
whole
world,
shh,
listen,
listen.
World of
so many
problems
(ph).
Should
be like
that,
should
we have
so many
problems
(ph)?
Can't we
nations
on equal
footing?
Can't
we
let's
have an
answer.
Anyone
have an
answer
that it
is
better
to have
a world
of so
many
polarities?
Why can’t
we have
equal
standing?
Should
we have
a
patriarch
(ph)?
Should
we have
bombs?
Should
we have
guns? Is
it and
this is
why
should
we have
a world
of so
many
polarity?
We
reject -
we
accept -
we don't
- we do
not
accept
that a
world
living
not
equal,
big and
small.
The
other
point
that is
sensitive,
the
quarters
of the
United
Nations.
Please,
can I
have
your
attention?
Please,
can I
have
your
attention?
All of
you came
across
the
Atlantic,
crossing
the
Atlantic
oceans,
the
Asian
continent
or the
African
continent
to reach
this
place.
Why? Is
this the
Jerusalem?
Is this
the
Vatican?
Is this
Mecca?
All of
you are
tired,
having
jet lag,
suffering
from jet
lag,
tired,
had
sleepless
night,
and very
tired
and
physically
speaking,
you are
very
low. One
just
arrived
now,
flying
20
hours,
and then
you want
him to
make a
speech
and talk
about
this.
All of
you are
asleep.
All of
you are
tired.
It is
clear
that all
of you
are
lacking
the
energy
because
of
having
to
travel a
long
journey.
Why do
that?
Your
country
now,
some of
our
countries
are in
nighttime,
and they
are
asleep,
and now
you
should
be
asleep
because
your
biological
hour or
your
biological
mind is
accustomed
to be
asleep
at this
time. I
wake up
4:00 at
New York
time,
before
dawn,
because
in Libya
it is
11:00 in
the
morning.
Because
when I
wake up
at
11:00, I
am
supposed
to be
daytime.
At 4:00
I'm
awake.
Why do
you
think?
Why do
you
think,
why?
Think
about
it. If
this was
put in
1945,
should
we keep
it up to
now? Why
can't we
think
about a
place
that is
in the
comfortable?
The
other
point,
America,
the
hosting
country,
that
bears
the
consequences
the
expenses
and the
looking
after
the
headquarters
and the
looking
after
the
peace
and
security
of heads
of state
who come
here,
very
strict,
and they
spend a
lot of
money
and New
York and
all of
America
being
very
tired. I
want to
relieve
America
from
this
hardship.
We
should
thank
America,
and we
say to
America,
thank
you for
all the
trouble
that
incurred
upon
itself.
And we
say
thank
you to
America.
We want
to help
America.
We want
to make
America
secure
and New
York
secure,
and we
should
not have
the
responsibility
of
looking
after
the
security.
Perhaps
somebody
would
do any
terrorists
will
make an
explosion
or a
bomb of
an
aircraft
or a
president
or an
American,
and then
this
place is
a target
by
targeted
by the
Al Qaida.
This
very
same
place,
the same
building.
And if
it was
and why?
Because
on the
11th of
September,
it did
not hit
it. That
was
beyond
their
power.
And the
next
target,
that
would
be and
I'm not
saying
this out
of the
record
that we
have
tens of
members
of Al
Qaida
being
detained
in the
Libyan
prisons
and
(inaudible),
very
scary.
And this
makes
America
lives in
under
tension,
and
perhaps
you
never
know
what
will
happen.
Perhaps
America
will be
targeted
again by
a
rocket,
or by
perhaps
tens of
heads of
state
will
die.
We want
America,
to
relieve
America
from
this
worry,
and we
shall
take the
place to
a place
where it
is not
targeted.
Now,
after 50
years,
should
be taken
to
another
part of
the
hemisphere.
Fifty
years in
the
western
hemisphere.
Now for
the next
50 years
should
be in
the
eastern
hemisphere
or in
the
middle
hemisphere,
like
this by
rotation.
Now 64
years
now, now
we have
extra 14
years
over the
50 years
that the
quarters
should
have
been
taken
from
this.
This is
not any
insult
to
America.
This is
a
service
to
America.
We
should
thank
America.
This was
possible
in 1945,
but we
should
not
accept
it now.
And, of
course,
this is
also put
for vote
in the
General
Assembly.
Only in
the
General
Assembly,
because
Article
23 of
the of
the
agreement
64, it
says
that
(inaudible).
After
the
America
has the
right to
make any
tight
securities
because
America
is
targeted
by the
terrorists
and by
Al Qaida.
America
has the
right to
be to
take all
the
security
measures.
We are
not
blaming
America
for
that.
But we
don't
tolerate
these
measures.
We don't
have to
come to
New
York.
And we
don't
have to
be
submitted
to all
these
measures.
One
president
told me
that
your
copilot
should
not come
to
America
because
there is
restrictions.
He said,
how can
I come
how can
I cross
the
Atlantic
without
a
copilot?
Why,
why? He
doesn't
have to.
He
doesn't
have to
come
here.
When
another
president
complained
that his
guard
cannot
his
honor
guard
cannot
come
because
there is
some
misunderstanding
in his
name and
granting
him a
visa. He
came
one
other
president
came and
said, my
own
doctor,
he
couldn't
get a
visa,
and he
could
not come
to
America
because
he was
not
granted
an entry
visa.
You see,
the
security
measures
very
strict.
And, of
course,
if there
is any
problem
that a
country
has with
America,
then
they
will put
restrictions
for the
movement
of the
member
delegations
like in
Guantanamo.
Is this
a member
state of
the
United
Nations
or he is
a
prisoner
in the
Guantanamo
camp
that he
cannot
allow
free
movement?
So, this
is what
is
submitted
for
voting
for the
United
for the
General
Assemblies.
The
transformation
or the
moving
of the
headquarters.
If 51
percent
say,
then we
come to
the
second
vote. To
the
middle
of the
globe or
to the
eastern
part of
the
globe.
If we
say that
we have
to take
the
headquarters,
then
certain
the
place is
(inaudible).
Whether
the
middle
whether
the
center
hemisphere.
Why
don't we
go to
(inaudible).
If you
go to
1,000
(inaudible),
and no
one can
blame
you? And
no you
can come
even
without
a visa.
Once you
come
with a
president,
it's a
secure
country
(ph).
We are
not
going to
restrict
you to
100 or
500
meters,
and
Libya
has no
hostile
actions
against
anybody.
And
again, I
think
we'll be
in the
same
positions.
And if
the
vote, it
say that
we shall
have to
take the
vote to
the
eastern
part,
then it
will be
Delhi or
Beijing
in
China,
the
capital
of China
or the
capital
city of
India.
And this
is
logic, I
believe,
my
brothers.
And I
don't
think
there
will be
any
objection
to that.
And then
you will
play
you will
say that
thank
you will
thank me
for this
proposal
for
eliminating
the
suffering
and the
trouble
of
flying
over 20
hours
and 15
hours to
come to
this
place,
and no
one can
blame
America,
can say
that
America
will
reduce
its
contribution
to the
United
Nations.
No,
nobody
should
have
this bad
thought.
America,
I'm
sure,
will be
committed
to its
international
obligations,
and
America
will not
be
angry,
and
America
will
thank
you for
alleviating
the
hardship
of
America.
And
America
should
thank us
for
taking
all the
hardship
and all
the
restrictions
for the
this,
plus
even
though
this
place is
targeted
by
terrorists.
Then we
come to
the we
come to
the
issues
that
will be
taken by
the
General
Assembly.
Either
we have
to try
ourselves.
Either
we do
the
right
thing,
or
whether
we have
a new
meeting.
This is
not a
normal
meeting.
This is
not a
normal
gathering.
This is
even my
son,
Obama
said
that. He
said
that
this is
a
historical
one.
This is
not a
normal
gathering.
This is
not a
normal
one.
Now, the
wars
that
took
place
after
the
establishment
of the
Second
World
War, why
did it
happen?
Where
was the
Security
Council?
Where
was the
charter?
Where
was the
United
Nations?
There
should
be
investigations,
and
there
should
be court
orders.
And why
there
was
massacres?
We start
with the
Korean
War.
This was
taken
after
the
establishment
of the
United
Nations.
How a
war
broke
out and
millions
of
people
fell
victims,
and
perhaps
there
was even
a
nuclear
a
nuclear
the
world
was
about
the
world
was
about to
witness
a
nuclear
war. And
those
who are
responsible,
and
those
who
caused
the war
should
be tried
and
should
pay the
consequence.
Then we
come to
the Suez
Canal
war in
1956.
The file
should
be
opened.
Why
three
countries
who have
permanent
seats in
the
Security
Councils
enjoyed
the
right,
the veto
of the
Security
Council's
attack,
a member
state in
this
General
Assembly?
A
country
that is
Egypt in
this
case,
that was
a
sovereign
state,
was
attacked
and the
army was
destroyed.
And
thousands
of
Egyptian
people
were
killed,
and
towns,
villages
were
destroyed.
How
could
such a
thing
happen
during
the era
of the
United
Nations?
And how
can we
guarantee
that
such a
thing
will not
be
repeated
unless
we
redeem
the
past?
And this
is a
very
dangerous
thing.
The Suez
Canal
war, the
Korean
War, we
should
open the
files.
And then
we come
to the
Vietnam
War.
Three
million
victims
of the
Vietnam
War.
During
11 days,
bombs
were
used
more
than the
bombs
used
during
the
whole
war. And
during
the
Second
World
War, all
the
shells
and the
bombs
that
were
used, or
bombed
during
the four
years of
the war,
the
bombs
that
were
used in
the 12
days
were
more
than.
This was
a fierce
war. And
this war
took
place
after
the
establishment
of the
United
Nations.
And we
decided
that
there
would be
no wars.
This is
the
future
of the
mankind,
and we
cannot
keep
quiet.
How can
we be
how can
we be
safe?
How can
we feel
accomplished?
How can
we feel
complacent,
I mean.
This is
the
future
of the
world
and this
is the
General
Assembly
of the
world,
and we
have to
make
sure
that
such
wars
will not
be
repeated
in the
future.
Then
Panama
was
attacked,
even
though
it was
an
independent
state, a
member
state of
the
General
Assembly,
of the
United
Nations.
And
4,000
peoples
were
killed,
and the
president
of this
country
was
taken as
a
prisoner
and was
taken
put in
prison.
And
Noriega
should
be
released,
and we
should
open the
file.
And how
we give
the
right to
a
country
that is
a member
state of
the
United
Nations
to go
and wage
a war
against
a
country
and take
the
president
of such
a
country
and take
him as a
criminal
and put
him in
prison?
Who
would
accept
that?
This may
be
repeated.
And we
should
not be
quiet,
and we
should
make
investigations,
and we
should
each one
of us
may face
the same
destiny.
Each
member
state of
us may
face the
same,
especially
if this
aggression
is made
by a
member
state
that is
has a
member
seat in
the
Security
Council
and
supposed
to look
and
maintain
the
world
peace
security.
Then we
have the
Grenada
war.
This
country
was
attacked,
was
invaded
even
though
it was a
member
state,
by 7,000
- 5,000
warships
and
using
7,000
troops.
It is
the
smallest
country
in the
world.
And
after
the
establishment
of the
Security
Council,
after
the
establishment
of the
United
Nations,
and the
(inaudible).
And the
president
of this
country,
Maurice
Bishop,
was
assassinated.
How this
can be
done
with
impunity?
This is
a
tragedy.
And then
how can
we
guarantee
that the
United
Nations
is good
or not,
that the
Security
Council
is good
enough?
Can we
be safe
and
happy
about
our
future
or not?
Can we
trust
the
Security
Council
or not?
Can we
trust
the
United
Nations
or not?
Then we
have to
check
and
investigate
the
bombing
of
Somalia.
Somalia
was a
member
state of
the
United
Nations.
It is an
independent
country.
And
(inaudible).
Why? Who
allowed
that?
Who gave
the
green
light
for such
a
country
to
attack
to be
attacked?
Then the
Yugoslav
war. No
country
that is
peaceful
country
like
Yugoslavia,
that was
built
that was
built
step by
step,
piece by
piece,
after it
was
destroyed
by
Hitler.
We
destroy
it as if
we are
doing
the same
job like
Hitler.
Hitler
after
the
death of
Tito
and he
built
this
country
step by
step and
brick by
brick,
and then
we come
and
dismember
it for
imperialist
personal
interests.
How can
we be
satisfied?
How can
we be
happy?
If a
peaceful
country
like
Yugoslavia
faced
this
tragedy,
the
General
Assembly
should
make
investigations
and the
General
Assembly
should
decide
who
should
be tried
for the
(inaudible).
Then we
come to
the
Iraqi
war, the
mother
of all
evils.
The
United
Nations
also
should
investigate.
The
General
Assembly
presided
by
(inaudible)
should
be
investigated
by the
General
Assembly,
the
invasion
of Iraq
itself.
This was
in
violation
of the
United
Nations
charter
without
any
justifications
made by
several
countries
who have
member
seats in
the
Security
Council.
Iraq is
an
independent
country,
member
in this
General
Assembly.
How this
country
is
attacked
and how
this
country
how we
have
already
read in
the
general
in the
in the
charter
that the
United
Nations
should
have
interfered
and
stopped.
We have
come to
General
Assembly,
and we
have
resorted
to the
General
Assembly.
We said
that we
should
go to
the
General
Assembly
and use
the
charter
for the
checking
(ph). We
were
against
this
invasion
of
Kuwait,
but Arab
countries
fought
with
foreign
countries
in the
name of
the
General
Assembly
with
foreign
countries.
In the
first
place,
the U.N.
charter
was
respected.
And the
second
time we
wanted
to use
to it
stop the
war
against
Iraq, no
one used
the U.N.
charter.
And it
was
discarded
in the
dustbin.
Why?
General
Assembly
should
investigate.
Why? Why
there
was any
reason
to
invade
Iraq?
Because
it is
mysterious,
ambiguous,
and we
may face
the same
destiny.
Why did
we
invade
Iraq?
The
invasion
in
itself
is a
serious
violation
of the
U.N.
charter.
I mean,
the
invasion
itself,
per se,
is
wrong.
Then the
total
massacre,
or the
genocide.
More
than 1.5
million
Iraqi
people
were
killed.
We want
the we
want to
take
this
file and
we want
to
those
who have
committed
the
general
mass
murder
against
the
Iraqi
people
should
be
tried.
Yes.
Make it
easy for
(inaudible)
to go to
be
tried,
or
Bashir
to be
tried.
Or it is
easy for
(inaudible)
to be
tried,
or
Noriega
to be
tried.
That is
an easy
job to
be done.
OK. What
about
those
who have
committed
mass
murder
against
Iraqis?
Cannot
be
tried?
Cannot
go to
the we
should
not
accept
it.
Either
it is
meant
for all
of us,
big or
small,
or we
should
not
accept
it and
refuse
it.
If
anyone
who
commits
a crime
and can
be
tried,
we are
not
animals
in the
livestock,
or in
that we
slaughter
we have
the
right.
We are
ready to
fight.
We are
ready to
defend
ourselves.
And we
have the
right to
live
dignified
under
the sun,
on the
Earth,
and they
have
already
tested
us, and
we can
put up
to test.
The
other
thing,
how come
that
prisoners
of war
of Iraq
can be
sentenced
to
death?
Then
when
Iraq was
invaded
and the
president
of the
Iraqi
war was
caught,
it was
made as
a
prisoner
of war.
He
should
not be
tried.
He
should
not be
hanged.
And
after
the end
of war,
he
should
be
released.
So, we
want to
know why
the
prisoner
of war
have
been
tried or
should
have
been
tried.
Who
sentenced
to death
the
president
of Iraq?
Is there
an
answer
to that?
We know
who
tried
who
tried
him, the
name of
the
judge,
the
identity
of the
judge.
Who put
on the
sacrifice
day the
rope
around
the neck
and
killed
or
hanged
the
president?
People
we don’t
know,
they
have a
mask
over
their
face.
If this
is a
civilized
war,
these
are
prisoners
of war
under
civilized
countries,
under
the
international
law. How
a member
of a
government
and the
president
of a
country
should
be
sentenced
to death
and
hanged,
do they
have the
right?
Are they
legal
people?
Are they
a member
of a
judicial
system?
Do you
know
what
other
people
say or
what the
people
say?
People
say that
the
American
president
and the
president
the
British
president
are
wearing
the
masks,
and they
have
already
put to
death
the
president
of Iraq.
This is
why
don't
they
uncover
their
face?
Why
don't we
know
their
ranks?
Why don’t
we know,
is he an
officer
or a
judge, a
doctor?
Who is
he? How
come a
president
of a
country,
a member
state,
is
sentenced
to death
and
killed?
We
don'tknow
the
identity.
Those
countries,
the
implementation
the
United
Nations
has the
duty to
answer
these
questions.
Who have
exercised
or
implemented
the
death
sentence?
Those
foreigners,
they
should
have the
legal
status
(ph),
and they
should
have the
legal
status
(ph),
and we
should
know the
identity
of the
presence
of the
doctor,
and all
the
legal
procedures
should
be, even
for a
layman,
let
alone as
the
president
of a
country,
a member
state in
the
United
Nations
to be
sentenced
in such
a way
and put
to death
in such
a way.
This is
the
Iraqi
war.
Point
number
three in
the
Iraqi
war is
the Abu
Ghraib
situation,
which is
a
disgrace
to
mankind.
I know
America
made the
investigations
for this
scandal,
or the
authorities
under
the
Americans,
but the
United
Nations
also
should
not
forget
it. The
United
Nations
should
the
General
Assembly
of the
United
Nations
should
investigate
and look
into
this
matter.
The Abu
Ghraib
decisions,
the
prisoners
of war
who were
prosecuted
there
and who
were
badly
treated,
and dogs
were
used on
them,
and men
were
made
love to.
And no
one has
done
this
before
in
previous
wars,
sodomy,
and this
is
unprecedented.
No one
no
previous
aggressions,
or no
or
aggressors
and
prisoners
of war,
there
are
there
are
soldiers,
and they
are
raped in
prisons.
Then by
a member
state of
the
Security
Council,
this
Security
Council,
this is
against
civilization.
And this
is a
humane
kind,
and we
should
not keep
quiet.
We
should
know the
facts.
And up
to now,
a
quarter
of a
million
prisoners
are
still
men and
women
are in
Abu
Ghraib.
They are
badly
treated
and
persecuted
and
raped.
We
should
never
forget,
and we
should
open an
investigation
for
that.
Then
Afghanistan.
Then we
have the
Afghani
war.
There
should
also be
an
investigation
for the
Afghani
war. Why
are we
against
Taliban?
Why are
we
against
Afghanistan?
Who's
Taliban?
If
Taliban
wants to
make a
religious
state,
OK, like
the
Vatican.
Does the
Vatican
pose any
threat
to us?
No it is
a very
peaceful,
religious
state.
If the
Afghans
want to
establish
an
Islamic
emirate
let it
be like
the
Vatican.
Who said
the
taleban
are the
enemy
and has
to be
struck
by the
armies?
Is bin
Laden an
Afghan.
Is he a
taleban.
Bin
Laden is
not from
the
taleban
and not
from
Afghanistan.
The
terrorists
who
struck
New
York?
Are they
Afghans?
Are they
from the
taleban?
No they
are not
Afghani
and they
are not
from the
taleban.
So
why were
Iraq and
Afghanistan
targeted?
If I
want to
deceive
my
American
and
English
friends
I would
not tell
them
this.
But I
would
encourage
them and
tell
them go
on, send
more
troops
to
Afghanistan
and send
further
troops
until
they
drown in
a blood
bath
because
they
will
achieve
no
result
in
Afghanistan
or in
Iraq.
You have
seen
what
happened
in Iraq.
That
took
place
even
though
Iraq is
a wide
open
desert.
Then
what do
you
think of
Afghanistan
with
these
mighty
mountains.
No one
could
defeat
it till
the
hereafter.
They are
just
hitting
the
rock.
They
will
scratch
it but
they
will not
demolish
it.
Continue
the war
in
Afghanistan
in Iraq.
But I
want to
save
them. I
want to
say
these
hapless
nations.
America
and the
other
countries
that
fight in
Afghanistan
and
Iraq. We
are
saying
you have
to leave
Afghanistan
for the
Afghanis.
You have
leave
Iraq for
the
Iraqis.
Leave
them
even if
they
fight
each
other.
They are
free to
do so.
The
civil
war took
place
even in
the USA.
Nobody
interfered.
The
civil
war also
took
place in
Spain
and in
China
and in
many
parts of
the
world
and
nobody
interfered.
If it is
a civil
war let
it go
on.
Leave it
for the
Iraqis
and for
the
Afghans
to fight
each
other,
they are
free.
Who says
that if
the
taleban
rule
Afghanistan
they
will
become a
threat?
Do
the
taleban
have any
intercontinental
missiles?
The
airliner
that hit
New
York.
Did it
come
from
Afghanistan
or Iraq.
These
airliners
took off
from
Kennedy
airport
in New
York. So
why do
we go
and
strike
Afghanistan.
They are
not
Afghans,
not
taleban,
nor
Iraqis.
Why
should
we keep
silent
about
these
things.
Those
who keep
silent
regarding
what is
right is
like a
silent
devil.
We won't
be
silent
devils.
It is
our
right
because
we are
keen on
world
peace.
We are
keen on
the
destiny
of the
world.
We do
not want
to
undermine
humanity
in this
manner.
Then
after
that Mr
Ali
Tereki,
the
general
assembly
has to
launch
investigations
of the
assassinations.
You have
to
launch
an
investigation
once
again on
the
assassination
of
Patrice
Lumumba.
We want
this
recorded
in our
African
history.
How an
African
leader,
an
African
liberator
was
assassinated.
We want
to
establish
who
killed
him and
to
record
that for
history
so that
our sons
will
learn
history
and they
will
known
why
Patrice
Lumumba
the hero
of
African-Congolese
liberation
was
killed.
Even
after 50
years.
And that
act has
to be
denounced
and
those
responsible
have to
be held
accountable.
This
file has
to be
opened
and we
have to
go back
to the
old
documents.
Then we
would
like to
know who
killed
the UN
Secretary
General
Hamashold.
Who
bombed
his
aircraft
in 1961,
the same
year in
which
Lumumba
was
killed.
We want
to know
who
bombed
the
plane of
the UN
Secretary
General.
We want
to know
who
bombed
it and
who had
an
interest
in that.
Then we
come to
Kennedy's
assassination
in 1963.
The UN
General
Assembly
has to
open the
file of
Kennedy's
assassination.
We want
to know
why he
was
killed.
He was
killed
by
someone
called
Lee
Harvey
and
someone
called
Jack
Rubbi
killed
Lee
Harvey,
the
assasin
of
Kennedy.
We want
to know
why this
Jack
Rubbi,
the
Israeli,
killed
the
assassin
of
Kennedy.
And Jack
Rubbi
himself,
the
killer
of
Kennedy's
killer
also
died in
vague
circumstances
before
his
trial.
We have
to
return
to these
files
and we
have to
know.
What I
know and
what the
world
knows
and what
we
studied
in
history
is that
Kennedy
decided
to
inspect
the
Israeli
Dimona
reactor
to see
whether
it has
nuclear
bombs.
That is
the
reason
he was
got rid
of. As
long as
the case
in
international
in this
manner
and it
concerns
world
peace
and
weapons
of mass
destruction
we have
to open
investigations
into the
reason
why
Kennedy
was
killed.
You
should
also
open the
file of
Martin
Luther
King.
This
vicar
who was
a black
activist
and
human
rights
campaigner
and his
assassination
was a
conspiracy.
This
file has
to
opened
to
establish
who
killed
him and
prosecute
him.
And
further
more who
killed
Khalil
Al Wazir
the
Palestinian
Abu
Jihad.
He was
attacked
in a
sovereign
country,
a member
of this
assembly.
That is
Tunisia
where he
stayed
in its
captial.
But
there
was an
attack
by four
warships,
two
submarines
and two
helicopters.
The
independence
of that
state
was not
respected
as is
clear
from the
assassination
of
Khalil
Al Wazir.
How
could we
keep
silent
about
such
matters.
If we
keep
silent
there
could be
submarines
coming
to our
countries
and we
could
see
warships
coming
to our
coasts
and pick
up
anyone
they
like
without
being
held
accountable.
Then we
have the
death of
Abu Ayad.
He was
killed
in very
ambiguous
circumstances.
Then we
have
operations
such as
Al
Fardan
Operation
and the
Youth
Spring
Operation
where
Kamal
Nasser
was
killed
and
where
Kamal
Udwan
and Abu
Yousif
Al Najar
were
killed.
These
three
Palestinians
were
killed
in
Lebanon
which is
a
sovereign
state
and
member
of the
UN
General
Assembly.
We have
to
establish
who
killed
them. We
have to
prosecute
them so
that
such
havoc is
not
repeated.
You
would
like to
know as
well why
Maurice
Bishop
the head
of
Grenada
was
killed.
We have
tackled
how
Grenada
was
attacked,
with how
many war
ships
and
troops.
We said
they
launched
an
attack
on
Grenada
with
7,000
soldiers,
15 war
ships
and
scores
of
fighter
planes.
The
president
of this
member
state of
the
general
assembly
Maurice
Bishop
was
killed.
We can't
keep
silent
about
these
crimes.
Otherwise
we will
all
become
victims
and
sacrifices
and
every
year it
would be
the turn
of
someone.
We are
not
animals
and we
are not
sacrifices.
We are
defending
our
existence,
we are
defending
ourselves
our sons
and our
grandsons.
We are
not
afraid.
We have
the
right to
live.
This
globe is
not only
for the
super
powers.
God
created
it for
all of
us. We
should
never
live in
humiliation.
Then we
have to
open
investigations
into the
evil
massacres
of Sabra
and
Shhatila
which
claimed
3,000
human
victims.
This
village
was
under
the
protection
of the
occupying
Israeli
army.
Then a
massacre
was
carried
out of
Palestinian
men,
women
and
children.
Most of
them
were
Palestinians.
How
could we
keep
silent.
Lebanon
is an
independent
state
and a
member
of this
assembly.
The area
of Sabra
and
Shatila
was
occupied
and
3,000
were
slaughtered.
Then
there is
the
massacre
of Gaza
in 2008.
And for
your
information
there
were a
thousand
woman
killed
an
injured.
And
2,200
children.
It means
that
there
were
3,200
women
and
children
only.
Fifty
educational
centers
belonging
to the
UN were
demolished.
Thirty
non-governmental
organizations
were
demolished
including
international
relief
organizations.
Sixty
clinics
were
demolished..
Forty
doctors
and
nurses
were
killed
while
they
were
doing
their
humanitarian
work.
That was
the
outcome
the Gaza
massacre
in
December
2008.
The
culprits
are
still
living.
They
have to
be
prosecuted
in the
international
criminal
court.
But if
the
International
Criminal
Court is
only
targeting
the
smaller
states
and
Third
World
countries
this is
not
right.
Those
culprits
have to
be tried
in the
court
unless
it was
not
international.
Then we
would
not
recognize
it. If
it is
international
everybody
is
subjected
to it.
As long
as the
International
Court of
Justice
is not
respected
and its
rulings
not
implemented
and as
long as
the
International
Atomic
Energy
Agency
does not
include
all
countries
and the
general
assembly
is doing
nothing
and the
Security
Council
is
monopolized
then the
United
Nations
is
nothing.
There is
no
United
Nations.
Then we
come to
piracy.
This
phenomenon
may
spread
to all
the
seas. It
could
become a
threat
like
terrorism.
Let us
tackle
Somali
piracy.
I am
telling
you the
Somalis
are not
pirates.
The
pirates
are
ourselves
because
we
exploited
all the
fishing
grounds.
We
undermined
their
livelihood.
We
undermined
their
economies
and
their
regional
waters.
All the
ships of
the
world,
whether
from
Libya,
India,
Japan or
America
exploited
Somali
waters
and we
are the
aggressors.
After
the
Somali
state
collapsed
we came
to pick
up the
remnants.
The
Somalis
had to
defend
their
marine
wealth
which is
their
food and
the food
of their
children.
Then
they
transformed
themselves
into
pirates
to
defend
themselves.
They are
not
pirates.
They
only
defend
their
livelihood.
And now
you are
handling
it in
the
wrong
way. You
are
saying
let us
send
warships
to
strike
the
Somalis.
No.
warships
should
go to
strike
the
pirates
who
undermined
the
Somali
wealth
and
resources.
You have
to
strike
the
foreign
fishing
boats.
Anyhow I
held a
meeting
with the
pirates.
I told
them I
would
make an
agreement
between
them and
the
world.
The
world
has to
respect
the
Somali
economy
area up
to 200
nautical
miles
according
to the
law of
the
seas.
All the
marine
wealth
in that
area
belongs
to the
Somalis.
The
world
has to
respect
this
economic
area.
This is
first.
Then
second,
all the
countries
should
abstain
from
dumping
hazardous
waste in
the
Somali
economic
area of
the
Somali
coast
and in
return
the
Somalis
will
abstain
from
attacking
ships.
We will
draft
this
agreement
and we
will
present
it to
the UN
General
Assembly.
That is
the
solution.
The
solution
is not
more
strikes
against
the
Somalis.
What is
worse is
that
their
warships
are
preventing
the
Somalis
from
going
into the
sea for
fishing.
This is
the
wrong
handling,
this is
the
wrong
approach.
Our way
of
tackling
terrorism
is
wrong.
Our
handling
of
matters
is
actually
wrong.
If the
vaccination
for
swine
flu is
produced
and
there
could be
more
flus of
God or
flus of
fish
then the
factories
that
belong
to the
intelligence
operate
and they
sell at
a high
price.
This is
trade.
They
produce
a virus
and they
spread
it
across
the
world so
that
capitalist
companies
gain
money
from
selling
vaccines.
This is
shameful.
The
vaccines
are not
to be
sold.
Medicines
are not
to be
sold.
You have
to read
the
Green
Book. It
does not
allow
the
selling
of
medicines.
If we
say the
medicines
are free
and the
vaccines
are free
and no
viruses
are
spread
because
it is
they who
produce
these
viruses
in order
to
produce
vaccines.
That is
how
capitalist
companies
work.
This is
the
wrong
approach.
You have
to
declare
that
medicines
are free
and not
for
sale.
Even if
the
viruses
are real
we
should
not sell
the
vaccines.
They
have to
be
offered
for
free.
All
these
matters
are
submitted
in files
to be
discussed
by the
UN
General
Assembly.
It has
nothing
to do
but this
work.
Then we
have the
Ottowa
agreement
which
bans the
production,
the
shipment
or sale
of mines
etc.
This is
wrong.
The
mines
are not
offensive
weapons.
They are
defensive.
The
mines do
not
move.
They do
not
attack.
It
remains
wherever
it is
planted.
That
means
you went
to it.
Why did
you go
to it? I
would
like to
plant
mines on
the
borders
of my
country
because
you are
aggressing
my
country.
Let your
hand or
leg be
amputated.
I urge
you to
review
this
Ottowa
agreement.
This
appeal
could be
seen in
the
internet,
in the
website
Al
Qadhafi
talks.
This
agreement
has to
be
revoked
or
amended.
They
want to
deprive
us even
from the
mines
which
are anti
personnel.
If I
want to
plant a
mine in
front of
my home
or farm
then
this is
my way
of
defense.
It is
not
offensive.
You may
cancel
the
atomic
weapons
the
missiles
and
inter-continental
missiles.
As for
the
Palestinian
cause
the
two-state
solution
is
impossible.
I urge
you not
to speak
about
it. The
only
solution
is one
democratic
state
for Jews
and for
Muslims
for
Palestinians
and
Christians
and all
others
like
Lebanon.
The two
state-solution
is not
practical
and
impossible.
There
can be
no two
neighboring
states
which
are to
much
overlapping.
Any
division
will
inevitably
fail.
Firstly
the two
states
are not
neighbors
but are
overlapping
from all
aspects,
population,
geography
and so
forth.
There
are no
states.
You can’t
establish
a
dividing
no man’s
land
between
them
because
it
doesn't
exist.
The West
Bank has
half a
million
Israeli
settlers.
The
so-called
Israel
has a
million
Palestinian
settlers.
How can
we
establish
two
states.
The
world
has to
go to
impose
one
democratic
state
without
any
religious,
nationalist
or
linguistic
bigotry.
Bigotry
is
reactionary
and it
is time
is well
over.
These
are
thoughts
of the
guard.
The
ideas of
the
Third
World
War. The
ideas of
men like
Yasser
Arafat
and
Sharon.
All
these
are
over.
The new
generation
wants
one
democratic
state.
We have
to exert
every
effort
to
impose
on them
one
state
where
all
people
co-exist.
Look at
the
Palestinian
youth.
Look at
Israeli
youth.
They
want
peace.
They
want to
live in
one
state.
This is
the way
to end
this
headache
which
undermines
and
poisons
the
whole
world.
The
White
Book has
the
solution
for
Israel.
You have
to
consider
it, Ali
Al
Treiki.
(Gaddafi
Throw a
book to
President
of UN at
this
point)
The
Arabs
have no
animosity
with the
Israelis.
They are
cousins
and they
live
with
them in
peace.
Arabs
have no
future.
Arabs
have no
future.
The
future
is
Israfil
(Angel).
I tell
you
again,
our
future
is
Israfil
(Angel).
The
Palestinian
refugees
must
return
and they
have to
live
peacefully
in one
state.
It is
you who
make the
holocaust
for
them.
You
burned
them
down in
the
chambers
of gas
in
Europe.
It is
you who
hate the
Jews but
we
don't.
We have
accommodated
them, we
protected
them
since
Roman
days and
since
they
were
expelled
from
Andulsia.
We also
protected
them in
the days
of
Hitler
and from
the gas
chambers
of
Hitler.
It is
ourselves
who
protected
them and
it is
you who
expelled
them.
You
expelled
them and
told
them go
and
fight
the
Arabs.
Let us
expose
this
reality.
We are
not
enemies
of the
Jews.
They are
our
cousins.
The Jews
will
need the
Arabs
one day
but the
Arabs
will not
protect
them as
they did
in the
past.
Let us
have a
look at
what
Tito
did.
What
Hadrin
did.
What
Edward 1
did and
what
Hitler
did to
the
Jews.
You hate
them and
you are
anti-Semitic.
As for
the
issue of
Kashmir
in short
in has
no
solution
unless
it
becomes
one
independent
state to
buffer
between
India
and
Pakistan.
It will
become
neither
Indian
nor
Pakistani
and the
conflict
will be
over. As
for
Darfur I
hope
that the
aid you
sent to
international
aid
organizations
are
transferred
to other
projects,
development,
industrial
and
agricultural.
Darfur
is now
living
in peace
and
there is
no war.
It is
you who
blew it
up soas
to
interfere
and
establish
a
foothold
for the
sake of
oil and
you
sacrificed
the
people
of
Darfur.
Why do I
tackle
all
these
issues?
It is
because
we have
to
investigate
these
issues.
Previously
you have
submitted
the case
of Al
Hariri,
God have
mercy on
him, to
the
United
Nations.
Why did
you do
so? Is
it
because
you
wanted
to
sacrifice
the
blood of
Al
Hariri
and you
sold the
body of
Al
Hariri
in order
to
settle
scores
with
Syria.
If it
not so
why did
Lebanon,
which is
an
independent
state
with a
judiciary
laws and
police
and
everything
and
could
determine
who the
culprits
are. But
in this
matter
it is
not the
culprits
who are
wanted.
What is
wanted
is the
settlement
of
scores
with
Syria
and
sacrificing
the
issue of
Al
Hariri
and we
will get
nowhere
in the
issue of
Al
Hariri.
Therefore
all the
cases of
Abu,
Khalil
Al Wazir,
Kennedy,
Lumumba,
Hammershold
should
be
transferred
to the
United
Nations
as the
others
were.At
any rate
the UN
General
Assembly
is
chaired
by Libya
and this
is its
right.
The work
that
could be
done by
Libya is
to help
the
world in
moving
from one
phase to
another,
from
this
world
which is
lost,
bitter,
shameful,
terrorised
and
threatened
to move
to a
more
human
world
where
there is
peace
and
tolerance.
I will
follow
up this
work
with the
General
Assembly
and with
Ali Al
Teriki
and with
the UN
Secretary
General
because
we will
not be
complacent
and we
will not
be
submissive
regarding
the fate
of
humanity.
Humanity
has to
struggle
in order
to live
in
peace.
The
struggle
by the
Third
World
and the
smaller
states,
100 of
them in
order to
live in
dignity
and in
freedom
is a
continued
struggle
and it
has to
continue
till the
end.
Peace
and
blessings.
=========================
Muammar
Gaddafi
Hero of
the
Islamic
World
who
ripped
up the
UN
Charter
at the
UN
platform
- 2009
Metaexistance.org