He is expected to criticize the IAEA 'and international community for failing to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons', while simultaneously refusing to co-operate with the international community and the IAEA, refusing to implement the additional protocols that Iran signed, making threatening noises... Hypocrisy of the highest order. Nuclear technology is not a 'right'. It is a privilege that the international community and the IAEA can allow only to those countries that have proved themselves responsible enough to handle it. The behavior of countries such as Iran are the very reason why the IAEA and international community is failing in preventing nuclear proliferation; it takes a pretty twisted mentality for a country that is part of the problem to condemn those attempting to find and implement the solution for their lack of success. It's like the virus accusing the anti-virus of dereliction of duty...

President Ahmaddinejad cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. But the United States is not honest in the way it deals with Iran. That is the U.S does not deal with Iran in honourable way. The U.S is driven by the need to humiliate Iranian leader. This in turn only inflames Iranian nationalists and immeasurably strengthens Ahmadinejad’s position within Iranian society. Which makes me to think this is deliberate in the part of the United States. This is why Russia needs to step in and tell Iran to stop its nuclear enrichment program. In exchange Russia will insure the security of Iran by transferring the necessary defence weaponry to Iran. This is the only way of the current predicament. The cynic in me thinks some Russian politicians want this dual strategy but that some segment of the Russia’s political leadership is being lobby by Israel. That is why Russia is playing a delaying tactic with its deal of S-300 defence weapons transfer to Iran. Russia cannot play this play all parts wait and seek game. Russia needs to make a concrete mover on this issue because it turns into much larger crisis.

Iran once again is coming clean and pointing its finger right to the heart of the problem: the double standard and hypocrisy practiced by the United States. If Washington is concerned about non-existent nuclear capabilities of Iran, how should the Arab countries and Iran, in fact, the whole Middle East feel about an Israel armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons? If Obama does not want to speculate on whether Israel possesses nuclear arms, let him ask the world. He cannot remain ignorant about such a serious matter forever. Educate him, world!

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should press charges against US and Israel in human rights court for harassment and discriminations against Iranian people for $150 billion for punitive damage. I am not joking!

While I don't condone walking out during an a UN address, after hearing this speech, I really don't blame those countries that did this time. At least this time, unlike last September, they tried to sit through it. But, unlike last September's address, this one was truly worthy of a walk-out. It takes truly twisted logic to claim that Iran has agreed to the deal hammered out last October and then shift the blame to the west for it's failure. I lost count of the number of lies, and twisted half-truths after the first five to ten minutes. I've heard a number of Ahmadiejad's speeches in the past, and I can honestly say that I've never heard him spew such sheer rubbish as this before.

USA, England and France delegations walking out during the Iranian leader addressing the UN is the best way to conceal the facts about these three countries double standards by avoiding confronting Ahmadinejad with what he had to say, because the West does not have credibility. This conference is about speaking out in the open in from of the whole World and through all facts and evidences conclude who is telling the truth and who is lying, and because the West does not have a single shred of evidence against Iran, they found it more convenient to walk out like cowards. If the West insists on sanctions against Iran they should have the guts to confront him for their accusation to materialise. But because they have nothing, and their well rehearsed method is “shoot first then ask question”, as was the case with Iraq, that’s what they are exhibiting again and again. Otherwise, how else would you create situation out of nothing?

The two that walked out during the speach, France and UK, were in fact those who supplied Israel with nukes back in early 60's. At the time US was oposed to that and that's why J. F. K. was murdered. Since that unhappy incident US is completely controlled by Jews (even if not being fully aware of that). Now the three nations want to force Iran to accept the position of being a legitimate and permanent target of Israeli nukes?!! I mean, why would Iran agree with that? All these hundreds of millions of Muslems in the Middle East to agree to be hostages of a small country with 300 nukes? If Russia, as the nearest Iranian neighbor, is not upset that much about Iranian nukes, why would then US (positioned on the other side of the globe) be upset about that? Every country has a legitimate right to work on its own defense if feels threatened. That is why Iran has the right to develop its own nukes if it feels threatenned by Israeli nuclear arsenal. The whole mess is as simple as that. If it comes to WWIII these 300, or more, Israeli nukes could be very easily turned against Russia. It is however dificult to imagine that Iranian nukes would be used against Russia. That is why Israeli nukes are a greater potential threat to Russia than those which would be installed in Iran.

A clear case of bandits organising the safety of their potential targets is what the Brits, Americans and the French manoeuvres within the framework of the NPT portends and only those afflicted by human forgetfulness of who the vilain and perpetrator of the Hirroshima tragedy was, will fail to acknowledge this. It is outright hypocricy on the part of the western powers, to treat Iran's technnogical advance in Nuclear physics with such virulent and unmitigated hostility , passing their actions as a measure of contributing to the control of nuclear proliferation. With Pakistan , a muslim (NB equiped) country , they acted with cynical indifference and even encouragement as that Country traded threats with India , which as a Soviet Union's friend, had evoked their anger as Iran does today . Albeit in Iran's case, given its just stance in opposition to the Isreali Zionists, it is its 'recalcitrance and unruliness' stigmatisation that we are constantly told as a pretext for their actions when in actual fact these actions are in consequence not of this alleged pretext atall . Say, who in the world has been more recalcitrant and unruly today than the overbearing and conquering Isreal?

I watch what mr.Ahmadinajad said at UN...In great majority- he is right on target! Droping nuclear bombs on civil population far away from front lines (Japan was gone before that) for experiment purpose Usa did send clear message to all world...Everyone try to have them to defend themself in the first place from Usa-West and Nato!Usa (and West) kill 10 of millions innorcent people around the world without any valid reason whatsoever...Having nuclear weapons give them "right"to keep in power themself and continue(from slavery till today) to inslave peacefull world(unprotected one)without any chalenge...They also give tehnology (against any international law) to Israel and keep playing dump (silence) on that.Duble standards-without any doubt! I have idea how to solve this dispute:Usa and West shall give about 100 nukes to Iran(after all of this threats) so Iran(I am positive) will not even think to produce them at all -case solved...Iran was and is a one of the most peacefull nation in the world and Usa and West are well known mass murderrers (judging by history facts in last 2000 years till today) and I will not compare them at all! Also, not giving visas to Iranien press and walk out when Ahmadinejad talk (they CAN"T HANDLE THE TRUTH) said everything! Thanke you!

To mbach. Who do you refer to when you speak of the international community? Are you aware that a large body of countries, NAM, supports Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy? And Iran did agree to the nuclear fuel swap deal, but only if the fuel is shipped off in stages and the excahnges take place on Iranian territory. What is so wrong with that? And Iran's nuclear sites are all under IAEA supervision. Do you know that American, Russian and Israeli nuclear sites are not open to inspection by IAEA? So how can Iran be wrong? They have no nukes, there is no proof of them having nukes. America and Israel have nukes. Iran has not invaded another country in centuries. America and Israel have invaded 3 countries each in my lifetime and I'm not even 30 yet! And they should be trusted with nukes??

PIt is laughable that the USA should accuse Iran of destabilizing the Middle East. The US has twice invaded Iraq, shipped weapons to Israel to attack Lebanon and Gaza, and through the 1980s supported the Iran-Iraq war... Hypocrisy is too small a word for so many murderous interventions and such magnificent effortless killing. The USSR used to refer to the USA as `the policeman of the world`. But policies and attitudes have changed - both for Russia and the United States. The former no longer confronts; the latter no longer constrains itself. Its purpose is total world domination (`full spectrum dominance`), or - in alternate rhetoric - the making of a Reich more absolute than any other imperial state in history. Already more than half the world`s nations pay tribute to this leviathan. And any nation that refuses subordination (`cooperation`) is first vilified, then ostracized and soon subject to destabilization. Iran is more victim than aggressor. Mr Ahmadinejad spoke clearly and forcefully: a nuclear arsenal is ``an affront to humanity rather than a weapon of defence``. He reminds us that only the `democratic` USA has used this weapon against humans. He might add that from the 1890s to the present the US has invaded more nation-states than any other empire in history. Meanwhile the US, Israel, UK and France are busy developing new weapons: drones, lasers, more powerful chemical and biological agents of mass destruction. The robotization of war is proceeding at an astonishing pace. All this dedicated activity makes ``nuclear weapons`` obsolete. Nuclear trace-elements are already embedded in other destructive devices. Placing a ban on `nuclear weapons` is certainly desirable. But the discussion is primarily part of a diplomatic game. The main game, like military power, lies elsewhere..

RT should have asked the people who walked out what they hoped to achieve by not countering Iran point by point? Debates can be unpleasant but must be taken seriously if we are to avoid wars.