Search Result in All

[17 May 2014] Iran marks world communications day - English

Press TV viewers in the UK can continue to watch the news channel via the following satellites or by visiting the following websites despite the British Office of Communications (Ofcom) removing the channel from the Sky platform. You can watch Press TV broadcast from anywhere in the world by visiting the following websites: · Press TV watch live services (Worldwide) · Zattoo (Internet platform and IPTV. Supports PC, MAC, Linux and all tablet PCs and smartphones) (UK) · OHTV Box (Internet Set-top box) (Worldwide) · Roku Box (Internet Set-top box) (Worldwide) (Available in UK from January 2012) · Livestation (Internet platform. Supports PC MAC, Linux and all tablet PCs and smartphones) You could also view our broadcast through the following satellites: Hot Bird 8 (13E) 12437 27500 3/4 H Eurobird 1 (28.5E) 11222 27500 2/3 H SES ASTRA (19/2E) 12460.50 27500 3/4 H

Iran\'s reformist presidential candidate Mohammad-Reza Aref has stressed the need for facilitating both domestic and foreign investment in the country, vowing to slash unemployment. In his televised speech on Wednesday night, Aref said, if elected, his administration would give assurances to Iranian investors and redirect people\'s money away from brokers and gold and foreign currency exchange markets to the country\'s industries. He also pledged measures to encourage foreign investment. \"Unfortunately the rate of foreign investment growth in Iran is below the international average and we are having an unfavorable situation,\" he said. Aref criticized the \"unacceptable\" rate of unemployment, especially among the country\'s university graduates, and promised to create over one million jobs annually. He said he would try to achieve the figure by boosting tourism, which he said would provide an annual 200,000 job opportunities, besides expanding the information and communications technology industry as well as the country\'s lucrative energy sector. \"We are planning to keep the added-value of energy products at home. We should try not to sell crude oil or natural gas,\" he stated. Aref also highlighted Iran\'s unique geopolitical situation and thus the opportunity for the country to become a regional hub in various fields, such as commerce, communications and goods transit. This will improve the country\'s economy and help the country\'s national security, the presidential candidate pointed out. Aref is vying against Tehran Mayor Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, Secretary of Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi. The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election and this year\'s election is scheduled for June 14.

Jame Jam Network on Gaza and Iraq March 2008

Afshin Rattansi in Tehran talks to Mohsen Salleh in Beirut about attempts by the Lebanese government to close down Hezbollahs strategic defences for Lebanon soon after the visit of U.S. Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Welch

Iran's Defence Minister has said that Iran is close to self-sufficiency in high technology, including communications and space sciences. Full report. Recorded on February 01, 2010 at 1800GMT

US, Israel behind cyber-attack on Iran? Experts say a computer worm that has targeted Iran's industrial sites may be part of a cyber-attack by the US or Israel against the Islamic Republic. The Stuxnet, a computer worm that is viewed as potentially the most dangerous piece of computer malware discovered, has targeted industrial computers in Iran. The complex worm recognizes a specific facility's control network and then destroys it. Experts say the worm, which has a very sophisticated design, may have been created by a state-sponsored organization in the US or Israel to target specific control software being used in the Iranian industrial sector, including the Bushehr plant -- Iran's first nuclear power plant. "All the details so far to me scream that this was created by a nation-state," Bloomberg quoted Frank Rieger, technology chief for a maker of encrypted mobile phones, as saying. Iran's nuclear facilities may have been the targets, said both Rieger and Richard Falkenrath of the Chertoff Group, a Washington-based security advisory firm. "It is theoretically possible that the US government did this," Falkenrath said during an interview with Bloomberg Television on Saturday. "But in my judgment, that's a very remote possibility. It's more likely that Israel did it." Meanwhile, a top US cyber-security official claims that the US does not know who is behind the cyber-attack and is still analyzing the worm. "We've conducted analysis on the software itself," Sean McGurk, director of the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center, told reporters on Friday. "It's very difficult to say 'This is what it was targeted to do,'" he said, adding the center was not looking for those behind the attack but it rather sought to prevent the spread. The US and Israel accuse Iran of developing a nuclear weapons program. Iran rejects the allegation, saying its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes. The International Atomic Energy Agency, in its several reports, has confirmed that it continues to verify the country's non-diversion from its peaceful path. Article Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/143868.html

Full George Galloway Speech at Trinity-St. Paul's United Church Toronto Canada - Oct 03 2010 - As you may all know by now that the Federal Court ruling has condemned the efforts of Conservative Immigration Minister Jason Kenney and his Communications Director, Alykhan Velshi, to deny British MP George Galloway entry to Canada. In a judgment released Monday (Sept. 27), Justice Richard Mosley found that Kenney’s and Velshi’s efforts to keep Mr. Galloway out of the country were motivated by disagreement with Mr. Galloway’s politics, rather than by national security concerns. So now George Galloway returned to Canada to deliver in person the message he was forced to deliver by Internet connection in March 2009.

Iran tests radars on 3rd day of drills Iran's military has entered the third day of its biggest ever nationwide air drills, with testing radar capabilities in defending the country's territory. The anti-air defense units from Iran's Armed Forces and the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) are taking part in the five-day air defense maneuvers dubbed Defenders of Velayat Skies, which began on Tuesday. According to the spokesman for the military drills Brigadier Hamid Arzhangi, various kinds of fixed and mobile radars that have been domestically manufactured or refurbished would be tested during the third day of the drills on Thursday. He further explained that radars would be used to detect and identify objects and pass relevant data to the operational units. The military official added that all types of the country's radar systems, which would relay intelligence to the unified command and control network of the central headquarters, would be utilized and examined during the third day of the maneuvers. He pointed out that reconnaissance missions to detect state-of-the-art systems of theatrical enemies using radars were also on the agenda of the third day of drills. During the second day of the maneuvers on Wednesday, advanced equipment used for communication and exchange of intelligence along with modern electro-optical systems were successfully tested and utilized. The air maneuvers are being held near Iran's strategic sights and landmarks, aiming to assess performance of new air defense systems and enhance rapid response capabilities in countering potential aerial attacks. Iranian military officials say the drills convey a message of peace and friendship to neighboring countries and a fierce warning against enemies. Iran simulates Electronic Warfare in drills An Iranian commander says the Air Force has "analyzed and conducted" Electronic Warfare (EW) missions during the first three days of its biggest defense drills. "EW means jamming the enemies' electronic systems, equipment, and capabilities and the mission of this war is to seize and control electromagnetic fields," Colonel Moharam Qolizadeh said on Thursday. "We have analyzed and conducted EW missions in the drills [dubbed] 'Modafean Aseman Velayt 3' (Guardians of Velayati Skies)," he added. The colonel said the maneuvers were aimed at "spotting [the enemy] without being spotted" and tapping the enemy communications lines without compromising transmissions by Iranian forces. Earlier on Thursday, the spokesman for the military drills Brigadier General Hamid Arzhangi said Iran had successfully tested a new generation of its first domestically-manufactured air defense system during the third day of the nationwide air drills. The Mersad (Ambush) modern medium-range system is capable of spotting and destroying advanced aircraft at low and high altitudes. In addition to its high mobility, Mersad's new generation can be used in electronic warfare and can be networked with other radar and defense systems, Arzhangi added. The forces were also set to test various models of fixed and mobile radars that have been domestically manufactured or refurbished. Air defense units from Iran's Armed Forces and the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) are taking part in the five-day air maneuvers.

As the situation in cities throughout Egypt continues to intensify, Egyptian-Americans are speaking up with deep emotions and frustrations about the problems of the Mubarak government. Palestinians also joined their Egyptian friends in support of change in the Middle East Ahmed Fadhi Sot: The people have spoken. Game over for Mubarak. Its time for new era. Ahmed Fadhi is the Chairman of the Alliance of Egyptian American Association and helped organize this protest in support of the peaceful protests in Egypt. Ahmed fadhi Sot: Mubarak regime was a Police State. Unfortunately the US government have supported this regime with billions of dollars and now its time for him to leave.. As Egypt's military has been deployed to the streets to break-up protests, the US State Department has issued a travel warning for those wishing to visit Egypt. US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has also weighed in with the official position to the events unfolding. Hilary Clinton SOT: As we have repeatedly said, we support the universal human rights of the Egyptian people including the right to freedom of expression, association, and of assembly. We urge the Egyptian authorities to allow peaceful protests and to reverse unprecedented steps it has taken to cut off communications. More protests are scheduled throughout New York and the rest of the US in the coming days. Protesters say they'll continue to mobilize as long as their brothers and sisters in Egypt need them to.

OCCUPY WALSTREET IS AMERICAN AWAKENING AND Beginning of the End of American Hegemony. http://occupywallst.org/ On October 05, 2011, at 3:00 in the afternoon the residents of Liberty Square will gather to join their union brothers and sisters in solidarity and march. At 4:30 in the afternoon the 99% will march in solidarity with #occupywallstreet from Foley Square to the Financial District, where their pensions have disappeared to, where their health has disappeared to. Together we will protest this great injustice. We stand in solidarity with the honest workers of: •AFL-CIO (AFSCME) •United NY •Strong Economy for All Coalition •Working Families Party •TWU Local 100 •SEIU 1199 •CWA 1109 •RWDSU •Communications Workers of America •CWA Local 1180 •United Auto Workers •United Federation of Teachers •Professional Staff Congress - CUNY •National Nurses United •Writers Guild East And: •VOCAL-NY •Community Voices Heard •Alliance for Quality Education •New York Communities for Change •Coalition for the Homeless •Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project (NEDAP) •The Job Party •NYC Coalition for Educational Justice •The Mirabal Sisters Cultural and Community Center •The New Deal for New York Campaign •National People's Action •ALIGN •Human Services Council •Labor-Religion Coalition of New York State •Citizen Action of NY •MoveOn.org •Common Cause NY •New Bottom Line •350.org •Tenants & Neighbors •Democracy for NYC •Resource Generation •Tenants PAC •Teachers Unite

Disproving Atheists in 82 seconds-

Microsoft X-Box Kinect games device has a video camera and a microphone that records speech. Microsoft has stated that users should not expect any level of privacy concerning your use of the live communication features," and the company "may access or disclose information about you, including the content of your communications.

[06 April 2012] Istanbul conference: Call for civil war in Syria? - Middle East Today - Presstv - English A gathering of some 70 countries which took place in Istanbul, has declared the Syrian National Council as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people. The Syrian government and the Syrian opposition inside Syria have refused the conference and have called it the conference of the "enemies of Syria." Although some reports have said that the west and some Arab states have already been arming the opposition, yet still it has not managed to bring down Assad's government, but how long can Assad hang on with the most powerful states in the world backing the rebel forces? Several Persian Gulf Arab states and the United States have pledged 100 million dollars to provide salaries and communications equipment for Syrian rebels fighting against the government.

DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday, Following is the full text of the interview: Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President. President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness? President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else. Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example. President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces. Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria? President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir. Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel. President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference? President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else. Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command? President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance. Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance? President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now? President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak? President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change. Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game? President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan. Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do? President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons. Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles? President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis? President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names. Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups? President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves. Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month? President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend. Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options. President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see. Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions? President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear. Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term? President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\\\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government. Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014? President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk. Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League? President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League. Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations? President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them. Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted? President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house. Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel? President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world. Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon. Al-Manar: Thank you.

DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday, Following is the full text of the interview: Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President. President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness? President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else. Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example. President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces. Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria? President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir. Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel. President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference? President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else. Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command? President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance. Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance? President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now? President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak? President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change. Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game? President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan. Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do? President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons. Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles? President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis? President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names. Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups? President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves. Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month? President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend. Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options. President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see. Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions? President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear. Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term? President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government. Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014? President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk. Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League? President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League. Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations? President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them. Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted? President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house. Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel? President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world. Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon. Al-Manar: Thank you.

News has just come out that the Justice Department secretly collected two months of telephone records for reporters and editors at The Associated Press. The records included calls from several AP bureaus and the personal phone lines of several staffers, AP President Gary Pruitt has called the subpoenas a \"massive and unprecedented intrusion\" into its reporting.\" These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP\'s newsgathering operations and disclose information about AP\'s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know,\" wrote Pruitt, the news agency\'s CEO. The AP reported that the government has not said why it wanted the records. But it noted that US officials have said they were probing how details of a foiled bomb plot that targeted a US-bound aircraft leaked in May 2012. On this episode of Inside Out, Susan Modaress takes an in-depth look at the cyber security of the United States in the Obama administration.

The timing of the revelation that UK security agents monitored the communications of politicians \'friendly\' to Britain is sure to leave David Cameron facing awkward questions from his G8 counterparts as the two-day summit wraps. Guests from Russia, Italy, France, Canada, Germany, Japan and the US might have been having second thoughts about the security of their data after the Guardian reported the activities of delegates at the 2009 G20 event had been closely monitored. Amina Taylor, Press TV, London

Press TV has conducted an interview with Paul Wolf, international lawyer, about the communications satellite service provider Intelsat announcing that it will take Iranian channels off the air as of next week.

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah lauded on Monday the deployment of security forces in the southern suburbs of Beirut (Dahiyeh) as a positive step hoping the State would bear its responsibilities and duties towards all Lebanese regions. Sayyed Nasrallah In a televised speech broadcast at Al-Manar TV, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that Hezbollah had contacted the state since the explosion took place in Dahiyeh, noting that the state said it needs time to carry out its responsibilities and not because we have failed, and the problems that happened were normal and anticipated when we endured responsibility for security . Hezbollah S.G. said Hezbollah took serious responsibility since August 15 when Ruweis attack took place because of a security vacuum in the country and statements were issued rejecting autonomous security. “We also reject autonomous security and this has never been part of our agenda and we did not practice it and when we took security measures that was because we had to prevent the entry of booby-trapped cars.” “Some went on to accuse Hezbollah of practicing autonomous security as part of our ‘statelet’, but today’s deployment refuted their claims because Hezbollah would have rejected this measure if their claims were true. We had asked the official bodies to take over the reins from the outset,” His eminence said. Sayyed Nasrallah called on all Dahiyeh residents and passers-by to show the highest levels of cooperation, respect, acceptance and responsiveness to the security measures and provide all the assistance and support needed to help the security forces perform their mission. As he assured that the State is solely responsible and must definitely extend its authority in all regions, Sayyed Nasrallah hoped these security forces and state authorities will shoulder their full responsibility and assume all the intelligence and preventative missions as well. “Only the state is responsible for security in all regions and we will leave any point to which the state might send forces. Today it happened in Dahiyeh and tomorrow it might happen in Baalbek and we welcome any efforts that contribute to the success of the mission.” Some People feels Delighted with Killing of People in Dahiyeh His eminence addressed some sides that condemned Hezbollah’s measures in Dahiyeh, saying: “I feel that those people are delighted with the killing of people in Dahiyeh, Tripoli and elsewhere, it is regrettable that hostility reached to that level of thinking.” Ruweis attackSayyed Nasrallah thanked the Palestinian factions and especially the families of martyr Mohammad Samrawi over their noble stance on the regrettable incident in Burj al-Barajneh. On the investigations after Ruweis attack took place, Sayyed Nasrallah said: “As promised, we reached decisive results concerning the perpetrators of Ruweis attack. It’s a Takfiri party that is affiliated with the Syrian opposition and which is based the Syrian territories, and the same results were reached by local security apparatuses. All the details were passed on to the relevant authorities, which must take the necessary measures, especially against the perpetrators who are inside Lebanon.” Chemical Weapons Campaign against Hezbollah “Funny” The S.G. denied accusations that the Syrian government handed chemical weapons to Hezbollah and said that this accusation is funny. “The U.S. defense secretary said after reaching an agreement with Russia that chemical weapons should not be transferred to Hezbollah and on the next day some Syrian Coalition officials claimed that the Syrian government has transferred chemical arms to Hezbollah and some officials claimed that we have received a ton of chemical agents,” his eminence said. “It’s funny, it’s not like transporting wheat or flour. Unfortunately, some parties in Lebanon launched a media campaign and said they fear that the chemical weapons might be transferred to Hezbollah,” Sayyed Nasrallah noted, saying he understands the backgrounds of these serious accusations which have serious repercussions on Lebanon, and stressed that “Hezbollah did not ask our brothers in Syria to transfer such weapons and will not do in the future.” “Some friends advised me not to comment on these claims as part of psychological war against enemies, but I rejected that because Hezbollah has religious taboos with the use of such weapons and using this as psychological warfare is not an option,” S. Nasrallah added. Some Invented Mock Battle in Zahle On the scuffle that erupted over claims Hezbollah was installing a telecom network in Zahle, Sayyed Nasrallah denied these claims saying Hezbollah has never sought to install such network in Zahle. “This does not exist today and will not exist in the future. The Bekaa and Baalbek are part of the battle with the enemy and we need to have communications with the Baalbek-Hermel region. Years ago, we extended a cable at the outskirts of the city of Zahle and not inside it, it’s a cable for connecting lines. What happened few days ago was that Hezbollah young men were doing maintenance for the cable.” Unfortunately, the S.G. said, some parties were launching a mock battle to what happened in Zahle and were seeking stunts and illusionary heroism. “The head of one of March 14 parties said that Hezbollah’s wired telecom network breaches the privacy of people. I hope that he asks any security official to explain to him about our network which is incapable of spying on anyone.” Let\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Discuss Hezbollah Intervention in Syria Concerning the national dialogue, Sayyed Nasrallah said Hezbollah supported Speaker Nabih Berri’s initiative, “but we have heard calls for boycotting and setting conditions for dialogue. When the national dialogue table was held the other team disrupted it and required the resignation of Mikati in order to return to it and the government’s resignation they did not return to dialogue.” He pointed out that Hezbollah will participate in the dialogue called for by the Lebanese President, and said: “Let’s discuss the intervention in Syria, and who did so. Isn’t it considered intervention the writing of speeches and statements urging [US President Barack] Obama to launch a military attack on Syria which if it had taken place would have serious repercussions on the world and especially Lebanon? We want to discuss on the table whichever is the most dangerous, appealing to Obama to intervene in Syria or what our young people are doing in Syria?” referring to former PM Fuad Saniora’s op-ed published by the Foreign Policy magazine recently. “Those who are obstructing dialogue in Lebanon are well-known and we are willing to participate in the dialogue regardless of who would take part or not.” Gov\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t Representation = Parties\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' Political Weight On the issue of the delayed formation of the Lebanese government, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the interest of the country requires that March 14 stop stalling and form a national unity government based on real political weight of each party and urged them to stop betting on regional developments. “Despite Lebanese consensus on the need to form a government, it has yet to be formed because from the first moment Tammam Salam was designated as PM, Al-Mustaqbal Party and some of its allies said they don\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t want the participation of Hezbollah in the government,” S. Nasrallah said, noting “they said they accept the participation of Hezbollah on two conditions: no tripartite formula, no to the guaranteeing one-third. However, we set one condition overtly and clearly that each political party should be represented according to the size of its Deputies.” “We reject the three-8s (8-8-8) formula because it’s unrealistic. The PM-designate is part of March 14 coalition and the minister whom he will nominate would be committed to his political decision, that means March 14 will have 10 ministers not 8.” Betting on Military Option in Syria Futile Hezbollah leader said some Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia, are insisting on accusing Hezbollah of occupying Syria and building on this to say that what is happening in Syria is not a conflict of countries, projects and nations, but rather a conflict against an “occupation force” which the Arab States should help to confront. And on such accusation they took retaliatory steps against Hezbollah. “In this context, March 14’s Veto on the participation of Hezbollah is Saudi and punishing the Lebanese in the Gulf is under the title of punishing Hezbollah.” “Is it reasonable to believe that Hezbollah has the ability to occupy Syria!” his eminence wondered, announcing that Hezbollah’s contribution with the Syrian army is modest. “Isn’t Syria occupied by the tens of thousands of fighters you brought from all countries? And today the Syrian Coalition began to raise the voice against them.” [Turkish President Abdullah] Gul was told that the Pakistani scenario will be repeated in Turkey because of its intervention in Syria, he said. Sayyed Nasrallah called upon Saudi Arabia, Gulf States and Turkey to review their positions on what is happening in Syria, saying “betting on the military option in Syria is futile.” “The salvation of Syria and the peoples of the region will be only with the political solution. The continuation of fighting in Syria will not lead to the goals you are looking for.” Criminalizing Hezbollah in Bahrain Political Hezbollah, BahrainConcerning the Bahraini crisis, the Secretary General said Bahrain regime’s insistence on criminalizing communicating with Hezbollah is a political position. “We are not surprised by the position of the Government of Bahrain in describing Hezbollah as terrorists. We supported the peaceful revolution in the Gulf country and then Manama expelled the Lebanese living there!” While insuring that the decision of the Bahraini opposition is internal and independent, Sayyed Nasrallah said Iran does not interfere in the course of the situation in Bahrain, urging Muslim scholars and states to react to confront repression in Bahrain as mosques are being destroyed and clergy men are forced in prisons. Credit: LitleButerfli

Hezbollah Secretary General, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, delivered a speech on Monday evening, September 23rd, 2013, to address some of the most recent local and regional developments. His eminence first talked about the deployment of Lebanese Army forces in the Southern Suburb of Beirut (Dahiyeh) in order to protect the area from any potential threats. Sayyed Nasrallah thanked the efforts of the government and the army, and he asked that people cooperate with the Lebanese Army at various checkpoints. The Secretary General also addressed some claims alleging that Hezbollah had supposedly received over a ton of chemical weapons from the Assad regime in Syria, Sayyed Nasrallah assured that these claims are indeed false and ridiculous. His eminence then moved on to clarify some claims about Hezbollah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s communications network in Zahle. He also spoke about the formation of the Lebanese government. On the regional level, Hezbollah called on various key players who have been fueling the crisis in Syria, such as Saudi Arabia and the GCC, Egypt, and Turkey, to reconsider their stance sooner rather than later. His eminence rejected Saudi claims about Hezbollah having \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"occupied\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Syria. Finally, Sayyed Nasrallah made some important comments regarding the long-forgotten cause of Bahrain. The Secretary General assured that He is not surprised at the recent actions of the Bahraini regime, which placed the Lebanese Resistance on a terrorist organizations\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' list. He said that this is merely due to the fact that Hezbollah supported the popular uprising in Bahrain against the Al-Khalifa regime in February 2011. Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized that Hezbollah still supports the demands of the Bahraini people, whose patience and peacefulness has surprised even him. He said that the Bahraini people has had to withstand all kinds of torture and repression at the hands of the Bahraini regime, which also called in foreign (Saudi) forces to help quell the revolution and crush the people. His eminence added that the regime has unlawfully withdrawn Bahraini scholars\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' nationalities, and imprisoned a large number of them. This oppressive regime has also detained and imprisoned hundreds of activists since over two years, and it imprisons even women and children, subjecting them to torture and despicable forms of maltreatment. The regime has also torn down mosques and other religiously sacred sights, and yet the international community has remained silent. Sayyed Nasrallah rejected claims of foreign interference in the popular uprising, and urged the international community, and more specifically Islamic peoples and scholars to publicly oppose what is going on in Bahrain.

The latest victim of Washington\'s spying scandal is Italy. Reports say America\'s spying agency snooped on everyday communications of Italians since 2010. The Italian spy watchdog called COPA-SIR recently learned that Italians too were under large scale monitoring by the US. Several Italian MPs have gone to Washington over the recent revelations. This comes as Mexican President Peno Nieto orders a probe into claims that the U-S spying agency hacked his and former President Felipe Calderon\'s emails. The allegations that Calderon was spied on from May 2010 were reported by German newspaper Der-Spiegel. The row coincides with reports that the NSA monitored millions of phone calls in France. The French government has called on the US to stop snooping on its citizens.

Germany chancellor has called the U-S president to demand immediate clarification on reports that the U-S spied on her. The German government spokesman says Angela Merkel had made clear to Barack Obama that if the information proves to be true, it would be completely unacceptable and represents a grave breach of trust. This, after Germany said it had received info that the U-S is spying on Merkel\'s cell phone communications. But the White House says Obama has assured Merkel that her phone is not being monitored. The U-S spying scandal is taking center stage after fugitive American whistle-blower Edward Snowden revealed the details of the program. Washington\'s espionage scandal has already caused outrage among Italian, French, Mexican and Brazilian officials.

Fishermen in Gaza have been constantly suffering under the Israeli blockade of Gaza and have paid a huge price for that . Fishermen along with representatives from fishing and human rights organizations, and Palestinian and international supporters organized a sit-in in tents under the name of \"Free Gaza Sea\" in the Gaza Sea Port to stand in solidarity with fishermen and call for their basic rights the Israeli occupation has taken away. The Ministry of Transport and Communications in Gaza has estimated that the losses of Gaza port stood at $300,000 in the last disastrous cold front. It had previously warned of the inefficient breakwater due to the Israeli prevention of entering cement to strengthen it Human rights organizations have repeatedly condemned Israel\'s massive violations against Palestinian fishermen.Fishermen in Gaza are urging human rights groups and international organizations to support them in their bid to free Gaza waters. This will let the fishermen enjoy their fundamental right to sail freely.

Six months ago, American whistleblower Edward Snowden started leaking the US National Security Agency\\\'s surveillance documents. Now the former NSA contractor says his mission has been accomplished. In an interview with The Washington Post, Snowden has said he\\\'s happy because the public is now informed about the US massive sweep of Internet and phone records. This is Snowden\\\'s first in-person interview since his June arrival in Russia under temporary asylum, that will expire in August. US federal prosecutors have filed a criminal complaint against Snowden, charging him with espionage and felony theft of government property. But Snowden says he\\\'s working to improve the NSA, adding this is the only thing Washington does not realize. Snowden\\\'s revelations have outraged civil liberties advocates. Even US allies have been angered by reports that Washington has been monitoring their leaders\\\' cellphone calls and other virtual communications.

[13 May 2014] Report: GCHQ covertly photographs, records computer users - English

Supreme Leader\\\\\\\'s Speech on 25th Demise Anniversary of Imam Khomeini (r.a.) Print 06/06/2014 Hotuba ya Kiongozi Muadhamu katika Maadhimisho ya Mwaka wa 25 wa Kufariki Dunia Imam KhomeiniThe following is the full text of the speech delivered on June 4, 2014 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, on the occasion of the demise anniversary of Imam Khomeini (r.a.). The speech was delivered at Imam Khomeini\\\\\\\'s shrine. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings upon our Master and Prophet, Muhammad, and upon his immaculate household, especially the one remaining with Allah on earth. \\\\\\\"Our Lord, forgive us and those of our brethren who had precedence of us in faith, and do not allow any spite to remain in our hearts towards those who believe. Our Lord, surely You are Kind, Merciful\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 59: 10]. \\\\\\\"Our Lord, surely You have given to Pharaoh and his chiefs finery and riches in this world\\\\\\\'s life. To this end, our Lord, that they lead people astray from Your way. Our Lord, destroy their riches and harden their hearts so that they believe not until they see the painful punishment\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 10: 88]. Allah the Omniscient said in His book: \\\\\\\"Have you not considered how Allah sets forth a parable of a good word being like a good tree, whose root is firm and whose branches are in heaven, yielding its fruit in every season by the permission of its Lord?\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 14: 24-25] On this unforgettable and important day, I would like to divide my statements to you dear brothers and sisters into three parts. In the first part, I will speak about an important reality which exists about the Islamic Republic. Today, paying attention to this reality is very important. In the second part, I will provide a brief explanation of our magnanimous Imam\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) permanent and eternal school of thought. Although we have said and heard many things about Imam\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) school of thought, it is necessary to provide a brief explanation at this point in time. I will provide a short portrayal of all the things that our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) created as a unique phenomenon in the contemporary world. The third part is about two important challenges which lie ahead of the people of Iran and the Islamic Republic. It is important for us to pay attention to these two challenges in order to move forward in the right way and on the right path. As for the first part, the reality that I referred to is that 25 years have passed from the demise of our great Imam (r.a.), but people\\\\\\\'s enthusiasm and excitement to hear and know about him has not diminished. And this is not particular to our country. Rather, this reality exists in the world of Islam and even beyond that. Not only in our country - where the third generation of the Revolution is growing and blossoming - but also in the entire world of Islam, the youth of the age of communications and Internet are after gaining more information about the issues of the Revolution, about the Islamic Republic and about the architect of this great structure. And these youth can easily familiarize themselves with the issues which occur far away from their own environment. The phenomenon of religious democracy and the theory of Wilayat-e Faqih are issues which are significant and attractive for the intellectual environments of the world of Islam. From the first days, our enemies began making a comprehensive effort and the more we moved forward, the more comprehensive this effort became. They used hundreds and thousands of television, radio stations and Internet sites to abuse the Islamic Republic, its great founder and its supporters. Of course, this issue has been helpful to us because it has aroused the curiosity of listeners and viewers throughout the world. These listeners and viewers want to know the reason behind all these enmities, hostilities and mudslinging. They want to know the nature of the truth which has been the target of these enmities. So, our enemies mentioned our names and they spoke about our Imam (r.a.) and our system with the purpose of showing their enmity, but \\\\\\\"...surely they will scheme, and I too will scheme\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 86: 15-16]. This is what Allah the Exalted says. They started this widespread movement with such an intention, but it eventually created an opportunity for us because the sense of curiosity of the listeners to these stations was aroused throughout the world. Islamic Awakening - in which anti-arrogant feelings were dominant more than any other phenomenon - in Islamic countries and our region is the sign of this curiosity and search for the truth and it continues to exist. It is possible that western and American intelligence services report to their seniors that they have managed to suppress Islamic Awakening in our region. If they have such a notion, then this will be another strategic mistake and another wrong interpretation on the part of our enemies. Islamic Awakening might be suppressed for a while in part of the world of Islam, but it will undoubtedly not be uprooted. On the contrary, it will develop. This understanding, this perception and this awareness in all countries and among Muslim youth in the region is not something that can be destroyed easily. Of course, they will make certain efforts in order to destroy it and these efforts may seem to be successful in some areas in the short run, but in the end, they will prove to be fruitless. The curiosity that exists in today\\\\\\\'s young generation all over the world - particularly in the world of Islam - about the phenomenon of religious democracy is rooted in the fact that the Islamic Republic is a phenomenon from whose birth 35 years have passed. And during all these 35 years, it has faced the violent and hostile reactions of the dominant powers in the world. They showed military reactions, they showed propaganda reactions, they showed economic reactions - which began from the beginning of the Revolution and which have been reinforced on a daily basis - and they showed political reactions. It is 35 years now that this powerful western camp has been doing whatever it could against the Islamic Republic. It has made military efforts, it has helped the aggressors who attacked our country, it has supported the enemies of the Islamic Republic in any area, it has used widespread propaganda and it has made perfect and unprecedented efforts in the area of sanctions and economic siege. But in the face of all these invasions and all these violent and unscrupulous hostilities, the Islamic Republic was not destroyed, it did not adopt a conservative outlook, it was not blackmailed by the west and it made progress on a daily basis. This is what forms the essence of this curiosity. Despite the fact that the primary military, political and economic powers of the world joined hands against a country and a government and despite the fact that they made efforts for 35 years, not only was this government not destroyed, but it also became stronger on a daily basis. This government was not blackmailed by them and it did not pay any attention to them at all. The Islamic Republic showed its power and capability to survive in different arenas. Today, when they look at the Islamic Republic, they see that the second and third generations of the Revolution in the country are comprised of several million students, several thousand knowledgeable clergy, several thousand researchers, several thousand university and seminary professors, thousands of scientific and intellectual personalities - some of whom are well-known on an international level - and thousands of activists and producers and thousands of political, cultural and economic personalities. This is the reality about our today\\\\\\\'s society. In the arena of science and technology, the Islamic Republic launches satellites into space despite all sanctions. It sends living creatures into space and it brings them back. It produces nuclear energy. It is ranked among the first ten countries in the world in many new sciences. The centers in charge of releasing statistics have announced that the rate of scientific progress in the Islamic Republic is 13 times faster than the global average. It gives scientific and technological services to different countries. Despite unprecedented sanctions, it manages a 75-million-strong country. It has the final word on regional policies. It shows resistance against the usurping Zionist regime, which is supported by global bullies, and it does this on its own. It does not compromise with oppressors and it defends the oppressed. Any well-informed individual becomes curious to know what this organism and phenomenon is and how it benefits from all these innate capabilities and this potential to survive despite all the enmities. This is the nature of this curiosity. This was about the issues related to scientific, technological and other such areas. As for political and social issues, the higher aspect of this religious democracy is that we have had 32 elections during the 35 years from the beginning of our Revolution. Thirty two public elections have been held in this country. Is this a minor achievement? This is an exceptional phenomenon. Elections in the Islamic Republic are held with a high turnout - higher than the global average and in some cases, it is much higher. Our elections witness a turnout of 70, 72 percent. Our elections are like this. These elections are the manifestation of democracy. Another exceptional example is the two phenomena which we people have gotten used to, but which are extraordinarily exciting and important for global inspectors and witnesses. These two phenomena are the 22nd of Bahman rallies and Quds Day Rallies in the month of Ramadan. During the past 35 years, the people have held the Revolution celebration each year with a great, exciting and glorious rally on the cold days of late Bahman. We have gotten used to this and we do not truly see the significance and greatness of this issue, but global witnesses see these things and they are very astonishing to them. These are the factors behind the element which arouses people\\\\\\\'s curiosity and which presents a new path to the minds of enthusiastic, inquisitive and research-oriented individuals. This is the important reality of our time which can be described as the general curiosity of youth, intellectuals, well-informed personalities and analysts throughout the world of Islam about the phenomenon which has emerged and grown on a daily basis in Islamic Iran. This is the first issue. This reality has been built by the hands of our great architect. We have said many things about Imam (r.a.). Perhaps some people think that we have spoken about Imam in an exaggerated way. But this is not the case. What we have said about our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) is neither exaggeration nor magnification of the truth. Rather, it is the truth. Our magnanimous and dear Imam (r.a.) was more complex and meaningful than what we managed to say and reflect about him. What is available to the people of Iran and what is in front of the eyes of people throughout the world has been built by those powerful hands. We should know about the architect\\\\\\\'s plan in order to take the path in the right way. If developers and builders do not have access to a plan in order to build an ordinary building and if it is not clear what the main plan is, then they may make a mistake no matter how skilled they are. We should know the main plan so that we can use our expertise in building on the basis of this plan. Imam\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) plan was not one that could be designed by a human being. It was definitely God\\\\\\\'s work. Our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) himself knew and acknowledged this. He himself used to say, \\\\\\\"What has occurred is a handicraft of divine power\\\\\\\". He had understood this correctly and his insightful and vigilant eyes had seen this correctly. We should be careful. We should know the plan so that we can continue the path. If we do not know the plan, we will deviate from the right path. And when we deviate, we will drift away from the main and the straight path on a daily basis. When we drift away from the straight path, we will drift away from goals and we will fail to reach them. In order to reach the goals, we should take care not to lose the path and in order to avoid losing the path, we should have the main plan in front of our eyes. We should know and identify this plan. Imam\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) plan and main task was to create a civil-political system on the basis of Islamic reason. The prerequisite for carrying out this task was to uproot the monarchic regime which was corrupt, dependent and dictatorial. The monarchic regime had these three characteristics: it was corrupt - different moral, financial and other such corruptions. It was dependent on powers. One day, it was dependent on England and another day, it was dependent on America. It was prepared to abandon its own interests and the interests of the people for the sake of the interests of foreigners. And it was dictatorial and oppressive. For the monarchic regime, the people\\\\\\\'s votes and requests counted for nothing. Each of these characteristics forms a long chapter. Each of them forms a long book. The prerequisite for the great task that Imam (r.a.) wanted to carry out was to uproot this corrupt, dependent and dictatorial regime. He focused his efforts on doing this and consequently, the regime was uprooted. In our country, the issue was not replacing a monarchic regime with another monarchic or semi-monarchic regime. The issue was uprooting the characteristics that the monarchic regime had and this was done by our magnanimous Imam (r.a.). Imam\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) statements, guidelines and behavior were oriented towards this goal. There are two fundamental points in building this civil-political system and these two points are interconnected. In one sense, these two points are two sides of the coin of truth. One is entrusting the affairs of the country to the people through democracy and elections and another is launching this movement - which originated from Islam - and any movement which originates from democracy and entrusting tasks to people, within the framework of Islamic sharia. These are two parts. In other words, these are two sides of the same truth. Some people should not think that our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) derived elections from the western culture and then mixed it with Islamic thoughts and Islamic sharia. This was not the case. If elections, democracy and reliance on the votes of people had not been part of religion and Islamic sharia, then Imam (r.a.) would have told us. If this had been the case, he would have announced it in an outspoken and decisive way. Democracy is part of religion. Therefore, Islamic sharia is the framework. When passing and implementing laws, when assigning individuals different tasks and discharging them from their service and during all tasks that follow this political-civil system, Islamic sharia should be observed. All tasks in this system revolve around democracy. All the people elect the members of the Majlis and the president, they elect ministers indirectly, they elect the members of the Assembly of Experts and they elect the Leader indirectly. All tasks are in the hands of the people. This was the main base of our magnanimous Imam\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) movement. The great structure that this great personality built was founded on these two bases. Commitment to Islamic sharia is the soul and truth of the Islamic government. Everyone should pay attention to this issue. If Islamic sharia is completely observed in society, this will ensure both civil and individual freedom - the freedom of individuals - and collective freedom which is called independence. Independence means freedom of a people. It means that a people are not dependent on anyone and any place. \\\\\\\"A free people\\\\\\\" means a people who are not under the influence and domination of their opponents, their enemies and foreigners in any way. If Islamic sharia is observed, it will ensure both justice and spirituality in society. These are the four main elements: freedom, independence, justice and spirituality. If Islamic sharia dominates society, these main phenomena in the order of Islamic society will show themselves. Therefore, our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) stressed the necessity of Islamic sharia which is the soul of the Islamic Republic. He also stressed the necessity of religious democracy which is a means and a tool and which is derived from sharia. According to Imam\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) school of thought, any power and force which has come into being through deception and oppression is unacceptable. In the Islamic government, oppression and subjugation are meaningless. Power and authority are meaningful, but only the one that originates from people\\\\\\\'s free will and choice. The kind of power which originates from bullying, subjugation and weapons is meaningless from the viewpoint of Islam, Islamic sharia and Imam\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) school of thought. The kind of power which emerges on the basis of people\\\\\\\'s choice is respectable. No one should confront this power. No one should try to suppress and subjugate this power. If they do so, this is called fitna. This is the new prescription that our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) introduced to the world. He added this important chapter to the political literature of the world. As we pointed out, one of the main elements in this new version is rushing to help the oppressed and confronting the oppressor. We should help the oppressed and in the present time, the concrete manifestation of being oppressed is the people of Palestine. As you witnessed, from the first day until the end of his life, our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) stressed the issue of Palestine. He supported the issue of Palestine and stated in his testament that the people of Iran and the officials of the country should not forget about this issue. Helping the oppressed, showing resistance against the oppressor, condemning his transgressions, rejecting his power and grandeur in an outspoken way and shattering this grandeur are among the parts of this system and this new version presented by our magnanimous Imam (r.a.). This is a short summary, portrayal and description of the political order and the foundation that our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) introduced to society after overthrowing the monarchic regime in the country. This matter was completely accepted by the people and it was put into practice. Unlike many political slogans, this matter was not confined to books. Rather, it was realized, put into practice and reflected in reality. And the people of Iran showed their determination, loyalty and self-sacrifice by preserving this matter and strengthening it on a daily basis until today. So, Imam (r.a.) succeeded. He achieved complete success in what he wanted to do. Will this great task continue? Will the empty boxes of this table - naturally, there are some empty boxes in social and historical tables - be filled in? This depends on how determined and aware you and I are and to what extent we observe and move in the direction of that clear line. It is completely possible to do this. Considering the people that we see, considering the experience that they have gained and considering the successful and continuous movement that they have launched in the past 35 years - and in the past 25 years since Imam\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) demise - it is possible to continue this path. The empty boxes will be filled in, great feats will be accomplished and by Allah\\\\\\\'s favor and grace, our people will reach the peaks. Like all the important paths which have been delineated for reaching great goals, this path involves certain challenges and obstacles. We should identify these obstacles so that we can pass through them. If we do not identify obstacles, overcoming them will be either difficult or impossible. I am saying these things to you honorable participants of this great and magnificent meeting and, in fact, to the people of Iran who will hear these statements. But it is our youth, our scholars and our intellectuals who should think about, work on and study each of these chapters and parts. They should work on not only semi-intellectual and theoretical discussions but also on practical and functional discussions which reflect the truth. What we are saying is some chapters for carrying out intellectual tasks. By Allah\\\\\\\'s favor, these chapters will be followed up by our youth who are much better and prepared than we are. I would like to refer to two challenges: one is an external challenge and another is an internal challenge. Our external challenge is the interferences of global arrogance. I would like to speak without any consideration. The external challenge is the interferences of America. They engage in mudslinging. Although some of their thinkers say in their analyses that it is useless or impossible to confront this great movement, they engage in mudslinging. We should know their plan. This is America\\\\\\\'s plan which has been revealed through their discussions, reports, statements and behavior: America divides all countries, orientations and people throughout the world into three groups: the first group is made up of the submissive including submissive countries, submissive political and social orientations and submissive individuals. The first group is comprised of these people. The second group is comprised of countries which are not submissive and which should be tolerated. From the viewpoint of America, a number of countries, personalities and orientations should be tolerated. They believe that they should define common interests with these countries and that they should get along with them somehow. Later on, I will explain this more. The third group is made up of disobedient countries, those which do not give in to America and which refuse to be blackmailed by it. The third group is comprised of these countries. From the viewpoint of the Americans, no country, no political, social, civil and economic orientation and no individual in the world is out of these three groups. Everyone is either submissive and docile or independent - and you should get along with them - or disobedient, bold and courageous. One should behave in a different way towards the third group. America\\\\\\\'s policy towards the first group is complete support. Of course, they do not provide this support for free. They support them, but they also milk them. In fact, they use their capabilities and resources to the advantage of their own interests and for safeguarding their own interests. The Americans ride roughshod over these people and they make them render all kinds of services to them. As I said, they milk them and they do not care at all. Of course, if these people and countries behave in a way that is considered to be indecent according to global conventions, the Americans do not condemn it. On the contrary, they defend and justify it. For example, there are some dictatorial countries which are managed by biased, reactionary and completely dictatorial regimes, but they have friendly relations with the Americans. These countries give in to the Americans and they are prepared to serve and obey them. They are members of the first group. When the Americans want to describe them, they do not refer to them as dictatorial countries. Rather, they say that they are patriarchal countries and thus they cover up their dictatorship. They say, \\\\\\\"They are not dictators. Rather, they are patriarchal countries\\\\\\\". What is the meaning of patriarchal in political systems? What does it mean? Is a patriarchal country a country in which there is no parliament, no elections, no power to speak freely, no freedom of speech and no freedom of expression? Is a patriarchal country a country in which the slightest disobedience to the wishes of the rulers is suppressed in a very serious and severe way? In one part of his life, Saddam Hussein was one of these obedient and submissive individuals. In that stage of his life, they gave him all kinds of support and they rendered some services to him. They gave him chemical weapons and they provided him with the plans of our military movement which had been discovered via satellite. They gave him military plans because he was at their service and because he was against the disobedient Islamic Republic which was a member of the third group. So, these people represent the first group. As I said, the second group is made up of the countries which America gets along with. The policy and plan of America is to get along with these countries. What does getting along mean? It means defining common interests and establishing friendly relations with someone. But when America has the opportunity, it will stab them in the back and tear their hearts open and it will not show any consideration for them. Which countries represent the second group? European countries represent the second group. Today, European countries are in such conditions. America gets along with them, but this does not mean that it defends their interests. This is not the case. It will kick them as much as it can. For example, it spies - Internet espionage - on the number one in its allied country. It also spies on him by tapping his cell phone. The Americans even keep watch on his personal life and they have no scruples whatsoever. When it comes out, they say, \\\\\\\"Sorry, it happened because we had no choice\\\\\\\". They are not even willing to apologize in a sincere way. My understanding of political issues tells me that the Europeans are making a great strategic mistake by serving America. They promote the interests of America, but America does not and will not do so and it will be the same until the end. This was about the second group. The third group is made up of countries which do not give in to America. America\\\\\\\'s policy towards this group is to use each and every tool they find against these disobedient countries. They use any tool they find and they do not have any limits for that. If you see that there is a country which is disobedient to America and that America does not attack or impose sanctions on it, then you should know that there is a problem - that is to say, there is an obstacle in their way. To put it simply, they cannot do it. If they can, they will definitely do it. The only crime that this disobedient country has committed is that it is not willing to give in to America, to be blackmailed by it and to let the interests of America have priority over its own interests. This is the definition of a disobedient country. In order to bring this country to its knees, the Americans do everything that they can. They do whatever is possible for them. If they do not do something, it is because they cannot. Well, what are the things that the Americans do? Today, launching a military attack is not a priority from the viewpoint of the Americans. They have understood that they suffered a loss on the issue of Iraq and Afghanistan where they launched military attacks. They have understood that launching a military attack is as dangerous for the aggressor as it is for the defender and sometimes, it is even more dangerous for the aggressor. They have understood this correctly. Therefore, it can be said that they have changed their mind about launching a military attack. They have other ways ahead of them. One of these ways is entrusting the task of furthering their goals in the target country - which is the target of their attacks - to the elements inside this country. The issue is not only about Islamic Iran and the Islamic Republic. They are doing these things all over the world and we are witnessing some instances of their effort in the present time. Another way is launching a coup d\\\\\\\'état. They empower some people inside the target country so that they can launch a coup d\\\\\\\'état and overthrow those governments and political systems which do not give in to them. One of the ways that they use is this. Another way is drawing part of the people to the streets. An example is the color revolutions which were carried out in each and every part of the region in recent years. Take the case of a government which comes to power in a country. After all, if the government that comes to power holds 60 percent of the votes, it means that 40 percent of the people did not vote for it. The Americans go to that 40 percent, choose certain elements and leaders among them and make them - either by bribing or by threatening them - draw that 40 percent or part of it to the streets. America\\\\\\\'s hands were behind the color revolutions - for example, such and such an orange revolution and other revolutions in different countries - that were carried out in recent years. We do not make any judgment about the events which are taking place in an area in Europe. But when one takes a look, one sees what a role an American senator and official can play - by showing his presence - in the demonstrations of a minority against a country. They showed their presence in such areas. One of the measures that they adopt is that they draw part of the people to the streets and make them break the law, thereby overthrowing the government which they do not approve of and which is not blackmailed. Another measure that they adopt is empowering and forming terrorist groups. They did this in Iraq, Afghanistan and some Arab countries in the region. They did it in our country as well. They form terrorist groups in order to kill well-known personalities. In our country, they struck and martyred scientists and experts on atomic energy. Before that too, they struck political, cultural, scientific and seminary personalities. These terrorists grew with the help of the Americans. Some of them were accepted into America by the Americans for the services that they rendered. Today, munafeqeen are in America\\\\\\\'s arms. They take part in different meetings and commissions of the U.S. Congress. The same munafeqeen who killed people from different social backgrounds - including great personalities, ulama, scientists and political personalities - and who carried out explosions are with the Americans today. So, this is another way they use. Another way is creating discord among decision-makers of countries. One of the measures that they adopt is this: they try to create a rift in the highest levels of the government and system that is not with them. They try to establish a dual government. Of course, they do not succeed in many countries. But unfortunately, they succeed in some areas. This is one of their ways. Another way is that they discourage - with their propaganda - the hearts and minds of people from following their ideological and religious principles. They try such measures. The regime of the United States of America has done all these things to our dear and Islamic Iran and by Allah\\\\\\\'s favor, it has failed in all of them. Launching military coups d\\\\\\\'état, supporting those who instigate fitna, drawing some people to the streets, confronting elections and creating rifts were some of the measures that they either adopted or tried to adopt and thankfully, they failed in all of them. Why did they fail? It was because the people were vigilant and religious. It is here that I want to speak about the second challenge which is the internal challenge. Dear brothers and sisters, the internal challenge for our people is the risk of ignoring, forgetting about and losing the spirit and orientation of our magnanimous Imam (r.a). This is the greatest danger. The internal challenge is making a mistake in knowing our enemies and our friends and confusing the camp of our enemies and friends so much so that we do not know who our enemies and friends are. Another mistake is failing to know our major and minor enemies. This is another danger. You dear brothers and sisters and all the people of Iran should pay attention that sometimes, someone shows enmity towards you. But if you pay careful attention, you will see that his enmity is not the main one. It is a function of another factor and another person. You should find the main enemy. Otherwise, if one confronts the lesser enemy, one\\\\\\\'s energy is sapped and the result will not be good. Today, some people in different parts of the world of Islam - which go by the name of takfiri, Wahhabi and Salafi groups - are adopting bad and inappropriate measures against Iran, Shia Muslims and Shia Islam. But everyone should know that they are not the main enemies. They show enmity and they adopt foolish measures, but the main enemy is the person who provokes them, who gives them money and who motivates them with different means when their motivation is weakened to some extent. The main enemy is the person who sows the seeds of rupture and discord between that foolish and ignorant group and the oppressed people of Iran. These measures are adopted by the hidden hands of intelligence and security services. That is why we have constantly said that we do not consider these foolish groups - who confront the Islamic Republic in the name of Salafism, takfiri and Islam - to be our main enemy. We consider you to be the deceived. We have said to these people: \\\\\\\"If you stretch your hand against me to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my hand against you to slay you: for I fear Allah, the Cherisher of the worlds\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 5: 28]. If you make a mistake and if you prepare yourself to kill your Muslim brothers, we do not consider you to be so important that we try to kill you. Of course, we defend ourselves. Anyone who attacks us will face our firm fist. This is natural, but we believe that these people are not our main enemies. They have been deceived. The main enemy is the person who acts behind the scenes. The main enemy is the visible hand that comes out of the sleeve of intelligence services, that confronts Muslims and that pits them against one another. This is our internal challenge: becoming busy with domestic differences - those which are trivial and unimportant. Such differences make us busy, pit us against one another, create tension and make us forget about the main issues and guidelines. This is one of the manifestations of the main challenge which was referred to. Losing national solidarity is one of our challenges. Suffering from laziness, lack of confidence, idleness, desperation and hopelessness and thinking that we cannot succeed and that we have not succeeded until today are among the internal challenges we should confront. As Imam (r.a.) said, we can. We should show determination. National determination and jihadi management can untie all the knots. As we said, our dear youth, our outstanding personalities and our scholars should sit and study these issues. These are our main points. The auspicious name of our magnanimous Imam (r.a.), the remembrance of that great man and the plan of that great architect can help us in all these chapters. It can give us hope, enthusiasm and morale, as it has done this until today and by Allah\\\\\\\'s favor, it will continue to do this in the future. Dear God, bestow your blessings on our dear people. Dear God, help our dear youth on the path of building an ideal Islamic structure. Dear God, protect us from deviations and digressions. Dear God, make the hands of the people of Iran stronger than the hands of their enemies. Help them achieve victory over their enemies. Make the holy heart of the Imam of the Age (may our souls be sacrificed for his sake) kind to us. Help us benefit from the prayers of that great Imam (a.s.). Associate the pure souls of Imam (r.a.) and our dear martyrs with the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.). Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings Source: http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1921

[26 June 2014] NATO service member killed in southern Afghanistan - English