Search Result in All

The Bahraini regime forces backed by troops from Saudi Arabia have once again attacked protesters in the tiny Persian Gulf littoral state. Security forces on Friday fired teargas and sound grenades at the demonstrating crowds in several towns and villages around the Bahraini capital, Manama. Clashes then erupted between government forces and the pro-democracy protesters demanding the ouster of the Al Khalifa regime. Several people were injured during the demonstrations. The protesters also voiced their anger at the US government for its support of the Manama regime. Anti-American sentiments are high in Bahrain after Washington announced earlier this month that it would resume arms sales to Bahrain. However, Bahraini opposition groups and activists condemned the decision, saying it could encourage further human rights violations in the Persian Gulf country. Press TV has conducted an interview with Kamel Wazni, political analyst, to hear his opinion on this issue. The following is a rough transcription of the interview. Press TV: First of all we are hearing slogans on the streets in Bahrain against the United States now besides those slogans that were against the regime. People it seems are now very strongly and clearly saying that they want the United States to cut its support for the Manama regime, however we are seeing that support continue. Do you think that these slogans are going to be heard by Washington? Wazni: Obviously they will resonate in the White House and on the streets of America because this is the voice of the people and for very long time the Americans felt they are not mentioned on the streets and the Americans know sometimes this hostility that is taking place by the Bahrainis because they continue support of the Americans for the Bahraini regime and the approval of the Americans to sell weapons and arms to the Bahraini regime despite the crackdown that is taking place by the Bahraini regime against the civilian demonstrators of the country. I think there is voice on the streets saying anyone who sided with the criminals who are committing crimes against humanity should be condemned and today because the Bahraini authority, the Bahraini monarchy is committing crime and America being accomplice to this crime, then you see the people are voicing their sentiment and making their voice to be heard across the world. They are not intimidated, they are not afraid. They wanted democratic system and a country, that is the basic principle of human dignity to live free in his own or her own country where will be no discrimination, no crackdown, no torture. This is the basic principle of any human wanted to live in peace and prosperity and the Americans by siding with the Bahraini regime preventing the aspiration of the Bahraini people to make this happen so the Americans should not be shocked by what they are hearing. That is what they actually worked on by helping the Bahraini authority and if Obama is listening and Mrs. Clinton should listen to the human rights when they actually condemn the torture that is taking place by the Bahraini government. The systematic torture that is taking [place] day after day should be heard by the American administration. There are a lot of committees being established by the UN bodies, by even the King and they all indicated there is a huge torture and killing taking place on the streets of Bahrain. So is anybody listening? Press TV: What you referred there to the United Nations also other human rights groups we know for instance that the UN Human Rights Council recently in Geneva started to discuss the situation in Bahrain. We know groups like Amnesty International and other human rights organizations in and outside of Bahrain have been saying they have documents and proved that these violations are taking place but does that mean that they are going to give any support to the Bahraini revolutionaries and do you think without that support on the ground the Bahraini revolution can get anywhere? Wazni: Well obviously the public opinion on the international appeal is important but eventually the legwork has to be done by the people of Bahrain because the people of Bahrain made a pledge and they are determined to carry their own cause despite all the obstacles and all the atrocity that is committed by the Bahraini regime against the civilian in Bahrain. But having the public support of the international community from the UN, from other bodies is actually attested to the reality that is taking place. There is a crime taking place in Bahrain by the monarchy, by the royal family supported by the Americans and somebody has to listen but I do not think the Bahraini people are counting on the West or the Americans because they think the Americans are participant in what is taking place in Bahrain and despite all of that they have the will and the determination to carry their cause to the end. They know the sacrifice and they are willing to take that sacrifice and we hear the leadership of the Bahraini talking, when we hear Sheikh Ghasem say this is the will of the people and they will carry their duty to bring honorable justice to Bahrain despite all the killing and torture [that] is committed by the Bahraini with the help of the Saudis. The people will prevail in the end, will be costly process but you have to trust the people and the people will carry their duties.

The following is the full text of the sermons delivered on August 9, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, during Eid ul-Fitr prayers in Tehran. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, the Creator of all creatures, Whom we praise, from Whom we seek help, to Whom we repent, and Whom we rely on, and peace and greetings be upon His beloved and noble one, the best among His servants, the protector of His secret, the promoter of His message, the harbinger of His mercy, the warner of His chastisement, our Master and Prophet, Ab-al-Qassem al-Mustafa Muhammad, upon his immaculate, pure and chosen household, and upon those who guide the guided, and who are immaculate and respected, especially the one remaining with Allah on earth. I advise myself and all of you dear brothers and sisters, who said your prayers in this magnificent meeting, to fear God and engage in piety which is the source of happiness and victory in this world and in the hereafter. I would like to congratulate all of you, all the people of Iran and all Muslims throughout the world on the occasion of the auspicious Eid ul-Fitr. The month of Ramadan, which is full of divine blessings for our nation and other Muslims, is over and many happy people benefited from the blessings of this month. These people spent the day obeying God while they were fasting and while they felt hungry and thirsty in such hot weather and on such hot days and they avoided carnal desires and curbed their human passions. At night, many people engaged in prayer and dhikr and they kept a vigil for God. Those who carried out their responsibility by worshiping God and fulfilling divine obligations in this month feel satisfied and happy. Engaging in spiritual deeds and fighting against human passions in this month gives a feeling of joy and spiritual happiness to you dear people who are the masters of determination and willpower and who exercised patience in fasting. One of the characteristics of carrying out responsibilities for the sake of God and making efforts and engaging in jihad for the sake of God is that one feels happy although one endures hardships and difficulties. And God has connected this happiness with the happiness that we feel on the day of Eid ul-Fitr. In order to show the greatness of this day, I should merely say that, during the nine qunuts of the auspicious prayers of Eid ul-Fitr, you swear by the blessedness of this day: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"By the blessedness of this day I ask you...\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Mafatih al-Jinan, Eid ul-Fitr] I hope that Allah the Exalted accepts your prayers, bestows and showers His mercy and blessings on the people of Iran and bestows abundant rewards on you for the efforts that you made in this month. One of the great efforts that the people made in this month was the Quds Day rallies. One cannot describe in any way, how significant what you did is. Throughout the country, you marched on the streets in such hot weather and while you were fasting in order to prove the resistance of the Iranian nation on this important issue of the world of Islam and the history of Islam. This is the meaning of a living nation. I deem it necessary to express my gratitude, from the bottom of my heart, to the Iranian nation for this effort. This year, more than previous years, a good tradition was witnessed. It is good to pay attention to this issue which is the act of providing the people with simple and unadorned iftar meals in our mosques and on the streets of many cities of the country. Unlike the act of offering extravagant iftar meals which we heard a number of people did, this is a very appropriate act. Under the pretext of offering iftar meals, these people engaged in extravagant acts. Instead of becoming an instrument for establishing a psychological relationship with the poor and the deprived in the month of Ramadan, they indulged themselves in carnal desires by doing this. We do not want to say that if somebody eats a delicious food during iftar, this is forbidden. No, according to Sharia, these things are not forbidden. But extravagance and overindulgence are forbidden. The extravagance which is sometimes witnessed in such occasions is forbidden. It is so much better for those who want to offer iftar meals to do this by cherishing the tradition which has become common. In such traditions, a number of individuals offer free iftar meals - with great generosity - to people and passers-by and those who like to benefit from these iftar meals on the streets and in different Hussayniyyahs. I hope that Allah the Exalted bestows His blessings on all of you people of Iran and accepts your actions. I hope that He bestows on you the blessing to preserve the achievements of the auspicious month of Ramadan until next year. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful I swear by the time, Most surely man is in loss, Except those who believe and do good, and enjoin on each other truth, and enjoin on each other patience.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 103] All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings be upon our Master and Prophet, Ab-al-Qassem al-Mustafa Muhammad and upon his immaculate, pure and chosen household, especially upon the Commander of the Faithful, the Mistress of all Women, Hassan and Hussein- the children of mercy and the Imams of the guided, Ali ibn al-Hussein Zayn al-Abidin, Muhammad ibn Ali al-Baqir, Ja\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'far ibn Muhammad al-Sadiq, Musa ibn Ja\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'far al-Kadhim, Ali ibn Musa ar-Ridha, Muhammad ibn Ali al-Jawad, Ali ibn Muhammad al-Hadi, Hassan ibn Ali al-Askari and Hujjat al-Qaem al-Mahdi. Greetings be upon them all and upon the Imams of Muslims, supporters of the oppressed, and those who guide the faithful. We ask for Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s forgiveness and we turn repentant to Him. I advise all the brothers and sisters to observe piety in their speech, behavior and positions and in different social, economic and political arenas. These days, many events are taking place in West Asia, North Africa and, generally, in Islamic regions. I will briefly refer to a number of these events. In our own country, the important event is the formation of the new administration. Thankfully, with the determination and all-out efforts of the people, this legal request was granted and this national tradition was preserved in the best way possible. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, after the Majlis carries out its responsibility of choosing competent ministers, the administration will be formed and it will start to fulfill the great and important tasks which it is in charge of although it has already started to fulfill many of the tasks. I hope that the honorable president and the executive officials of the country will benefit from divine blessings. I hope that the people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s support and assistance will help them carry out the great responsibilities - great responsibilities have great advantages as well as great difficulties - which they have in the best way possible. However in countries which are located around us - countries in West Asia and North Africa - the events that are taking place are not happy events. Rather, they are worrying events. One event is the event of the oppressed Palestine. After the passage of 65 years since the official occupation of Palestine, this oppressed nation continues to suffer from oppression and cruelty on a daily basis. Houses are destroyed, innocent people are arrested, children are separated from their parents and prisons are filled with people who are innocent or who have served their prison terms. What is distressing is that western powers support these criminals with all their power. One of the disasters of today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s world is that an act of clear oppression, which is a combination of tens and hundreds of oppressive acts, is supported by those who claim they support human rights and democracy and who chant beautiful and colorful slogans, but who support criminals in practice. Now, a number of negotiations have begun again between the self-governing government of Palestine and the Zionists. These negotiations will definitely not produce any results other than what happened during previous negotiations in which Palestinians gave up their rights and encouraged the transgressors to transgress more and stop the lawful political activities of the people of Palestine. They destroy houses, build unlawful buildings for the people who have occupied Palestine and then they say that they are negotiating. Now, they have announced that negotiations will be conducted in secret. The way global arrogance cooks these negotiations will definitely be to the disadvantage of the Palestinians. We believe that the world of Islam should not back down on the issue of Palestine and it should condemn the usurping act of the predatory and wolf-like Zionists and their international supporters. It should not let these negotiations which are conducted with the so-called mediation of America lead to more oppression against the people of Palestine and to the isolation of Muslim Palestinian fighters. In fact, America is not a mediator. Rather, the Americans themselves are one side of these negotiations and they are on the side of the usurpers of Palestine, the Zionists. Another issue is the issue of Egypt. We are concerned about what is happening in Egypt. Considering the things that are being done in this country, the idea that a civil war may break out in Egypt is gaining strength on a daily basis and this is a disaster. It is necessary for the great people of Egypt and political, scientific and religious personalities in this country to take a look at the current situation and see what catastrophic consequences this situation may have. They should see the current situation in Syria. They should see the consequences of the presence of western and Zionist mercenaries and terrorists wherever they are active. They should see these dangers. Democracy should receive attention. The killing of people is vigorously condemned by Muslims. Using the language of violence and bullying by different groups of people is absolutely useless and it will cause great harm. The intervention of foreign powers - the way it is witnessed in the present time - will produce nothing except for loss and harm. The problems of Egypt should be solved by the people of Egypt and the outstanding personalities of Egypt. They should think about the catastrophic and dangerous consequences of this situation. If, God forbid, there is mayhem and if, God forbid, a civil war breaks out, what can then preclude this? In such conditions, there will be excuse for the intervention of superpowers which are the greatest disaster for any country and nation. We are concerned. We would like to offer a brotherly piece of advice to outstanding Egyptian personalities, the people of Egypt, political and religious groups and religious scholars. They should think of a solution on their own and adopt this solution on their own. They should not allow foreigners and powers - whose intelligence services have, most likely, played a role in creating this situation - to make more interventions. Another issue is the issue of Iraq. In Iraq, a democratic administration and government has come to power with the votes of the people. Because superpowers and the reactionary forces of the region are unhappy about this situation, they do not want to let the people of Iraq feel comfort. These explosions, these killings and these criminal and terrorist activities results from the assistance and financial, political and arms support of a number of regional and ultra-regional powers which do not want to let the Iraqi nation live its life the way it wants. It is necessary for Iraqi politicians and officials, Iraqi groups, Shia and Sunni Muslims, Arabs and Kurds to take a look at the situation which exists in a number of other countries. They should notice that the consequences of civil wars and domestic conflicts, which destroy the infrastructures of any country, ruin the future of any nation. In all these events, the Zionist regime and usurpers sit and watch this situation with satisfaction and they feel comfort. Should this be allowed to continue? Dear God, by the blessedness of Muhammad (s.w.a.) and his household (a.s.), awaken us from ignorance. Dear God, cut off the hands of malicious people and transgressors in Islamic nations and countries. Dear God, by the blessedness of Muhammad (s.w.a.) and his household (a.s.), make Islam and Muslims achieve victory wherever they are. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful To you, have We granted the Fount (of Abundance), Therefore to your Lord turn in Prayer and Sacrifice, For he who hates you, he will be cut off.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 108]

Animated comical series discussing the application of Islamic concepts in modern society. In the face of adversity, the Pear is perfectly comfortable praying five times a day, fasting in the month of Ramadhan and going on the occasional ziarat trip, being self assured that his religion ends there. He\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'ll drink a cup of tea while sitting in front of the news and pass a comment on how dirty politics is and how terrible the world has become while failing to recognise that the power to make a change lies in his own hands. “And get my hands dirty? I think not!” -The Pear. I guess you could say the Pear’s religion has become “pear-shaped”. Alas, the “Pears\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" of our society have forgotten that the message of Islam and the awaited saviour of mankind (Al-Mahdi) [a], is a message of justice which will encompass the entire globe. But in order to bring about the establishment of world peace and tranquility it requires painstaking effort from us. When there is corruption in our societies, it is OUR duty to try and stop it. When a foreign country is bombed, it is OUR duty to voice our opposition. The bottom line is, when we see that something is wrong in the world, it is OUR duty to set things right. So don’t be like the Pear. Have a topic in mind? Then drop us a message at fb.com/IslamicPulse to request your very own episode of Biskit and our team will try and get you your very own Biskit.

- Importance of pondering over why Allah(s.w.t) wants us to go all the way to Makkah for hajj. - Explanation of Aayat 97 of Surah Aale Imran where Allah(s.w.t) mentions how it is a duty for a Muslim to go for hajj if he has the ability to do so. - Once the Kaaba’s walls were erected, Allah(s.w.t) asked Prophet Ibrahim to call people for hajj so that they could witness the benefits for themselves. - There are many benefits when we go for Hajj. - Getting to network and meet other business traders from around the world. - The most important benefits are the spiritual and social dimensions of Hajj. - Hajj is a powerful way of recognizing who we are. - We shed away all the artificial identities that we have whether it applies to our clothing or political and economic status. - Everyone is dressed in 2 pieces of Ehram (white cloth) which is a dress that does not belong to any other nation. - Realizing that no matter what race, colour, ethnicity background or status in society we come from, we are all just servants of Allah(s.w.t) and nothing else. - Islam does not say that you should not love people of your own tribe, culture or language. Infact, that is part of our innate nature. - Islam is against discrimination and prejudice amongst the believers on the basis of race, colour, culture or language. - According to the 4th Imam we will be accountable in the eyes of Allah (s.w.t) when we start preferring our own kind even if they are evil over the righteous ones from another tribe. - “Asabiya” (discrimanation/bias) is when you support your own people even if they are unjust and wrong. - Mention of the words of Malcom X, on the impact that hajj had on him from a letter that he wrote to his wife. - Islam is a religion that is colour-blind and is our identity as part of a global Ummah (nation). - Inspite of millions of Muslims going for hajj, we don’t see any changes when it comes to unity and equality amongst believers. - Example of the way the rich gulf state treats Muslims from other nations. - This attitude still present amongst those known as the custodians of the “haramayn”. - “Mawali” is the plural of the word “mawla” which means slave or client. - In the pre Islamic era, a foreigner would not have security for himself, his life and his property unless he would be affiliated with a local tribe. He would be a “mawla” of the tribe. - Islam abolished this but it was later revived again. Only the school of the Ahlulbayt opposed this concept. - The “mawalis” were attracted to the Ahlulbayt because they did not differentiate between Arab or non Arab, master or slave and rich or poor. - Narration of a story from the life of Imam Ali Raza (a.s) of when he asked all the workers and slaves to join him and eat dinner together. - Mention of all the Imams whose mothers were from different parts of the world. 4 of them being from the African continent. - Molana Sayyid Saeed Akhtar Rizvi was the pioneer in tabligh among the African people. - Today Bilal Muslim mission is the pride of the community while it was not the case in the early days. MP3:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities. The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue. The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran. AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran. Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more. Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president. AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic. Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur. JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs. We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region. AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place. A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another. But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number. So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free. JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that? AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now. PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed. AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it. Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that. But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy. AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see. Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here. I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end. It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward. I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie. AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran. Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is. JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion. Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad. But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue. AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad. ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president President Ahmadinejad was interviewed recently in New York by Democracy Now

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities. The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue. The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran. AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran. Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more. Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president. AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic. Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur. JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs. We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region. AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place. A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another. But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number. So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free. JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that? AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now. PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed. AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it. Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that. But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy. AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see. Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here. I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end. It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward. I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie. AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran. Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is. JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion. Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad. But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue. AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad. ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities. The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue. The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran. AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran. Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more. Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president. AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic. Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur. JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs. We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region. AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place. A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another. But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number. So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free. JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that? AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now. PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed. AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it. Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that. But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy. AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see. Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here. I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end. It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward. I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie. AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran. Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is. JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion. Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad. But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue. AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad. ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution has described the \\\\\\\'unprecedented\\\\\\\' turnout of almost 85% in the election as a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy. Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said high turnout in the election, which witnessed more than 40 million Iranians casting their votes, was a great manifestation of people\\\\\\\'s solidarity with the Islamic establishment. Addressing Friday prayers congregation, Ayatollah Khamenei said that last Friday\\\\\\\'s election indicated a \\\\\\\'common sense of responsibility\\\\\\\' of the Iranian nation to determine the future of the country. The Leader added that all those who took part in the election proved their \\\\\\\'political consciousness and commitment\\\\\\\' towards the establishment to the whole world. The Leader said the high voter turnout in the election was a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy and a \\\\\\\'real celebration\\\\\\\' for the friends of the country. \\\\\\\"The Islamic Republic of Iran will by no means betray the votes of the nation,\\\\\\\" the Leader said, adding the legal system of the election will not allow any ballot rigging in Iran. Ayatollah Khamenei, however, maintained that the Guardian Council, the body tasked with overseeing the election, would look into the complaints of the candidates who are unhappy with the election results. The Leader also added that the establishment would never give-in to illegal demands, urging all presidential candidates to pursue their complaints through legal channels. Ayatollah Khamenei called for an end to illegal street protests aimed at reversing the result of the election. Following the announcement of the election outcome, supporters of the defeated candidate Mir-Hussein Mousavi-who rejected the election results-- took to the streets of Tehran and other cities in daily rallies. The Leader also warned against attempts made by foreign media outlets seeking to destabilize the country and blamed Britain in particular. Ayatollah Khamenei also decried the slander of former and incumbent top officials in pre-election debates by candidates. President Ahmadinejad was re-elected the next president of the country with over 60% percent of the votes. He won over his three rivals Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaei with almost 25 million votes. The Leader said the time is over for rivalry, stressing that all should unite and line up behind the president-elect Complete Transcript http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610 In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing. In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country. I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election. I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media. On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment. The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system. Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote. In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us. It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence. Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense. Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored. Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system. Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement. My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory. Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system. This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy. This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene. This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country. This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election. If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election. Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment. They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout. A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other. For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game. This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today. I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily. For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts. The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed. These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent. Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system. The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue. The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment. Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system. I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism. I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted. My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue. Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution. People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent. Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities. They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon. The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects. All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people. They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated. One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice. These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates. Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings. Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth. If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates. But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate. There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made. This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions. They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me. For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems. On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere. I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law. On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures. They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption. Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities. You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation. Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures. He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date. On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities. For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know. In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people. The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine. The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that. The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced. There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country. We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources. Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it. Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized. Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat. They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this. The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution. It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust. In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process. When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place? However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands. If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system. Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this. I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries. We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now. Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people. It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues. I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy. In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain. I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say. All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want. If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections? Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda. It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this? They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership. Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents. It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country. Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time. I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly. The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries. Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters. When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal. When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave. Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks. Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe? Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security. This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services. The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution. Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people. American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime? During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights? In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment!

Complete Transcript http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610 In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing. In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country. I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election. I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media. On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment. The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system. Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote. In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us. It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence. Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense. Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored. Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system. Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement. My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory. Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system. This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy. This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene. This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country. This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election. If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election. Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment. They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout. A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other. For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game. This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today. I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily. For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts. The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed. These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent. Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system. The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue. The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment. Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system. I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism. I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted. My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue. Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution. People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent. Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities. They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon. The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects. All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people. They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated. One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice. These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates. Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings. Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth. If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates. But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate. There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made. This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions. They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me. For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems. On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere. I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law. On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures. They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption. Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities. You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation. Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures. He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date. On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities. For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know. In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people. The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine. The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that. The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced. There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country. We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources. Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it. Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized. Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat. They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this. The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution. It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust. In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process. When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place? However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands. If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system. Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this. I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries. We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now. Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people. It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues. I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy. In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain. I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say. All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want. If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections? Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda. It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this? They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership. Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents. It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country. Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time. I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly. The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries. Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters. When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal. When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave. Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks. Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe? Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security. This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services. The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution. Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people. American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime? During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights? In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment! Supreme Leader Ayatullah Sayyed Ali Khamenei - Friday Prayer Speech - 19Jun09 - English

As if we needed any more proof that the international media deliberately avoids exposing anti-Muslim, anti-Palestinian injustices, its suspect behavior during recent days has sealed the case. Even as we were being force-fed minute details of Michael Jackson's colorful life along with endless speculation as to the true parentage of his children, a former U.S. Congresswomen and presidential candidate, Cynthia McKinney, was languishing in an Israeli jail. Her 'crime' was boarding the Free Gaza Movement's aid vessel The Spirit of Humanity in Cyprus, in an effort to break Israel's cruel siege of Gaza, which even the U.S. President has condemned. Like several of her sister vessels, The Spirit of Humanity was attacked by the Israeli Navy in international waters before being boarded by Israeli commandos and dragged along with its crew and passengers towards Israel. Once there, 21 human rights advocates from the U.S., Britain, Ireland, Denmark, Jordan, Palestine and Yemen, including McKinney, Noble Laureate Mairead Maguire, and documentary filmmaker Adam Shapiro, were incarcerated. Let's be realistic. If just about any other high-profile U.S. politician on any other mission had been detained within a cell block on foreign soil, the incident would have merited headlines. However, McKinney's abduction went almost unnoticed. Not only was the story relegated to the back pages, if it ran at all, there was a corresponding absence of comment from Congress and the White House. McKinney is now home after refusing to sign a statement in Hebrew that she was guilty of a violation, but the mainstream media is certainly not clamoring at her door for interviews. As far as I can tell, her ordeal has mostly been covered by left-wing outlets such as Democracy Now or Middle East networks including Al Jazeera and Press TV. A number of McKinney's supporters say the reason for the media blackout was the fact that she is a Black American. But, in fact, it's her cause that's the problem rather than her color. My analysis is based on the lack of media coverage given to the Viva Palestina aid convoy of trucks and ambulances from London to Gaza, led by British Parliamentarian George Galloway. The Herculean efforts of hundreds of ordinary Britons to deliver much-needed humanitarian supplies to war-torn Gaza earlier this year was a non-event as far as the media was concerned until Galloway was barred from entering Canada as a result. Unless you're a person who relentlessly digs on the internet, you probably are not aware that during McKinney's ordeal, Galloway, along with Vietnam War veteran Ron Kovic, were meeting up with over 200 Americans in Cairo armed with $2 million (Dh7.35 million) that was raised in the U.S. to buy trucks and medical aid destined for Gaza. The Egyptian English-language paper Al Ahram Weekly dubs this ""the largest grassroots medical relief effort for Gaza in U.S. history"" but once again, this doesn't merit column inches in either U.S. or European mainstream papers. In a similar vein, is the way that the horrendous courtroom stabbing of 32-year-old Marwa Al Sherbini was considered inconsequential by the German media until it elicited angry protests in her hometown of Alexandria. There are so many aspects to this story, which should have been emblazoned across front pages. First of all it was a blatant race crime, which Germany is normally sensitive about. Second, it begs questions concerning court security. What were armed officers doing when Marwa was stabbed 18 times and why was her husband shot when he attempted to protect his pregnant wife? What kind of editors would bin reports of such a horrendous crime carried out in full view of the authorities? What were they thinking? Purely coincidentally, I was sitting at a table with one of Marwa's uncles in an Alexandria coffee shop when he received a call on his mobile and had to dash off because of a ""family emergency"". Today, this exceptionally close-knit family is devastated and hurt that the murder of one of their own wasn't initially treated with the weight the crime deserved. Egyptians are outraged at Germany's disinterest and the inaction of their own foreign office. The numbers who attended her funeral, who gathered outside the German embassy in Cairo and who demonstrated in Cairo and Alexandria speak for themselves. Because Marwa's dispute with her attacker was based on his objections to her Islamic headscarf, the death of the young pharmacist has become an emblem for the rights of Muslim women at a time when the French President is attempting to ban the burqa. Marwa loved life. She didn't plan to become a martyr. But in the eyes of Egyptians calling for a mosque and a street in Alexandria to be renamed in her honor, she is a heroine. If the U.S. and Europe are chronically supine when it comes to Muslim causes, then the governments and media throughout the Arab and Muslim world should embrace them clearly and loudly. With anti-Muslim hate crimes on the rise, Muslims need a strong united voice on the international stage. Shame on the world's media that appears to be united only in its anti-Muslim bias! Linda S. Heard is a specialist British writer on Middle East affairs. (Source: Gulf News

In the Name of Allah, the All-beneficent, the All-merciful. All praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the worlds and may Allah’s blessings be upon our Master, Muhammad al-Mustafa and his immaculate Family and his elect Companions. As a symbol of Islamic unity and honour and the emblem of monotheism and spirituality, the Holy Ka’bah, during the Hajj season, is host to the ardent and hopeful hearts, who come hurrying from all over the world to the birthplace of Islam in response to the call of the Glorious Lord. At this time, the Islamic Ummah can have a bird’s eye view of its own great extent and diversity, seen through the eyes of its envoys who gather here from all over the world, and be witness to the profound faith that rules over the hearts of the followers of the True Religion, and appreciate its great and peerless heritage. This self-discovery of the Ummah enables us as Muslims to become aware of the position which is worthy of them in the world, today and tomorrow, and to keep moving towards it. The expanding wave of Islamic awakening in the world today is a reality that heralds a bright future for the Islamic Ummah. This powerful surge started three decades ago with the victory of the Islamic Revolution and establishment of the system of the Islamic Republic. Our great Ummah has continued to march ahead non-stop, removing the obstacles from its way and conquering new fronts. The sophisticated stratagems of the global Arrogance and its costly maneuvers aimed at countering Islam are also a consequence of these victories. The extensive propaganda of the enemy to spread Islamophobia, its offhand efforts to create discord among Muslim sects, to incite sectarian prejudices, to bring about pseudo-confrontations between the Sunnis and the Shi’ah, to create disunity between Islamic states and to aggravate their differences, to change them into hostility and unsolvable conflicts, its employment of intelligence and espionage outfits to propagate corruption and immorality amongst the youth—all these are nervous and bewildered responses to the steady and firm advances of the Islamic Ummah towards awakening, honour and freedom. Today the Zionist regime is no more the undefeatable monster of 30 years ago. The United States and the West are also no more the unquestionable decision-makers of the Middle East that they were two decades ago. Contrary to the situation that existed ten years ago, the nuclear know-how and other complex technologies are no longer considered inaccessible daydreams for Muslim nations of the region. Today the Palestinian nation is an acknowledged paragon of resistance, the Lebanese nation has single-handedly demolished the fake awesomeness of the Zionist regime and emerged as the victor of the 33-day war, and the Iranian nation is at the vanguard of the movement towards the looming peaks. Today the arrogant United States, the self-styled commandant of the Islamic region and the real sponsor of the Zionist regime, is bogged down in the quagmire of its own making in Afghanistan. As a result of all its crimes against the people of Iraq, it is in the course of becoming isolated in that country. It is hated more than ever before in disaster-stricken Pakistan. Today, the influence of the anti-Islamic front which since the past two centuries has acted as a despotic overlord over Islamic nations and states and plundered their resources, is receding before the heroic resistance of the Muslim nations. On the opposite side, the wave of Islamic awakening is steadily advancing and growing in depth day by day. On the one hand, this hopeful and promising situation should inspire us, the Muslim nations, to keep marching ahead towards the desirable future with ever greater confidence. On the other hand, the past lessons and experience should make us more vigilant than ever before. This general imperative undoubtedly calls for greater commitment from religious scholars, political leaders, intellectuals and youth than the others and requires them to be at the vanguard of the struggle. The clear and living message of the Noble Qur’an is addressed to us: You are the best nation ever brought forth for mankind: you bid what is right and forbid what is wrong, and have faith in Allah. (3:110) In this majestic address the Islamic Ummah is declared as one which has been brought forth for the sake of humanity. The aim of its birth is the good of mankind and its deliverance. Its major duty is to urge what is good and to forbid evil while maintaining unshakeable faith in God. There is no ‘right thing’ (ma’ruf) more significant than rescuing nations from the satanic claws of the global Arrogance, and there is no ‘wrong thing’ (munkar) uglier than dependence on the Arrogant and servitude to them. Today the major duties of the elite of the Islamic Ummah is to provide help to the Palestinian nation and the besieged people of Gaza, to sympathize and provide assistance to the nations of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Kashmir, to engage in struggle and resistance against the aggressions of the United States and the Zionist regime, to safeguard the solidarity of Muslims and stop tainted hands and mercenary voices that try to damage this unity, to spread awakening and the sense of responsibility and commitment among Muslim youth throughout Islamic communities. The glorious spectacle and stage of Hajj provides us with an opportunity for the fulfillment of these duties and summons us to intensify and redouble our resolution and efforts. Peace and Allah’s mercy be upon you! Sayyid Ali Hussaini Khamenei 1 Dhul Hijjah, 1431 (8 Nov., 2010)

How Big Pharma takes your money and makes you sick Mike Adams interviewed by G. Edward Griffin Mike Adams, known as the Health Ranger to his fans, is the author of numerous books on natural health and editor of the popular internet site called News Target. Although self-taught, his knowledge of natural medicine is nothing short of phenomenal, as you will see from this interview. Be prepared for an enlightenment that could change your life. DVD, 107 minutes. TOPICS * How Mike cured himself when doctors failed. * Aspartame: The sweetest poison money can buy. * How Big Pharma controls the FDA. * Inventing mental disease to sell pharmaceuticals. * Modern medicine is riddled with junk science. * The cancer industry: A medical con game. * The best medicine contains freedom of choice. * The criminalization of vitamins by the United Nations. * The health crisis that looms ahead. * What you can do on your own to help. * Sidestep restrictions by growing your own medicine. * The importance of pH balance to optimum health. * The importance of sunlight to optimum health

Iran's Secretary General of the High Council for Human Rights, Mohammad Javad Larijani has said that the recent claims by the International Atomic Energy Agency against Tehran are “laughable.” In his November 8 report on Iran's nuclear program, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano claimed that Iran had engaged in activities related to developing nuclear weapons before 2003, adding that these activities “may still be ongoing.” Based on the report, which Iran has called "unfounded and unbalanced," the IAEA Board of Governors on Friday passed a new resolution on the Islamic Republic's nuclear activities. The resolution voices "deep and increasing concern" over Tehran's nuclear program and also calls for Iran and the IAEA to intensify dialogue to resolve the dispute over the issue. Larijani made the remarks in a heated television debate aired on the American channel MSNBC. US president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Dr. Richard Haass, Mike Barnicle and John Mitchun were the other guests on the television debate. What follows is a rough transcription of the interview: MSNBC: Let's go to the heart of the matter when it comes to Iran, the headlines of the past week, the IAEA report found evidence of nuclear weapons program in Iran and you are quoted as saying that is “quite laughable.” Why sir? Larijani: The reason is very simple. There is no single evidence in that. These allegations which is aired again is based on a document which was put to us four years ago based on a laptop somewhere found by United States authorities. And at that time, four years ago, it has been discussed with the agency and the conclusion was that none of these allegations could be verified. So by a letter it has been closed- the whole issue. Then again it has been renewed and [let me] just give you an example. A good part of this so-called document which is on the laptop, for example lecture notes that somebody presented in Brussels or at some universities. Some of them are parts of some textbook as put together with pictures, formulas, so it is totally inconclusive. MSNBC: Let's back up. Before I send this to Richard Haass- are you saying it doesn't exist? There is no nuclear program? Larijani: Well we have a very extensive nuclear program but not to the direction of producing arms. Our nuclear project is very extensive, very advanced. We are number one in the Middle East but we are not pursuing the nuclear armament for two basic reasons. Number one there is a Fatwa by Ayatollah Khamenei, the leader and it is against the Islamic jurisprudence to build and use mass destructing weapons. It is Haram we call it, unlawful. And secondly, it doesn't add to our security. It is more liability than asset for us. Our military muscle is strong enough to repel or to deter any imminent threat and this is basically very important achievement. MSNBC: Richard Haass, put this into perspective for us. What the reports were saying and what this gentleman is saying. Haass: Well quite frankly it is impossible to take the Iranian denial seriously. They are preposterous. The International Atomic Energy Agency taking information from all the member states in the United Nations have put together a comprehensive and extraordinarily damning report. And what there is, is a pattern, not a single incident, a pattern over years of Iranian program to move in the direction of developing nuclear weapons. We see a procurement mechanism to gain access to all sorts of equipment, we see all sorts of undeclared efforts to produce nuclear material now up to 20 percent well on its way to what it needs to produce a weapon, most important there is now serious evidence about the Iranian testing of the implosive device that would actually be the heart of the nuclear weapon. So the idea that the Iranians have all these underground and undeclared facilities, that they have been misleading the International Atomic Energy Agency for years, the idea they're doing this- this oil rich country in order to produce electricity? If you believe that you seriously have to believe in the tooth fairy. MSNBC: Sir this doesn't sound like preposterous, little pieces of information that were roaming together randomly. Larijani: Well the whole scenes of allegation is produced and initiated by the United States. It seems there is a good machinery to produce perpetual allegation against Iran, it is not only one case. I am telling you exactly that there are no secret programs in our nuclear program and development. Iran's transparency is far ahead of United States, far ahead of UK, far ahead of France and incomparable to Israel which is a renegade state in the sense of NPT. Barnicle: So you allow inspectors to just come into Iran. Larijani: The inspectors are coming to Iran periodically, the cameras are there 24 hours. This is quite obvious. Haass: But the whole concept the way this works, just when you talk about inspectors, let's just be clear, I am sure if everyone watching this will understand, the entire international nuclear inspection effort depends upon the willingness of the country in question to cooperate fully. This is a gentlemen's agreement. They declare their facilities that are involved in the nuclear business then the inspectors come in and look at them. If they do not declare facilities the inspectors don't give a chance and the problem is this is a gentlemen's agreement in a world where not every country is a gentleman. So Iran quite frankly has undeclared facilities and undeclared programs which the inspectors had not had access to and the reason we only know about it is that member states, not simply the United States sir, but many, many member states of the United Nations have provided independent information to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which by the way you know and I know is not controlled by the United States. We have fundamental differences with this agency over the years including over Iraq. We had fundamental differences and we've also had differences over Iran where we the United States felt, this agency was not being nearly tough enough. So now they have come in with an extraordinarily damning report and Iranian officials can dismiss it. MSNBC: So if this is a gentlemen's agreement, the gentlemen certainly don't agree and sir, you seem very confident and almost as if it's funny it's interesting because we interviewed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about this about a year ago, off camera, and he too seemed very comfortable about his position which is similar to yours. And if you are so comfortable with your position about the lack of nuclear armament and the facilities that the IAEA is talking about, why not let inspectors completely come in? Open the door let them come in and see what you have. Larijani: Well the mechanism that the gentleman addressed is not complete because first of all there is no single secret installment or activity which is concealed from the agency. Secondly, two years ago we asked the agency tell us all the questions you have and he managed to put to us six groups of questions. The questions were raised by themselves not dictated by us. So one by one groups of inspectors came to Iran and we cleared them up and there is official letters from them this group has been finished then we moved to another one. Well it doesn't make sense that every morning somebody says we guess there is some secret things done there. There should be foundation for this allegation. What do you mean the door should be open? They should ask where do you want to inspect? Did they want to inspect my bedroom or other places? I mean it doesn't make sense. Barnicle: A few moments ago when you mentioned the nuclear programs of other nations I detected a definite edge in your voice when you mentioned the state of Israel. Do you fear an attack from the state of Israel on your nuclear facilities? Larijani: Well I am beyond the fear. What is the difference between us and Israel? Israel has a bomb, not a member of NPT; it doesn't disclose anything to agency, nothing wrong with it. You see what the double standard is in here. We are member of NPT, they periodically come to Iran, their cameras are there, we don't have the weapon then the whole pressure is put on us. No, not at all. We don't fear any attack from anyone. We take it serious in our calculation but we don't fear. There is a difference between that. Mitchum: Given your tone again Sir when you talk about Israel, just a second ago why shouldn't we suspect that there would be ambitions for Iran to join the club of which Israel is a part with the nuclear arms? Larijani: We are very advanced in the nuclear technology which is a matter of pride for us and that gentleman mentioned that we have plenty of gas and oil with all good calculations, the age of this is up to 20-25 period, 25 years from now. It means that if we don't have it, then we should beg in front of the Western countries to light our houses and we know how bad they are treating us in this area. We are right now very happy that we have the first power plant, we know how to make the fuel. We already have more than 25 percent share of sodalite and erudite they don't give us a bit of this fuel that we need, even the twenty percent that we needed for Tehran. Haass: It's important to keep in mind we are not talking about an established democracy that treats its own people with respect, we are talking about a country also that is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. So this is obvious and understandable concern about what Iran is doing. Larijani: In terms of record I think United States of America is the largest and the greatest country supporting terrorism. The records of terrorist activity which is supported by the tax money of these people is enormous, I can go one by one. Barnicle: Wait a minute. This is a free country. And part of our gift is we have the liberty and the freedom to say anything and to sound foolish, to sound absurd, to sound smart. That's absurd saying that America is the biggest terrorist nation in the world. My question to you Sir is, you seem like a really nice guy, alright, why doesn't your country be a better neighbor? Larijani: We have fantastic relations with all of our neighbors... Barnicle: Really? [laughing] Larijani: Definitely, but the policy of demonizing Iran, a very important policy which is pursued in the region- well it has its own benefit. Barnicle But it's just in little things, like the American tourists cross the border, supposedly cross the border, you grab them, you scoop them, you hold them for months on end. Why? Larijani: This is a very simple question I answered before; suppose the security of your people... Barnicle You're here... Larijani: No, I'm here with visa- It's quite different. [Suppose] The security of the United States' people, on a patrol with Mexico elsewhere they pick 3 Iranians and ask them why are you here? They say well we are just walking in the desert. Well, with the whole hostility and suspicion which is between the two countries, you are in here to blow up somewhere definitely they will be put into jail for years if not in Guantanamo, they bring them somewhere else. It took a lot of time that we convince- I was working on this case because they were like me from ... Berkeley. I talked with their families, managed to contact between them and their families when they were arrested- for their families to come to Iran to take the suspicion away. This is very natural for security of people to suspect a cross bordering which is in the most volatile regional area of Iran- in which there is daily shooting over there. Barnicle Ok. They're going to blow up the desert. What is the root? What do you think is the root of Iranian paranoia towards the United States and towards many of its neighbors? What is the root of this paranoia? Is it the fear that we find out about your nuclear program? Larijani: We don't have any paranoia about our neighbors. We are very suspicious of American paranoia with us. The question is what is wrong with Iran that this persistent hostility... Barnicle: You have a track record of international terrorism. Larijani: This is not true. We are ourselves the victim of international terrorism- terrorism in the area. Let me ask you, who was helping Al-Qaida and Taliban for years while we were at war with them in Afghanistan? The United States of America. The money from the United States was pouring to Al-Qaida and Taliban- the idea was we should curb Iran by another religious front. Is it correct? Haass: No it's not correct. The United States did support the Mujahidin; obviously in order to get rid of the Soviet... to say that the United States supported Al-Qaida is again preposterous- the fact is that Iran is supporting terrorism in Lebanon, it's supporting groups like Hezbollah, groups like Hamas; it is involved in Iraq; it is involved in Afghanistan. Iran has basically become a regional power that is trying to destabilize many countries, trying to make them in some ways heavily influenced by Tehran and that is simply a fact of life- which again is one of the reasons the world is so concerned about Iranian nuclear program. How do we know Iran will not become even more aggressive? How do we know that nuclear materials will not end in the hands of a group like Hezbollah? What do we see about Iran's track record that would lead us to believe that Iran in any way would be responsible with nuclear material? This is a genuine concern and if you dismiss it as laughable Sir you are seriously underestimating not simply the American, not simply the Israeli, but I would suggest the world's concern over the direction your government is heading. Larijani: The disastrous thing is the blind policy of the United States in supporting carte blanche renegade Israel which is the source of all tension in the region. If you call Hezbollah and Hamas terrorist groups- they are fighting to be given the permission to live. What about Israel? Israel is involved in government sponsored terrorism. Kills anybody who thinks that it's not correct and deprives millions of people from basic tenures of life. 60 years of atrocity in that area is supported carte blanche by the US, this is even against the basic interests of that nation- they don't know it. Mitchum:Sir do you recognize the right of Israel to exist? Larijani: We recognize the rights of Jews, Christians and Muslims to live together in peace and tranquility- to create a racist regime in the middle of a land put the others out is like creating a small colony for the blacks and leave the rest for the whites. Mitchum: Thank you for the answer. Barnicle: The answer is no. Larijani: No, the answer is not no. We respect any decision by Palestinians. We are not in a position to tell them what kind of state they [should] have. But they should be given the chance to decide. MSNBC:This has been fascinating and a great picture window into the choices that Americans make when they're choosing their president and also a sense of what our Secretary of State and what our diplomats have to confront in dealing with when they're going out into the world and working with other countries. It is extremely complicated and often conversations feel like they're going in circles because it's very hard to develop a common understanding or even a place where you can start engaging and I think this was an example of that. Mohammad Javad Larijani, thank you for coming on the show this morning.

Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech to Participants of International Conference on Islamic Awakening‌ 11/12/2012 The following is the full text of the speech delivered on December 11, 2012 by Ayatollah Khamenei the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution at the International Conference of Muslim University Professors and Islamic Awakening. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful‌ First of all, I welcome you honorable guests who have come here from different countries and I also welcome the dear and honorable professors from our own universities. Since almost one and a half years ago until today, many meetings and conferences on Islamic Awakening have been held in Tehran, but I think that the International Conference of Muslim University Professors and Islamic Awakening has a special significance. This significance is because of the role of outstanding personalities and intellectuals in promoting new ideas in every society. They are the people who can lead a nation to salvation or to - God forbid - destruction. Unfortunately, the latter happened in certain countries, including our own country, over the last 70 or 80 years. There is a narration from the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.), Muhammad ibn Abdullah, which says, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The masses do not follow the right path unless outstanding personalities guide them towards it.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" When he was asked who these outstanding personalities are, he answered, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Religious scholars.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Religious scholars were the first people whom he referred to as outstanding personalities and then he mentioned other groups of people. Therefore, university professors, luminaries and outstanding personalities can be the leaders of the people in every country, provided that they show purity and courage. They should not be afraid of the enemies. If they show fear, greed, negligence and laziness, they will fail to achieve the desired result. If they do not show fear, greed and negligence- if they show courage, then their efforts will achieve the desired result. During the early days of the Revolution, about thirty one years or thirty two years ago, I and two other people went from Tehran to Qom to meet Imam Khomeini (r.a.). At that time, he was still in Qom. We - who were members of the Revolutionary Council at that time - went there to ask for his opinion about a very important issue. When we explained to him what the issue was, Imam (r.a.) looked at us and asked, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Are you afraid of America?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" We said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"No\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Then he told us to implement our decision. Then we implemented our decision and we succeeded. If you show fear, greed and negligence and if you let deviant orientations play a role [in your decision-making], you will face serious problems. Today the entire world is faced with a great event. This great event is Islamic Awakening. This is a fact. Muslim nations and the Islamic Ummah have awakened. Today achieving domination over Muslim nations is not as easy as it used to be during the time after World War I and during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Today, if global arrogance wants to dominate Muslim peoples, they will face serious difficulties. Islamic Awakening has penetrated the Islamic Ummah which has resulted in a number of revolutions and the fall of corrupt and dependent regimes in certain countries. But this is only part of Islamic Awakening, not all of it. Islamic Awakening is a deep and widespread movement. Of course, the enemies are afraid of the phrase \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Islamic Awakening.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" They are trying not to let the phrase \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Islamic Awakening\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" be used to refer to the current great movement in the region. Why are they doing this? It is because they tremble with fear when they see genuine Islam. They do not fear the kind of Islam which is based on money, corruption, aristocracy and the kind of Islam which is not supported by the majority of people. But they are terrified when they see the kind of Islam which is supported by the majority of people and which is based on action, reliance on God and divine promises. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And surely Allah will help him who helps His cause\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 22: 40]. Whenever this kind of Islam emerges, whenever there are signs that this kind of Islam is approaching them, they tremble with fear. They are filled with fear \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"as if they were frightened donkeys, fleeing from a lion\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 74: 50-51]. Therefore, they do not want the phrase \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Islamic Awakening\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" to be used. But we believe that the current great movement is a true example of Islamic Awakening and it has penetrated the world of Islam. This movement will continue in the future and it will not easily deviate from its path. We should identify the problems of these regional movements. This is the first point that I want to discuss with you. You should identify the problems of these movements and revolutions in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and similar countries. What are the dangers? What are the problems? Why do we say that these movements are Islamic in essence? Take a look at the people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s slogans. Take a look at the role of Muslim believers in overthrowing corrupt regimes. If Muslim believers and Muslim groups who firmly believe in Islam and who are greatly respected by the people had not participated in these movements, these large public demonstrations would not have been held. The pressures that the people exerted, with their presence, on oppressive regimes like those of Hosni Mubarak and Ben Ali, completely destroyed their shaky foundations. They were Muslim peoples with Islamic slogans. The crucial role of Islamist parties in overthrowing these regimes is a clear proof that this movement is an Islamic movement. And whenever there was an election in these countries, the people voted for Islamist parties. They supported Islamic parties and they preferred them to other parties. Today, if a free election is held almost everywhere in the world of Islam - there may be a few exceptions - and if Islamist leaders and politicians participate in this election, the people will vote for Islamist politicians. This is the same everywhere in the world of Islam. Therefore, this movement is undoubtedly an Islamic movement. Well, I said that we should identify the problems in these movements. Besides identifying the problems, we should delineate the goals of these revolutions, otherwise there will be confusion. We should delineate these goals. One of the most important goals of Islamic Awakening is getting rid of global arrogance. We should announce this openly because it is wrong to think that global arrogance - headed by America - may get along with Islamic movements. Wherever Islam and supporters of Islam prevail, America does its best to destroy them while putting on a friendly smile. Regional revolutions have no other choice than distancing themselves from global arrogance. We do not say that they should go to war with America, but we say that they should determine what the position of America and global arrogance is on the recent events in the region. They should do this correctly because if they do not gain a proper understanding of their position, they will be deceived. Today, global arrogance is ruling over the world by using money, weapons and science. But it lacks new ideas and a road map. Today global arrogance has this big problem. It does not have any new ideas to help the people and intellectuals. But you do. You have Islam. When we have new ideas and a road map, we can delineate our goals and we can stand up against global arrogance. In this way, their weapons, their science and their money will not be effective as they were in the past. Of course, they will not be entirely ineffective, but we should think of ways to counter them - if there is time, I will explain more. Thus, in the first place, we should have new ideas, a road map and an ideology. We should know what we want to do. We should delineate the goals of Islamic Awakening. One of the important goals of Islamic Awakening, which regional developments should pay attention to, is to preserve the pivotal role of Islam. Islam should be the pivot. Islamic principles and sharia should be the pivot of things. There is an all-out effort to claim that sharia is not compatible with progress, change and civilization. This is what the enemy says. No, it is perfectly compatible. Of course, there are many people in the world of Islam who do not have enough knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence and who have supported the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s claim with their dogmatic and old-fashioned ideas. These people are Muslims, but they are at the service of the enemy. There are such people in Islamic countries which are located near us. They call themselves Muslims, but they do not have any new ideas about and any new outlook on Islamic teachings. Islam is for all eras and centuries. Islam answers all the needs of human beings. We should only develop the necessary expertise in order to find Islam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s answers to all the questions of human beings. Some people do not have this expertise and they only know how to excommunicate and drive certain people out of religion. And they call themselves Muslims. Sometimes we discover that these people cooperate with the enemy. We should make Islam and sharia the pivot of our activities. This is one of the goals of Islamic Awakening. Another goal of Islamic Awakening is building a governing system. If a governing system is not built in countries which have carried out a revolution, they will face dangers. In North African countries, similar revolutions were carried out about 60 or 70 years ago. It was in mid-twentieth century that a revolution was carried out in Tunisia and certain people came to power. Similarly, a revolution and a coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état were carried out in Egypt and certain people came to power. The same thing happened in some other countries. But they failed to build a governing system. This resulted in not only the destruction of these revolutions but also in the complete political transformation of the individuals who had come to power as revolutionaries. There was a complete change in their political behavior and they turned their backs on their values. This happened in Tunisia, Egypt and Sudan during that time. It was around 1343, 1344 or 1345 that I and a couple of my friends were listening to Sawt al-Arab radio station in Mashhad - Sawt al-Arab used to be broadcast from Cairo in Egypt. It was broadcasting the interviews of Gamal Abdel Nasser, Muammar Gaddafi and Jaafar Nimeiry who had gathered in one place. We were being suppressed by the dictatorial regime of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in Mashhad, but these fiery and impassioned speeches made us very enthusiastic and brought us great joy. Well, Abdel Nasser died and you saw what his successors did. You also saw what happened to Gaddafi and Nimeiry. Those revolutions underwent drastic changes because they had no plans and they did not build a governing system. There should be a governing system in countries which have carried out a revolution. They should build a solid foundation. This is one of the important issues regarding Islamic Awakening. Another important issue is strengthening popular support. Islamic governments should not separate themselves from the people. The people have certain expectations and needs. The real power is in the hands of the people. Whenever the people hold demonstrations, whenever they become firmly united and whenever they unanimously support their leaders and government officials, then America and even powers that are greater than America cannot do anything to harm them. We should maintain the support of the people and you intellectuals, authors, poets and religious scholars can do this. The most significant people are religious scholars who have a heavy responsibility. They should clarify for people what they want and where they are going. They should enlighten them about the problems and the enemy. They should help the people remain vigilant. In this way, no harm will be inflicted on the Islamic Ummah. Another issue is training the youth in scientific areas. Islamic countries should make progress in scientific and technological areas. I said that the west and America dominated the world by means of science - one of the means they used was science. They acquired wealth by using science. Of course, they acquired part of their wealth by using political machinations and immoral methods, but science also played an important role. We should make progress in science. There is a narration which says, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Knowledge is power. Anybody who has knowledge will be able to dominate those around him. Anybody who fails to gain knowledge will be ruled.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" You should make progress in science. Acquiring knowledge is like having strong arms. If you do not have strong arms, other strong people will twist your arms. You should encourage the youth in your countries to make progress in science. This is possible. We have done this in Iran. Before the Revolution, we were ranked one of the lowest nations in terms of science. No one paid any attention to us. Today those who carry out research in this regard say that Iran ranks 16th in the world in terms of science and the news of our achievement spread quickly in the world. This has been achieved in the shade of the Revolution, Islam and sharia. News of this achievement spread several months ago. Those organizations who said this predicted that Iran\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s scientific rank would be single-digit in a few years. They specified a year by which Iran will achieve this rank - in 10, 12 years. They said that Iran will be ranked fourth. This is because Iran has a fast rate of scientific growth. Of course, we are still far behind the world. Our scientific growth is several times faster than the global average, but we are still behind other countries. If we move forward at this speed, we will make great progress. The world of Islam should continue making progress. Islamic countries are talented. We have good young people. They are very talented. Muslim peoples used to be pioneers in science during a certain period. Why would we not expect that the world of Islam will be an authoritative source of reference in scientific areas? Why would we not expect that we can reach a point where all countries turn to Muslim countries in scientific areas? This is possible in the future. We should try very hard. Progress in science can be achieved in the shade of Islam and regional revolutions. The Islamic Ummah has proved that it can move forward at a greater speed. Another important issue is unity - it is almost time for praying and we need to go. Dear brothers and sisters, our enemies are making the best of the discord that exists among us. They are trying to create discord among Muslim peoples under such pretexts as Shia and Sunni Islam, ethnicity and nationality. They are trying to create discord by magnifying Shia and Sunni differences. You see that they are creating discord in Islamic countries which have carried out a revolution and in other Islamic countries. Everybody should be vigilant. The west and America are the enemies of the world of Islam. We should address and respond to this issue from this perspective. They are provoking the emotions of the people. Their intelligence services are working very hard and they sow destruction wherever they can. On the issue of Palestine, they created as many obstacles as they could. Of course, they failed in their efforts. We are moving forward. The world of Islam is moving forward. The recent event in Palestine is very important. An 8-day war broke out between the people of Gaza and the Zionist regime which claims to have the strongest army in the region. But when both sides decided to declare a ceasefire, it was the Palestinian side that set conditions. Is this believable? Would anybody have believed ten years ago that one day there would be a war between the Palestinians - not all Palestinians, a group of them in Gaza - and the Zionist regime and it would be the Palestinians who set conditions for a ceasefire? Well done to the Palestinians. Well done! Well done to Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the soldiers who fought in Palestine and Gaza for their outstanding courage. What they did is a perfect example of courage. I want to express my gratitude to the Palestinian soldiers for their sacrifices, their efforts and their patience. They saw that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Verily, with every difficulty there is relief\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 94: 6]. If we show patience, God Almighty will resolve our problems. Because they resisted the enemy and showed great patience, God Almighty resolved their problems. This is a lesson for both the Palestinians and other people. You should not underestimate the significance of unity between Muslim peoples. It is a very important issue. The point that our Bahraini brother raised about the silence of the world of Islam on the issue of Bahrain is true. The reason why some people are silent on this issue is that they have a denominational bias. According to these people, you can help people who have risen up against their corrupt government unless these people are Shia like the people of Bahrain. Some people have such an attitude towards this issue. They should change their attitude. We should know the enemy. We should know what his plots and machinations are. We should know how he tries to harm us. Our position on the issue of Syria was based on such an outlook. We cannot even stand to see that blood runs from the nose of a single Muslim. Even this is very painful for us. What we say is that those who are dragging Syria into a civil war, destruction and fratricide are to blame for the current situation in Syria. The demands of all peoples should be met in conventional ways and without using such violence. I hope that Allah the Exalted guides all of us. I hope that Allah the Exalted bestows His blessings on your efforts. I hope that Allah the Exalted bestows a bright future on this great wave of Islamic Awakening. Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings

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.

Patrick is walking one day when he discovers that he is followed by a black thing. His friends then tell him that it is just his own shadow. They go on to show him how to make shadows. Do they have fun making shadows? Watch and find out. In this episode, children learn how light can create shadows. They learn that everybody has shadow and that you can actually have fun with your own shadow.

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful‌ First of all, I would like to welcome all the dear brothers and sisters and the glorious officials who render many services in one of the outstanding arenas of the Islamic community - that is to say, the arena of hajj and visiting the House of God and the enlightened city of Madina. I hope that you will benefit from this great achievement in the hereafter. I hope that your actions and efforts in this auspicious arena will be so sincere that your performance sheet in the hereafter shines, like the sun, with the light of purity and sincerity. I express my gratitude to the honorable gentlemen for the efforts that they have made in the arena of hajj. The things that they have done - whether in cultural, spiritual, moral and educational areas or in practical and organizational areas - should really be appreciated. What is important is that we should know hajj is one of the strong points of the holy religion of Islam. Although there are not a few strong points in Islamic sharia, hajj plays an outstanding role because of the characteristics which it enjoys and which we are more or less familiar with. In fact, we can say that hajj is a source of power for the Islamic community and the Islamic Ummah. The day when we Muslims from different countries and with different denominations manage to achieve intellectual growth so much so that we can form the Islamic Ummah in the real sense of the word - unfortunately, we Muslims have not managed to achieve this moral, political and intellectual growth until today - and the day when we Muslims from eastern parts to western parts of the world of Islam manage to form one single ummah although we may have different governments, we understand how hajj can be a source of power, strength, transcendence and dignity for this Islamic Ummah. Today, the Islamic Republic should adopt such an outlook towards hajj. It should regard hajj as a means of power. What kind of power? By power, do we mean materialistic, political, military power or soft power such as cultural or linguistic power? The answer is no. The power of hajj is far beyond this. As well as showing the political and cultural power of the Islamic government, hajj provides a source of spiritual power. That is to say, it builds human beings from the inside, prepares them to overcome difficult obstacles and opens their eyes to realities which cannot be seen and felt without being present in the arena of hajj. By performing hajj rituals, one can understand a number of spiritual and educational realities of Islam. Hajj plays such a role. One of the requirements of hajj is that hajj pilgrims should behave in a brotherly - in the real sense of the word - way towards one another in the arena of hajj and this great Islamic obligation. They should not look at one another as outsiders and enemies. They should see themselves as people who are moving towards one goal, who pursue one thing, who revolve around one pivot. Allah the Exalted says, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Let there be no obscenity, no wickedness and no quarreling in the Hajj.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 2: 197] The meaning of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"no quarreling\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is not that we should not quarrel with the enemy. On the contrary, hajj is the manifestation of quarreling with the enemy. Some narrow-minded and pessimistic people say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"There should be ‘no quarreling\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' during hajj pilgrimage. Why do you hold a detestation ceremony during hajj pilgrimage?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" The enmity which is reflected in this ceremony means enmity towards polytheism and atheism. This is one of the most fundamental principles of Islamic life. The kind of enmity which should not exist in hajj pilgrimage is enmity between brothers and believers and enmity between people who believe in monotheism. This enmity should not exist. Not only should we Muslims express in words that we have no enmity towards one another, but also we should feel this from the bottom of our hearts. This is the exact opposite of what the enemies of Islam are trying to do in the Islamic community. You should pay attention to this. The existence of differences between Islamic denominations and between Shia and Sunni Muslims will not create any problem as long as these differences are confined to ideological differences. One person may believe in something and another person may believe in something else. Problems arise when these ideological differences lead to behavioral differences, confrontation, hostility and enmity. The enemies of the world of Islam are after creating such a situation and hatching such a plot. They have properly understood that the Zionist regime can breathe easily if Islamic denominations in the world of Islam start confronting and fighting with one another. They have understood this truth perfectly and properly. On the one hand, they form groups which engage in takfirism - not only do these groups anathematize and curse Shia Muslims, but they also anathematize Sunni denominations - and on the other hand, they hire a number of mercenaries to add fuel to the fire of discord. You know and have heard about this plot. They provide these groups and mercenaries with different means of mass communication. Where do they do this? They do this in America and London. The kind of Shia Islam which is promoted from London and America is useless for Shia Muslims. Shia leaders - particularly the leaders who emerged after the victory of the Islamic Revolution - our Imam and other leaders placed great emphasis on preserving the unity of the Islamic Ummah and behaving in a brotherly way towards Muslims. This is while a number of people - who interfere in the affairs of Muslims for no reason - are after fueling the fire of discord. This is the thing which the enemy wants. This is the thing which the enemies of Islam - who are neither Shia nor Sunni - like to pursue. We should understand this condition properly and we should pay attention to it. Another important point is that Muslims should share and exchange their original Islamic cultures and their Islamic experiences with one another. This is another strong point of hajj and another source of power for it. We may have heard different things about such and such an Islamic country. But, hearing is different from sitting and talking directly to an individual from an Islamic country. This individual can also compare what he has heard about our dear Islamic Iran with what he sees in you and hears from you. This way, he can discover the truth about Iran. There are an enormous number of propaganda campaigns against the Islamic Republic. There are a large and surprising number of media networks who propagandize against the Islamic Republic with different methods. When a young individual from such and such an African, Asian, Arab or non-Arab country goes on the Internet, watches such and such an international channel or reads such and such an international newspaper, how can he or she understand that what such media networks say is false? Your presence in hajj and in this international arena gives you the opportunity to reveal the truth not only in words but also in action. It helps you to speak the truth about Shia Islam, the Islamic Revolution and the events which are happening today. Another important and crucial point about hajj is the thing which I referred to earlier: strengthening spirituality in our hearts and souls. My dear ones, we can put up a resistance in the arenas of jihad for the sake of God only if our hearts are filled with faith in God and reliance on Allah the Exalted. It is not possible to move forward without spirituality. It is not possible to take difficult paths without a strong faith. Without reliance on Allah the Exalted, it is not possible to ignore the superficial power of powerful countries and see the real power. Reliance on God, faith and belief in God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s promises are necessary. These things can be achieved in hajj. When people go on hajj pilgrimage they \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Witness the benefits (provided) for them.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 22: 28] These benefits are not only material benefits. There are otherworldly, spiritual and psychological benefits as well as material benefits in hajj pilgrimage. This is the significance of hajj. Well, today you can see that besides creating intellectual, psychological and ideological discord among Muslims throughout the world of Islam, the enemies fuel the fire of war as well. See how they fuel the fire of war in our neighboring countries with the pretext of Shia and Sunni differences. They do this in different ways in our neighboring countries such as Pakistan, Iraq, Syria and Bahrain. Even when the problem is not about Shia and Sunni, they say that it has occurred because of Shia and Sunni differences. I have given many examples in this regard. The enemies are prepared to set the region on fire for their own political interests. Superpowers are like this. They are not afraid that an explosion may take place in such and such a neighborhood of an Iraqi city and they are not afraid that 50 people may be killed in this explosion. They are not afraid that certain events may happen in Syria, Egypt or other countries which may turn them into a ruin. Superpowers - such as America and countries like America - do such things for their own illegitimate interests. We hope that the Americans are serious about their new outlook on Syria. We hope that it is not another political game. It is several weeks that they have been threatening the region to wage a war and create a serious conflict for the sake of the interests which they have defined for themselves. And they consider it legitimate to defend these interests no matter if they jeopardize the interests of ten other countries and nations. They are such people. They do not care about justice and the interests of human beings. They refer to such interests as national interests, but these are not really their national interests. Rather, these are the interests of the Zionists and the enemies of humanity. These are the interests of capitalists who have proved during the last 70, 80 years that they are not committed to any human principle and value. But they call it national interests and they are prepared to fuel all kinds of wars and fitnas for the sake of these proclaimed national interests. It is several weeks that they have been trying to cause great controversy by threatening the region with a war and bombardment. Well, if they are serious about their recent outlook, this means that they have turned back from the wrong path which they have been taking during the last few weeks. We hope that they are serious. This is the condition of the region and the world. The Islamic Republic takes a look at all these issues with open eyes and with its full attention. What we have understood is that as a nation with a total population of 70, 80 million people and with a sensitive geographical location in the world, we should strengthen our position by adopting the right outlook and by benefiting from our Islamic power. We should let the entire humanity see our lofty and human goals which have originated from Islam and we should invite all human beings to cherish the gift which Islam has offered to human beings. This is our responsibility. I have repeatedly said that strengthening the country from the inside is possible primarily with firm faith, unity of the people, appropriate actions by the officials of the country, cooperation between the people and officials and reliance on Allah the Exalted. That is to say, we should benefit from rationality, spirituality, reliance on God and diligence. Undoubtedly, this will influence the conditions of the region as it has influenced the region so far. I hope that what Islam wants for the Islamic Republic, people throughout the world, Muslims and non-Muslims will be achieved with your presence in different arenas - including your presence in the arena of hajj which manifests your rationality and your clear outlook. I hope that your presence in such arenas will bring about communal happiness. I ask all of you to pray for us. I hope that this year you will experience a good hajj pilgrimage and I hope that you, all Iranian hajj pilgrims and all the pilgrims who visit the House of God from throughout the world will benefit from divine blessings and mercy. I hope that your hajj pilgrimage will be accepted by God. Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings

Supreme Leader’s Speech to Hajj Officials Print 22/08/2015 The following is the full text of a speech delivered on August 22, 2015 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with hajj officials. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful Dear brothers and sisters, welcome. You hajj officials are in charge of one of the most beautiful and glorious responsibilities, namely making preparations for our faithful people to attend hajj, which is a unique Islamic obligation. I would also like to express my gratitude to the brothers and sisters in charge of hajj affairs, who – as Mr. Qazi Askar and the esteemed head of the Hajj and Pilgrimage Organization pointed out – have made certain arrangements for the betterment of hajj pilgrimage for Iranian believers. And this is exactly what needs to be done. It is necessary to improve on a daily basis and facilitate the achievement of the noble goals of hajj. It is necessary to work hard. Each one of you dear brothers and sisters has a responsibility to fulfill. Each one of you has a role to play. You should try to play your role in the best possible way, with motivation, patience and enthusiasm. The efforts that you make will produce a great outcome: that is to say, the people will be able to perform hajj appropriately. My advice is that hajj does not exclusively belong to Iranians. Hajj belongs to Islam and to the Islamic Ummah and it guarantees the prevailing of Islam. God’s respect for the months in which hajj pilgrimages take place shows how great and significant hajj ceremonies are. It shows that this Islamic obligation enjoys a quality that other Islamic obligations do not enjoy. It is necessary to pay attention to this point. The interesting point is that hajj has two complementary aspects: an individual aspect and a social aspect. It is necessary to pay attention to both aspects. The individual aspect of hajj belongs to individual hajj pilgrims. Each hajj pilgrim should establish a relationship with Allah the Exalted during his pilgrimage and he should repent and take spiritual provisions for himself. In a holy ayah relating to hajj, piety has been advised. “Surely the provision is the guarding of oneself, and be careful (of your duty) to Me, O men of understanding” [The Holy Quran, 2: 197]. Each and every one of the honorable pilgrims who are blessed with this great opportunity should think of how to make the best of this provision. “And you that ask forgiveness of your Lord, then turn to Him” [The Holy Quran, 11: 3]. Hajj pilgrims should repent. They should pray. They should ask Allah the Exalted for whatever they need. They should make a covenant with Allah the Exalted to remain committed to their future, their lives and their activities. This is the individual aspect of hajj. As far as this individual aspect of hajj is concerned, every hajj pilgrim should try to move closer to Allah the Exalted on his pilgrimage. He should cleanse his heart. He should take provisions for the rest of his life. Spiritual blessings for individual pilgrims originate from this pilgrimage, from these rituals, from these days. Hajj pilgrims should appreciate the value of this opportunity. There are certain things that an individual can achieve only during hajj pilgrimage. Seeing Ka’bah is worship. Tawaf around Ka’bah is worship. Praying in Masjid ul-Haraam is worship. Visiting the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.) is worship. Arafat is an arena for speaking to God. Mash’ar is an arena for attention to God. The same is true of Mina. Pilgrims should make use of each and every one of these elements to cleanse their hearts, to improve their spiritual status and to take provisions for the rest of their lives. This is the individual aspect of hajj. The other aspect of hajj is the social aspect. Hajj is the manifestation of Islamic unity. People with different skin colors, people from different nationalities, people with different identities, people from different Islamic denominations, people with different tendencies – all of them gather in one place as equals. They all perform Tawaf together. They all work together. They all stay in Arafat and Mash’ar. This unity is very important. Islamic solidarity is the true manifestation of harmony and unanimity during hajj, not just for the people of Iran, but also for all Muslims throughout the world, for the Islamic Ummah. God’s curse be upon those who sideline the truth of the Islamic Ummah, those who divert attention away from the importance of the Islamic Ummah, those who divide Muslims into different groups with different goals, those who magnify nationalities against the glory of the Islamic Ummah and those who create division within the Iranian nation. The Islamic Ummah is important. Glory belongs to the Islamic Ummah. Allah the Exalted will bestow His mercy and blessings on the Islamic Ummah. Hajj is a manifestation of the Islamic Ummah: it is the Islamic Ummah in microcosm. “Coming from every remote path” [The Holy Quran, 22: 27]. Muslims come together from different parts of the world and from remote places. And what a great opportunity for communicating with each other, for unity with one another, for listening to each other’s sufferings, for expressing sympathy. Apart from hajj, when do Muslims get such an opportunity? The issue of unity is one of the social dimensions of hajj. Showing the greatness of the Islamic Ummah is another social dimension of hajj. The fact that several million Muslims gather in one place to attend a particular ceremony shows the greatness of the Islamic Ummah. From a country whose population is seventy, eighty million, around fifty, sixty, seventy thousand people come together and form a glorious gathering. This shows the greatness of the Islamic Ummah. Another dimension is the sharing of experiences among hajj pilgrims. Many Islamic countries have certain experiences. For example, the Iranian nation has certain experiences in confronting the enemy, in identifying the enemy, in refusing to trust the enemy, in distinguishing friends from enemies. We have experience in these areas. We did not make a mistake in distinguishing friends from enemies. From the beginning of the Revolution to this day, we have been aware that the real enemy, the aggressive, stubborn and persistent enemy is the world of global arrogance and Zionism. We have been aware of this. Sometimes this archenemy has spoken through other people. We must not make a mistake and think that those who are speaking for the enemy are the real enemy. No, as I stressed earlier, the real enemy is the arrogant powers. Take a look at the slogans that the people of Iran chant on the 22nd of Bahman, on Quds Day and in different other rallies. Their slogans are against the arrogant powers, against America, against the Zionists, against the usurping Zionist regime. They chant slogans against these elements. This is while these enemies sometimes use certain Islamic countries to say and do what they want. But we never chanted slogans against those Islamic countries. Our people have not chanted slogans against those Islamic countries. Why? The reason is that they know who the real enemy is. They know that those Islamic countries have been deceived and used as a tool. This shows insight in identifying the real enemy. This is our experience. Certain Islamic groups that were provided with great opportunities in certain Islamic countries, did not have this experience and they made a mistake as a result. They made peace with the real enemy and worked against their friends. And they paid the price for this. Allah the Exalted had provided them with a blessing and they failed to appreciate its value. Creating unity is another experience of the Iranian nation. There are many differences of opinion in our country. There are many differences and disagreements in political, intellectual and ideological areas, but our people have managed to preserve their unity despite these disagreements. Certain parts of our country are populated by particular ethnic groups, but those ethnic groups take part in the rallies on the 22nd of Bahman and Quds Day as well as in different other demonstrations that are rooted in the Islamic Revolution, just like other people throughout the country. We have Kurdish, Baluchi, Arab and Azeri regions in the country. In certain cases, their actions in support of the Revolution and the Islamic Republic are more outstanding than other regions in the country. We have seen examples of such actions. This is Islamic unity and the Iranian nation has experienced it. For thirty-five, thirty-six years, we have experienced the importance of unity among the people and we have made great achievements thanks to this unity. Certain other countries never realized the importance of this unity and they are still unaware of it. Because of a small disagreement – which is rooted in religious, ethnic or political differences – they turn against each other and attack each other as if they were enemies. As a result, Allah the Exalted takes His blessing away from them. “Have you not seen those who have changed Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor for ungratefulness and made their people to alight into the abode of perdition (even into) hell? They shall enter into it and an evil place it is to settle in” [The Holy Quran, 14: 28-29]. When we fail to appreciate the value of a divine blessing, when we show ingratitude, Allah the Exalted changes the way He treats us. “This is because Allah has never changed a favor which He has conferred upon a people until they change their own condition” [The Holy Quran, 8: 53]. As long as we move ahead on the right path, as long as we submit to the will of God to the extent that our limited capacities allow us, Allah the Exalted will continue His blessings, but when we work against ourselves, when we sow discord, when we hatch plots against each other, when we start fighting each other, Allah the Exalted will take away His blessings. God does not discriminate in favor of anybody. “This is because Allah has never changed a favor which He has conferred upon a people until they change their own condition”. Allah the Exalted does not take away a blessing that He has bestowed on you unless you prepare the ground for that. Once you have prepared the ground for yourself to be deprived of a blessing, Allah the Exalted will take away that blessing. The Iranian people have the experience of preserving divine blessings for themselves. These experiences should be shared. Today Islamic countries are faced with conspiracy. Do we understand this or not? Today there is conspiracy against Islam, not against Shia or Sunni Islam or against any other Islamic denomination. The Holy Quran belongs to Islam. Shia Islam is not the center that clearly promotes “Allah will by no means give the unbelievers a way against the believers” [The Holy Quran, 4: 141]. It is the Holy Quran! It is Islam! For this reason, the enemies are opposed to Islam. They are opposed to any center and any voice that awakens peoples. They are opposed to any hand that fights the arrogant powers and that hand is the hand of Islam. That voice is the voice of Islam. Therefore, they are opposed to Islam. There are different methods to confront and oppose Islam. There are different types of methods. They sit down together and think. They try to find ways to infiltrate and to harm. During the early years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, we were informed that the Zionist regime had funded a group of people to come together and think about Islam and the Shia denomination, to study and to investigate. What was the purpose? Their studies and investigations were aimed at finding ways of countering this great element, this awakening and this Islamic vigilance. The purpose of those investigations was to find a way to harm Muslim peoples who had awakened and realized that they had the power to take action. They spent a lot of money on the plan. This was only one of the things that they did. Tens of centers – we know about some them and we can infer the existence of several others – were established in Europe, America, occupied Palestinian lands and certain dependent countries that are controlled by the arrogant powers and the purpose was to find ways of countering Islam. For this reason, they believe it is necessary to foment discord, to give rise to violence, to tarnish the name of Islam, to dismember Islamic countries, to turn Muslim nations against each other and to pit members of a nation against each other. One day the means of doing so is Blackwater from America and another day the means is DAESH from Iraq, Syria and other places. They look for the means to create discord. These are our experiences. These are the things that the people of Iran have experienced and seen up close. When we stress the issue of unity among different Islamic denominations, between Shia and Sunni Islam and between different Muslim nations, we are not just paying lip service to Muslim unity. We have identified the malady. We care about the Islamic Ummah and this is why we pursue Muslim unity. As far as the people of Iran are concerned, the importance of unity has been established, but many other nations have not realized the importance of this unity. Hajj is an opportunity to convey this understanding to other nations and spread the message. Of course, there are certain people who are opposed to this. Those who want these disagreements to prevail do not want these interactions, these relationships, these friendships and this sharing of experiences to take place among Muslims. It is necessary to find the appropriate ways. One of the important things that should be done during hajj is to take care of the individual and social aspects of hajj. When we stress the social aspect of hajj, this should not encourage us to ignore the individual aspect, namely solemn praying, humility before God and dua. Hajj is a good opportunity. There is no place like Masjid ul-Haraam. There is no place like Masjid un-Nabi. This opportunity has been provided for you and for hajj pilgrims. It would be a pity to deprive oneself of this blessing and roam around in the bazaar and visit this and that store. It was announced that there have been efforts to prevent hajj pilgrims from roaming the bazaars. However, I have received reports that unfortunately some of our hajj pilgrims are suffering from this problem. They visit different shops and meet different local businessmen and they buy junk at twice the normal price and fly back to Tehran or other cities. This is wrong, absolutely wrong. Our people should pay attention to the fact that this is wrong. Shopping is something that can be done anywhere. One can roam the marketplace anywhere in the world. One can buy stuff anywhere. One can waste money like that anywhere. After all, what is done is basically throwing away money and one can throw away money anywhere. During hajj, it is necessary to go after the kind of things that cannot be done somewhere else. Those things include looking at Ka’bah, praying in Masjid ul-Haraam and kissing the footprint of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.). The Holy Prophet (s.w.a.) used to walk around in that city. He used to speak in that city. The atmosphere of that city reverberates with the voice of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.). It would be a pity if one failed to immerse oneself in this atmosphere. This is not something that can be found somewhere else in the world. Our hajj pilgrims should appreciate these things, otherwise it is possible to roam the bazaars, go sightseeing and do other such things in any other part of the world as well. One can do the same things in Tehran, in Isfahan, in Tabriz or in Mashhad. It is possible to do these things anywhere in the world. Go after the kind of things that cannot be done in other places, the kind of things that can only be done during hajj. These are my recommendations. I hope Allah the Exalted provides all of you with the opportunity to perform a pilgrimage that is acceptable to Him. And we ask you pray for us. Greetings be upon you and Allah’s mercy and blessings

The bitter events brought about by blind terrorism in France have once again, moved me to speak to you young people. In the Name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful To the Youth in Western Countries, The bitter events brought about by blind terrorism in France have once again, moved me to speak to you young people. For me, it is unfortunate that such incidents would have to create the framework for a conversation, however the truth is that if painful matters do not create the grounds for finding solutions and mutual consultation, then the damage caused will be multiplied. The pain of any human being anywhere in the world causes sorrow for a fellow human being. The sight of a child losing his life in the presence of his loved ones, a mother whose joy for her family turns into mourning, a husband who is rushing the lifeless body of his spouse to some place and the spectator who does not know whether he will be seeing the final scene of life- these are scenes that rouse the emotions and feelings of any human being. Anyone who has benefited from affection and humanity is affected and disturbed by witnessing these scenes- whether it occurs in France or in Palestine or Iraq or Lebanon or Syria. Without a doubt, the one-and-a-half billion Muslims also have these feelings and abhor and are revolted by the perpetrators and those responsible for these calamities. The issue, however, is that if today’s pain is not used to build a better and safer future, then it will just turn into bitter and fruitless memories. I genuinely believe that it is only you youth who by learning the lessons of today’s hardship, have the power to discover new means for building the future and who can be barriers in the misguided path that has brought the west to its current impasse. “ Anyone who has benefited from affection and humanity is affected and disturbed by witnessing these scenes- whether it occurs in France or in Palestine or Iraq or Lebanon or Syria. It is correct that today terrorism is our common worry. However it is necessary for you to know that the insecurity and strain that you experienced during the recent events, differs from the pain that the people of Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Afghanistan have been experiencing for many years, in two significant ways. First, the Islamic world has been the victim of terror and brutality to a larger extent territorially, to greater amount quantitatively and for a longer period in terms of time. Second, that unfortunately this violence has been supported by certain great powers through various methods and effective means. Today, there are very few people who are uninformed about the role of the United States of America in creating, nurturing and arming al-Qaeda, the Taliban and their inauspicious successors. Besides this direct support, the overt and well-known supporters of takfiri terrorism- despite having the most backward political systems- are standing arrayed as allies of the west while the most pioneering, brightest and most dynamic democrats in the region are suppressed mercilessly. The prejudiced response of the west to the awakening movement in the Islamic world is an illustrative example of the contradictory western policies. “ I genuinely believe that it is only you youth who by learning the lessons of today’s hardship can be barriers in the misguided path that has brought the west to its current impasse. The other side of these contradictory policies is seen in supporting the state terrorism of Israel. The oppressed people of Palestine have experienced the worst kind of terrorism for the last sixty years. If the people of Europe have now taken refuge in their homes for a few days and refrain from being present in busy places- it is decades that a Palestinian family is not secure even in its own home from the Zionist regime’s death and destruction machinery. What kind of atrocious violence today is comparable to that of the settlement constructions of the Zionists regime? This regime- without ever being seriously and significantly censured by its influential allies or even by the so-called independent international organizations- everyday demolishes the homes of Palestinians and destroys their orchards and farms. This is done without even giving them time to gather their belongings or agricultural products and usually it is done in front of the terrified and tear-filled eyes of women and children who witness the brutal beatings of their family members who in some cases are being dragged away to gruesome torture chambers. In today’s world, do we know of any other violence on this scale and scope and for such an extended period of time? Shooting down a woman in the middle of the street for the crime of protesting against a soldier who is armed to the teeth- if this is not terrorism, what is? This barbarism, because it is being done by the armed forces of an occupying government, should not be called extremism? Or maybe only because these scenes have been seen repeatedly on television screens for sixty years, they should no longer stir our consciences. The military invasions of the Islamic world in recent years- with countless victims- are another example of the contradictory logic of the west. The assaulted countries, in addition to the human damage caused, have lost their economic and industrial infrastructure, their movement towards growth and development has been stopped or delayed and in some cases, has been thrown back decades. Despite all this, they are rudely being asked not to see themselves as oppressed. How can a country be turned into ruins, have its cities and towns covered in dust and then be told that it should please not view itself as oppressed? Instead of enticements to not understand and to not mention disasters, would not an honest apology be better? The pain that the Islamic world has suffered in these years from the hypocrisy and duplicity of the invaders is not less than the pain from the material damage. “ Dear youth! I have the hope that you- now or in the future- can change this mentality corrupted by duplicity, a mentality whose highest skill is hiding long-term goals and adorning malevolent objectives. Dear youth! I have the hope that you- now or in the future- can change this mentality corrupted by duplicity, a mentality whose highest skill is hiding long-term goals and adorning malevolent objectives. In my opinion, the first step in creating security and peace is reforming this violence-breeding mentality. Until double-standards dominate western policies, until terrorism- in the view of its powerful supporters- is divided into “good” and “bad” types, and until governmental interests are given precedence over human values and ethics, the roots of violence should not be searched for in other places. Unfortunately, these roots have taken hold in the depths of western political culture over the course of many years and they have caused a soft and silent invasion. Many countries of the world take pride in their local and national cultures, cultures which through development and regeneration have soundly nurtured human societies for centuries. The Islamic world is not an exception to this. However in the current era, the western world with the use of advanced tools is insisting on the cloning and replication of its culture on a global scale. I consider the imposition of western culture upon other peoples and the trivialization of independent cultures as a form of silent violence and extreme harmfulness. Humiliating rich cultures and insulting the most honored parts of these, is occurring while the alternative culture being offered in no way has any qualification for being a replacement. For example, the two elements of “aggression” and “moral promiscuity” which unfortunately have become the main elements of western culture, has even degraded the position and acceptability of its source region. So now the question is: are we “sinners” for not wanting an aggressive, vulgar and fatuous culture? Are we to be blamed for blocking the flood of impropriety that is directed towards our youth in the shape of various forms of quasi-art? I do not deny the importance and value of cultural interaction. Whenever these interactions are conducted in natural circumstances and with respect for the receiving culture, they result in growth, development and richness. On the contrary, inharmonious interactions have been unsuccessful and harmful impositions. We have to state with full regret that vile groups such as DAESH are the spawn of such ill-fated pairings with imported cultures. If the matter was simply theological, we would have had to witness such phenomena before the colonialist era, yet history shows the contrary. Authoritative historical records clearly show how colonialist confluence of extremist and rejected thoughts in the heart of a Bedouin tribe, planted the seed of extremism in this region. How then is it possible that such garbage as DAESH comes out of one of the most ethical and humane religious schools who as part of its inner core, includes the notion that taking the life of one human being is equivalent to killing the whole humanity? One has to ask why people who are born in Europe and who have been intellectually and mentally nurtured in that environment are attracted to such groups? Can we really believe that people with only one or two trips to war zones, suddenly become so extreme that they can riddle the bodies of their compatriots with bullets? On this matter, we certainly cannot forget about the effects of a life nurtured in a pathologic culture in a corrupt environment borne out of violence. On this matter, we need complete analyses, analyses that see the hidden and apparent corruptions. Maybe a deep hate- planted in the years of economic and industrial growth and borne out of inequality and possibly legal and structural prejudice- created ideas that every few years appear in a sickening manner. “ Any rushed and emotional reaction which would isolate, intimidate and create more anxiety for the Muslim communities living in Europe and America not only will not solve the problem but will increase the chasms and resentments. In any case, you are the ones that have to uncover the apparent layers of your own society and untie and disentangle the knots and resentments. Fissures have to be sealed, not deepened. Hasty reactions is a major mistake when fighting terrorism which only widens the chasms. Any rushed and emotional reaction which would isolate, intimidate and create more anxiety for the Muslim communities living in Europe and America- which are comprised of millions of active and responsible human beings- and which would deprive them of their basic rights more than has already happened and which would drive them away from society- not only will not solve the problem but will increase the chasms and resentments. Superficial measures and reactions, especially if they take legal forms, will do nothing but increase the current polarizations, open the way for future crises and will result in nothing else. According to reports received, some countries in Europe have issued guidelines encouraging citizens to spy on Muslims. This behavior is unjust and we all know that pursuing injustice has the characteristic of unwanted reversibility. Besides, the Muslims do not deserve such ill-treatment. For centuries, the western world has known Muslims well- the day that westerners were guests in Islamic lands and were attracted to the riches of their hosts and on another day when they were hosts and benefitted from the efforts and thoughts of Muslims- they generally experienced nothing but kindness and forbearance. Therefore I want you youth to lay the foundations for a correct and honorable interaction with the Islamic world based on correct understanding, deep insight and lessons learned from horrible experiences. In such a case and in the not too distant future, you will witness the edifice built on these firm foundations which creates a shade of confidence and trust which cools the crown of its architect, a warmth of security and peace that it bequests on them and a blaze of hope in a bright future which illuminates the canvass of the earth. Sayyid Ali Khamenei 8th of Azar, 1394 - 29th of Nov, 2015

Don\\\\\\\'t get distracted | Biskit Islamic Pulse is proud to present their unique series, Biskit. This series aims to look at relevant social and Islamic concepts... But not in the boring old-fashioned way. Have a topic in mind? Then drop us a message at fb.com/IslamicPulse to request your very own episode of Biskit and our team will try and get you your very own Biskit. Duration = 5:39 Follow us at: Shiatv.net/user/IslamicPulse Telegram.me/IslamicPulse Fb.com/IslamicPulse

Animated comical series discussing the application of Islamic concepts in modern society. We all know how important it is to obey our parents, but when does it ever become wajib (obligatory) to DISOBEY them? The fourth installment of Biskit discusses the extent to which a Muslim must be obedient to his or her parents and also- if the circumstances ever arise where disobedience becomes obligatory- HOW to do disobey them. Have a topic in mind? Then drop us a message at fb.com/IslamicPulse to request your very own episode of Biskit and our team will try and get you your very own Biskit. Duration = 5:37 Follow us at: Shiatv.net/user/IslamicPulse Telegram: http://goo.gl/tSdizW Fb.com/IslamicPulse

Animated comical series discussing the application of Islamic concepts in modern society. For the longest time, the topic of Music has been shrouded in confusion and controversy. Being an intricate subject that takes a long time to delve into; we at Islamic Pulse have done our best to clear up any misunderstandings that many sharia-abiding citizens might have. For this episode, we\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'ve focused particulaly on the fatwas of Grand Ayatollah Sistani and Grand Ayatollah Khamenei to arrive at sound conclusions based on the research of these two great scholars of our time. Have a topic in mind? Then drop us a message at fb.com/IslamicPulse to request your very own episode of Biskit and our team will try and get you your very own Biskit.

Animated comical series discussing the application of Islamic concepts in modern society. We see around us a society which has made the dunia its ‘qibla’. Both work and education aim to make progress on a worldly level, rather than for what’s worth much, much more. “And the life of this world is nothing but a sport and a play; and as for the next abode, that most surely is the life” -The Holy Qur’an 29:64 Have we become so busy living the 9-5 lifestyle that we are afraid of breaking out of the box of mundane life? Why are we afraid to step out and explore new realms? Is the life of this world truly worth living in a cage for? This world with all its murkiness has entangled many of us in its unfruitful production line. The dunia, like the sea only makes us thirstier the more we drink and yet people have become so obsessed with gaining more and more on a material level, they have forgotten to look at the hereafter. It\\\\\\\'s like the famous children\\\\\\\'s story from Aesop\\\\\\\'s fables: In a field one summer\\\\\\\'s day a Grasshopper was hopping about, chirping and singing to its heart\\\\\\\'s content. An Ant passed by, bearing along with great toil an ear of corn he was taking to the nest. \\\\\\\"\\\\\\\"Why not come and chat with me,\\\\\\\"\\\\\\\" said the Grasshopper, \\\\\\\"\\\\\\\"instead of toiling and moiling in that way?” \\\\\\\"\\\\\\\"I am helping to lay up food for the winter,\\\\\\\"\\\\\\\" said the Ant, \\\\\\\"\\\\\\\"and recommend you to do the same.\\\\\\\"\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"\\\\\\\"Why bother about winter?\\\\\\\"\\\\\\\" said the Grasshopper; \\\\\\\"\\\\\\\"We have got plenty of food at present.\\\\\\\"\\\\\\\" But the Ant went on its way and continued its toil. When the winter came the Grasshopper had no food and found itself dying of hunger - while it saw the ants distributing every day corn and grain from the stores they had collected in the summer. Then the Grasshopper knew: It is best to prepare for days of need. In this episode, we discuss how a Muslim must be just like the ant: working hard and preparing for what comes next, regardless of what the grasshoppers of our society might think. Have a topic in mind? Then drop us a message at fb.com/IslamicPulse to request your very own episode of Biskit and our team will try and get you your very own Biskit.

Episode 7 of the ground-breaking new film following the journey of five students as they make their way to the Holy land of Karbala. This episode depicts the ultimate sacrifice that took place in the plains of Karbala. The tyrannical Yazid had amassed an army of over 10,000 soldiers with one intention: to destroy the essence of Islam. Imam Husayn took a small party of Godly men, as well as his own family: a group consisting of women and children as young as his six-month old baby son. While the armies of Yazid blocked off the camp of Imam Husayn from having any access to the river Euphrates, Imam Husayn himself gave up his own water supplies to quench the thirst of one of the battalions of Yazid, which was led by Hurr. After seeing the pure-hearted intentions and the merciful personality of Imam Husayn, Hurr changed sides and joined the heroic ranks of Husayn, despite knowing that he would be slain amongst them. But knowing that he was on the right path was more valuable to Hurr than the worldly riches Yazid had offered him. Al-Abbas, the brother of Imam Husayn and the flag-bearer of the righteous, rode against the armies of Yazid, in an attempt to get water from the Euphrates. When he filled his water-carrier, the armies attacked from all sides. First, they cut one of his arms and then they cut the other arm from his body. Thus, Al-Abbas was tragically martyred. The events of Karbala make you wonder: how could people become so cruel the they would prevent a man from taking water to children dying of thirst? The tragedy of Karbala epitomised the struggle between good and evil which has existed before time. Both armies claim to be Muslims. On the one hand, you see masses of pawns united for the sake of wealth, worldly rewards and fear of losing their mundane comforts. And on the other side, you see 72 men who with courage stand up, ready to sacrifice everything they have for the sake of justice and truth. Imam Husayn’s sacrifice is the greatest sacrifice made in history. It defines humanity, friendship, love and freedom and the true message of the Holy Prophet [s] What is it about the ancient city of Karbala that captivates Muslims? What makes approximately 30 million people travel there each year? The ziarat [pilgrimage] to Karbala is considered a sacred journey for Muslims across the world, especially the followers of Ahlulbayt (as). Every week, Islamic Pulse will be releasing two episodes of ‘When He Calls’ by the will of God, so stay tuned!

We often criticise other religions for being polytheistic, but it is vital that we recognise that there are many polytheistic traits in some belief systems within the folds of the Muslims. Islam itself, being the perfect religion, has no polytheism whatsoever. It’s very clear: there is only one God, one direction and one purpose. But people end up attributing limitations to Allah without realising it. This episode is all about the most fundamental principle of Islam: the Oneness of God. Here in the Islamic Seminary of Qom, we learn that one of the main reasons why people run away from faith is the incorrect behaviour or beliefs of those who call themselves religious. Sometimes, despite how perfect the religion might be, the followers of the religion end up becoming a barrier between the common people and their relationship with God. Have a topic in mind? Then drop us a message at fb.com/IslamicPulse to request your very own episode of Biskit and our team will try and get you your very own Biskit.

Questions, questions… Is everything determined by Allah? Does He choose what we do and don’t do in life? Or has He simply created us and left us free to make our own decisions? Do we really have the ability to make decisions of our own - or is everything we do a predestined effect of causes already set in motion? These are some of the mind-boggling questions that can keep us up at night and the answers to such philosophical queries normally take years and years of contemplation to truly suss out. Even so, allow the BISKIT guy to attempt to unboggle your mind for the next seven minutes. Inshallah, some questions will be answered and some new questions will be raised… #Allah #HolyProphet #Quran #Islam #Ahlulbayt #Fate #Freedom

Our own flaws and sins can make us feel as though we can never reach our full potential. But the concept of repentance, as taught by Islam, is actually there to give you the opposite feeling; a feeling of hope; an opportunity to rectify yourself. Let’s take a moment to reflect on how Allah has placed a world of potential within our own hands!