Search Result in All

[After Effects Tutorial] Realistic Gun Blow Back - English

In this video we will learn how to make realistic Easter egg in Gimp

In this video we will learn how to make Realistic Graffiti on Brick Text in Gimp

In this video we learn how to make Realistic Ampharos painting in Gimp

\\\"Reach the Peak\\\" as we delve deeply into the beautiful pages of Nahjul Balagha and the wise words of the Commander of the Faithful, the first divinely appointed Imam, Imam Ali ibne Abi Talib (A). In this episode, Sayyid Amir Behbahani speaks to us about another revolutionary attribute; \\\"Realistic Confidence\\\". Yet, what are some of the revolutionary attributes that have been previously spoken of? And what is the fifth phrase of Imam Ali (A) in Hikmah No. 3 of Nahjul Balagha? What does Imam Ali (A) describe helplessness as? And along these lines, what is one of the obstacles on our path to success? What are some of the sources of confidence? What role does belief play in having confidence? Finally, what is a life that has no ultimate purpose? If you ultimately want to \\\"Reach the Peak\\\", you\\\'re going to have to take the first step - wherever you are! #IslamicPulse #ReachthePeak #ImamAli #Rajab #NahjulBalagha #RTP #Islam #Allah #Shia #Muslim #Sunni #AhlulBayt #Imamate #Wilayate #Ali

This shows you how to make a flame and background with GIMP.

In this video we will learn how to make a scene of bubbles in Gimp

You may hear many things about Iran from every Tom, Dick, and Harry. Take a listen to the words of the most honest, realistic, and trustworthy person who lays out three remarkable facts about the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Pepe Escobar explains clashes between US-backed government and Hezbollah-led opposition. Overall this is a very realistic description of the situation. Only problem is with the use of the term SECTARIAN at the beginning. This is not a Sunni Shia Druze Christian conflict.

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

Try or buy Photoshop CS5 at http://bit.ly/try_CS5psfb. View the top 5 Photoshop CS5 photo editing software features. Russell Brown, Photoshop senior creative director, presents his favorites from over 100 new features, including Content-Aware Fill, Puppet Warp, HDR Pro, realistic paint brushes, and new selections tools for the trickiest elements like hair. Want more Photoshop CS5 on YouTube?

Martyred professor, Allameh Morteza Motahhari, was born on February 2, 1919 in the town of Fariman, 75 kilometers from the holy city of Mashhad. At the age of twelve, he set off for Mashhad seminary to embark on learning the basics of Islamic sciences. In 1937, despite Reza Khan’s intense confrontation with clergymen and also opposition by some of his friends and relatives, he left for Qom seminary to complete his studies. During 15 years of his stay in Qom, he benefited from the presence of Grand Ayatollah Borujerdi (in jurisprudence and the principles of jurisprudence), Imam Khomeini (12 years in the philosophy of Molla Sadra, gnosis, ethics and principles of jurisprudence) and Allameh Seyyed Mohammad Hossein Tabatabaiee (in philosophy). He had also benefited from the presence of the late Ayatollah Haj Mirza Ali Aqa Shirazi in ethics and gnosis. Among other teachers of professor Motahhari mention can be made of the late Ayatollah Seyyed Mohammad Hojjat (in principles of jurisprudence) and the late Ayatollah Seyyed Mohammad Mohaqqeqdamad (in jurisprudence). While he was in Qom, in addition to education, he participated in socio-political affairs as well and he was in contact with Fadaiyan-e-Eslam group. In 1952, he migrated to Tehran though he was one of the renowned teachers and among the future hopes of the seminary. In Tehran, he taught at Marvi School and delivered well-researched speeches. In 1955, the first session of the exegesis of the holy Qur’an in the Students\\\' Islamic Association was held by professor Motahhari. In the same year, he began teaching at the faculty of divinity and Islamic teachings of Tehran University. In 1958-59 concurrent with the establishment of the Physicians\\\' Islamic Association, professor Motahhari was one of the main speakers of the Association and during 1961-1971 he was the only speaker of the Association leaving behind a number of important deliberations. In 1962, with the start of Imam Khomeini’s uprising, professor Motahhari accompanied him to the extent that one can consider the organizing of the June 5th uprising in Tehran and its coordination with Imam Khomeini’s leadership as being indebted to him and his companions. Having given an enlightening speech against the Shah on Wednesday, 5th of June 1963, Ayatollah Motahhari was detained by the police at 1 a.m. and sent to the interim police headquarters and was imprisoned with a number of Tehrani clergymen. 43 days later, following the migration of Ulema from other provinces to Tehran and public pressure, he was freed together with other clergymen. After the formation of groups called “Mo’talefe Eslami”, which was among the combatant groups of the time, Imam Khomeini called on martyr Motahhari to lead these groups along with a number of clergymen. Following Imam Khomeini\\\'s exile, professor Motahhari and his companions shouldered a heavier responsibility. At that time, he wrote books covering social requirements and delivering speeches at universities, the Physicians\\\' Islamic Association and mosques. Professor Motahhari made a lot of ideological efforts to Islamicize the content of the movement and strongly fought against diversions and falsehoods. In 1967, he established Hosseinieh Ershad with the help of some friends. In 1969, after releasing an announcement signed by him, Allameh Tabatabai and Ayatollah Haj Seyyed Abolfazl Mojtahed Zanjani calling for collection of aid for the displaced Palestinians and because of publicizing it during a speech in Hosseinieh Ershad, he was detained and held in solitary confinement for a short while. From 1970-72 he supervised publicity works by Al-jawad mosque where he was the main speaker until the mosque and the Hosseinieh were closed and professor Motahhari was detained for a while. Later, Ayatollah Motahhari gave speeches at Javid, Ark and a number of other mosques. After a while Javid mosque was also closed. Around the year 1974 he was forbidden to speak which lasted till the triumph of the Islamic revolution. Presenting genuine Islamic ideology through teaching, speech and writing books were among the valuable activities of professor Motahhari reaching its climax particularly during the years 1972-78; since in those years the leftists had increased their propaganda and groups of leftist Muslims and also those with a hotchpotch of ideas had emerged. After Imam Khomeini, professor Motahhari was the first figure who found out the ideological deviation of the heads of the so-called “Mojahedin-e-Khalq” organization and prevented others from cooperating with them and even foresaw their change of ideology. In those years, upon Imam Khomeini’s recommendation, professor Motahhari traveled to Qom twice a week to teach at its seminary where he taught important courses and at the same time he taught some courses at home in Tehran. In 1976, following an ideological dispute with a communist teacher of the faculty of divinity, he became retired prematurely. Furthermore; in those years Ayatollah Motahhari, in collaboration with some clergymen, established “Jameye Rohaniat-e-Mobarez” of Tehran hoping that such an institution would be gradually established in other cities as well. Although professor Motahhari’s contact with Imam Khomeini continued after the Imam’s exile in France via letters and other means, in the year 1976 he managed to travel to the holy city of Najaf and consulted with Imam Khomeini on the important issues of the revolution and also seminaries. After the martyrdom of Ayatollah Seyyed Mostafa Khomeini and the start of the new phase of the Islamic revolution, professor Motahhari fully devoted himself to the revolution and hence played a fundamental role in all of its phases. At the time of Imam Khomeini’s stay in Paris, Ayatollah Motahhari traveled to France where he spoke with the Imam on the important issues of the revolution and it was then that Imam Khomeini urged him to shape the Islamic Revolution Council. Upon Imam Khomeini’s return to Iran, he personally took the responsibility of the welcoming committee and till the victory of the revolution and after that he always acted as a supporter of the leader of the Islamic revolution and served as a kind and trusted advisor for him. But at 22:20 p.m. of Tuesday, 1st of May 1979 he was martyred by a grouplet called “Forqan” after leaving an ideological and political gathering. This caused profound sorrow and grief for Imam Khomeini and the Islamic Ummah who had a lot of hopes for this great man’s future. There remain tens of works by Ayatollah Motahhari. These works deal with a variety of religious issues and offer responses to many of the important questions of religious society so much so that we can name his works as a reliable source concerning the Islamic ideology system. Some of Imam Khomeini’s Words on Martyr Allameh Morteza Motahhari [Motahhari] was rare in Islamology and different Islamic and Qur’anic sciences. I have lost a very dear child. I am mourning for him who was one of the figures who was considered the fruit of my life. Martyrdom of this righteous child and immortal clergyman created a vacuum in the dear Islam that cannot be filled by any means. Motahhari, who was rare in purifying spirit, the strength of belief and the power of speech, flew to the ethereal world, but the ill-wishers should know that his Islamic, scientific and philosophical personality won’t perish with his departure. Motahhari was a dear child for me and a firm stronghold for the religious and scientific seminaries and a useful servant for people and country. I recommend the students and the committed intellectuals not to let this dear professor’s books be forgotten by non-Islamic schemes. In his short life, [Motahhari] left behind immortal works which stemmed from a wakeful conscience and a spirit filled with the love for religion. He embarked on educating and training the society with an eloquent style and an able thought in analyzing Islamic subjects and explaining philosophical facts with a popular diction and without uncertainty. His oral and written works are unexceptionally instructive and inspiring; and his advice and admonitions, which sprang from a heart filled with faith and belief, are useful both for the Ulema and the laymen. Late Motahhari was an individual who had different aspects of personality; and few people have done the service to the young generation and others as Motahhari has done. All his works are unexceptionally good and I don’t know anybody else whose works I could call unexceptionally good. His works are unexceptionally good and constructive for humans. Professor Motahhari from the Viewpoint of Ayatollah Khamenei Interview with the Supreme Leader on Martyr Motahhari ‘I consider myself Mr. Motahhari’s pupil’ As you know late professor Motahhari was a philosopher; the science sought by him was mostly the philosophical science. Later on; however, he got to the subjects of theology, i.e. he dealt with Islamic issues with new argumentation method of modern philosophy. But he spent most of his time on philosophical matters. He was considered the philosophical student of Imam Khomeini and Allameh Tabatabaiee. Thus what he maintains in theology is Hekmat Mota’aliah, i.e. the Philosophy of Molla Sadra. His behaviour was like that of the mystics who would set out to find a perfect instructor. Basically his spiritual and moral condition was in such a way. He would search to know for example if a perfect elderly instructor is somewhere in the world, and he would go to him to stay by him. Indeed, spiritually, such a situation was fitting him. Yet he had found such a perfect instructor in Iran. He was absorbed in Imam Khomeini and Allameh Tabatabaiee. He was captivated by their love and regarded their scientific and mystic status very high. Morally, late Motahhari was a prominent man; and a pure-hearted, enlightened, just, self-possessed and mature person. In his personal bonds with God he was a mystic, a man of God’s remembrance, journey towards God and worship. He used to say: “I have learnt paying attention to and worship of God from my father.” Professor Motahhari had a lot of historical information especially about the recent history, and particularly on the issues related to the Ulema, seminaries, scientific, spiritual, philosophical and mystic figures. These pieces of information were not registered in any book and are heard from the professors and great figures and kept in mind. Since he knew all professors and Ulema of Najaf, Samarra and Isfahan, he was well-informed about their events and he would talk of them in the gatherings and visits held on different occasions. Supereme Leader’s Words on Professor Motahhari’s Personality and Works “As time passes from his martyrdom, his spiritual and ideological works and bounties manifest more fresh dimensions. The ideological and scientific works of that grand clergyman become clearer in the scene of the country press and religious knowledge; and one understands that an intellectual clergyman with responsibilities could have so fruitful life.” Martyr Motahhari with his strong and decent thought stepped in the fields of Islamic subjects that hitherto nobody had stepped; and considering the ideas that had prevailed or were going to prevail in the country---through translation and import from the west and east, he entered a profound, vast and interminable scientific challenge. He both embarked on a very clever struggle to confront with the Marxists and entered the scene to confront with the western and Liberalist thoughts. This role is very important; it needs both courage and self-confidence, it requires both thinking strength and Ijtihad (being well- qualified in jurisprudence and different theological fields), it both needs certainty and resolute belief. This great man had all these together; he was both a learned man and very faithful, he was firm in his belief and had self-confidence, too; these are all necessary.” Leader’s Visit with Martyr Motahhari’s Family (1996) He had three characteristics regarding ideological issues: First, he had a strong thought and he was a true thinker. Secondly, while presenting and spreading the ideological principles, he had no intention but God’s nearness, promotion of the truth and fighting against the false. There was sincerity in him and his personal actions which would naturally make the second characteristic tangible. For example think of some people who are thinkers, yet do not present their thought for God’s sake, but they present it to show that they are knowledgeable, to draw people’s attention and to say that they are philosophers. Martyr Motahhari was not such. He would present thought for God’s sake and for Islam. He would truly burn up [like a candle] and would gush forth [like a fountain] and would present [Islamic ideas]. The reason for his survival is his second characteristic. It means that sincerity will have its impact and the Almighty God will grace any deed done with sincerity. The third characteristic was his working hard and his inexhaustibility. The truth is that he wouldn’t sit till he might be referred to; but rather he would himself go after activity. He had these three characteristics.” Leader’s Visit with Martyr Motahhari’s Family (1998) “We should introduce Mr. Motahhari to the world especially the Islamic world. And if we want to introduce him, which points should be highlighted? I think this is your most important job. Some aspects of a figure’s personality are either unique that must be highlighted or are very outstanding that should be stressed. In the life of the late Martyr Ayatollah Motahhari, his personality and his scientific identity there are numerous examples of these. One point, that in my opinion has the prime importance, is the new interpretation of the Islamic teachings. This is apart from his philosophical aspect and his strong and compelling arguments in the footnotes of ‘The principles of philosophy’ by ‘Ayatollah Tabatabaiee. This is another point. He elucidated Islamic concepts and teachings with a novel diction and expression which was much needed. I don’t say that if the works of the predecessors were pondered and scrutinized signs of this exegesis would not be found. Really if one had attentively studied the works of the Ulema he would have found some hints and cues; but I want to say that nobody had done this. As far as we know, nobody had done it before Mr. Motahhari. Even the modernist writers, who had emerged in the Arab countries, and we knew some of them, had not done this. These Egyptian authors, who were modernists and would write things with a broader sight and who knew the world somewhat more than Martyr Motahhari, most of them had traveled a lot and had visited different universities. Yet he [Ayatollah Motahhari] was not so, he was confined. I mean he was inside Iran and Tehran but his profound vision of the Islamic issues and his novel understanding of the verses [of Qur’an] and the narrations [of the Ahl-ul-Bayt], in my opinion, was one of his most outstanding aspects. It was he who, for the first time, substantively expressed the subjects related to principles of ideology, piety, patience, love, fairness, justice, and so on in the ideological atmosphere of Iran. We thank God that Mr. Motahhari’s name was not forgotten in our society and the mental atmosphere of this country; but rather it became more prominent day by day. Many of the world phenomena are naturally perishable and by the lapse of time they become older. Most of the world phenomena are such. Yet there are some phenomena that not only do not fall into oblivion via lapse of time but become brighter, more manifest, more spectacular and more impressive. The phenomena based on reality are usually such. I clearly feel that, thank God, Martyr Ayatollah Motahhari’s thoughts are such.” Memoirs of Dr. Ali Motahhari (Martyr Motahhari’s Son) Night Supplication in front of the Word Allah As it is said he didn’t give up midnight vigilance, midnight prayer, and wakefulness since his youth till the end of his life. It was his practice both at the time of studentship and after that and even at the time of martyrdom. I remember that facing our house there was the house of one of the previous regime’s officials which was usually guarded by two police officers. Apparently since the official had seen that the lamp of our house was lit at midnight, had worried to find the reason and it was important for him from the security point of view. He had told the guards to look for the reason. Professor [Motahhari] had a neon board of Allah which was green when lit. He would turn it on and perform his midnight prayer in its light. After the revolution one of the officers said, we had examined several nights and I had looked through the window to see what was going on inside the house. At the end I myself saw that he came at midnight and started worshipping for an hour. We were somehow absorbed by the professor, and despite much negative propaganda against the clergymen and him in particular to make us pessimist to them, we became very interested in him so much so that some would say we got our salary from the government but it was as if we were guarding him. A Voice vis-à-vis MHe was very sensitive against ideological deviations and believed that we were seeking Islamic revolution and not mere revolution. It is not important that Shah goes but it is important to see what system is established after his going. Because if after the ouster of the Shah, for example the Mojahedin-e-Khalq take the lead, it is much better not to stage a revolution at all. Thus the deviated groups had found out professor Motahhari’s sensitiveness and had become his enemy. Three or four months before the victory of the Islamic revolution, a person, who had some tendencies to Mojahedin-e-Khalq and the leftists and was intended to be religious, too, was freed from the prison. Professor [Motahhari] said we had better visit him. I was with the professor. There was a man by the name of Ashuri as one of the heads of the Forqan group. He spoke of Islam and Marxism and said: ‘These two religions say one single thing and their content is the same with different forms. They speak of the laborers and we speak of the oppressed. Therefore our word is the same. We should unite to topple the regime of Shah and basically there is no difference between Islam and Marxism, etc.’ Professor was very upset and that man knew that professor Motahhari would answer him. That’s why he rose to leave. The professor said: ‘No, Be seated! Be seated!’ He made him sit and explained him in detail that our path is fundamentally separate from that of the Marxists. In no way can the forms be different with the same content. And we cannot unite with the Marxists in any way. Immortal among People Prior to the victory of the Islamic revolution, at the time of Imam Khomeini’s staying in Paris, it was heard everywhere that the regime of Shah wanted to arrest the leaders and prominent figures of the revolution. Some people told him [Ayatollah Motahhari] it was better to go somewhere else to hide. He said: ‘Such actions are not good for clergymen. It is not good for us to escape from one place to another to hide; such things are not good for us.’ He stayed at home like before and nothing happened. His Method of Training Children One of the features of the professor’s training method for his children was that he would never resort to force and coercion and he would let them to realize and choose the right path with their own thought and wisdom. About choosing the field of education and the way of spending leisure time and the like he would never force us to do something necessarily; but he would show us the way. As the holy Qur’an says: ‘…be he grateful or ungrateful.’ And it was we who would choose the way. There was never force over our heads and we would choose one way with interest and free will. The Professor’s Arrest after anti-Israel Speech I have another memory from the year 1969 when he delivered the provocative speech on Palestine in Hosseinieh Ershad. This speech has been broadcast many times by IRIB. It was a very provocative, important and interesting speech which shook the regime of Shah; and it required a lot of courage to deliver such a speech when the regime of Shah was in the zenith of power and had the highest level of relations and unity with Israel. When the Israeli planes would refuel in Iran’s airport(s) during the 1967 war and would fly over the heads of the Arabs and Muslims, much bravery was needed to give such a speech and we saw that professor Motahhari gave that speech and was promptly arrested and taken away. When he was freed he said, ‘They made me sit in a car and blindfolded me and the car set out. I told them there is no need to blindfold and I will not look. If you want me not to look I will close my eyes. But they didn’t agree. Yet I realized the route till Ferdowsi square but didn’t realize after that.’ Apparently they had taken him to the committee of the SAVAK which was presumably located in the same Ferdowsi Street. Allameh Tabatabaiee’s Message on the Occasion of Ayatollah Motahhari’s Martyrdom In the name of the Almighty God In memory of a scientific and philosophical personality who cast a world into grief and made the world of science and merit mournful with his departure. Late Motahhari, who was a scientist, a thinker and a researcher with an overflowing intellect, a bright thought and a realistic mind, has left behind marvelous works and researches written about scientific and argumentative purposes that are seen in his books. Late Motahhari, through his precious and blissful life that was abundant with scientific effort and philosophical thinking, sends an expressive and valuable message to the enthusiasts of science and philosophy never to repose from effort towards perfection and never forget scientific struggle for perfection; and in the market of realities turn their life--which is the best human commodity-- to the spiritual life— which is the lofty human life and is lasting till the world exists; and not to be absorbed and deceived by fabricated and imaginary personalities in this short life. Yes, a narrow route opened by a scientist towards realities will bestow eternal life upon him and this is more valuable than the world and what it contains.

This video we will create a realistic looking bomb explosion and add it to a photo we are working in. Have fun with this one! Please check ouT..

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful As-Salamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullah All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings upon our Master, Muhammad, and upon his immaculate household and chosen companions and upon those who follow them appropriately until the Day of Judgment. Allah the All-Wise said: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed and most surely Allah is well able to assist them. Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause only because they say our Lord is Allah. And had there not been Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s repelling some people by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s name is much remembered. And surely Allah will help him who helps His cause. Most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, Sura al-Hajj, Ayahs 39-40] I would like to welcome the all dear guests and the honorable audience. Among all the issues that deserve to be discussed by religious and political figures from across the world of Islam, the issue of Palestine enjoys special importance. Palestine is the primary issue among all common issues of Islamic countries. This issue has unique characteristics. The first characteristic is that a Muslim country has been taken away from its people and entrusted to foreigners who have come together from different countries and formed a fake and mosaic-like society. The second characteristic is that this historically unprecedented event has been accompanied by constant killings, crimes, oppression and humiliation. The third characteristic is that Muslims\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' original qiblah and many respected religious centers which exist in that country have been threatened with destruction, sacrilege and decline. The fourth characteristic is that at the most sensitive spot of the world of Islam, this fake government and society has played the role of a military, security and political base for the arrogant governments since the beginning up until today. And the pivot of the colonialist west - which has been opposed to the unity, development and progress of Islamic countries for various reasons - has always used it like a dagger in the heart of the Islamic Ummah. The fifth characteristic is that Zionism - which is a great ethical, political and economic threat to the human community - has used this foothold as a tool and stepping stone to spread its influence and hegemony in the world. Other points that can be added include: heavy financial and human costs that Islamic countries have paid so far, preoccupation of Muslim governments and people, the sufferings of millions of displaced Palestinians many of whom still live in refugee camps after the passage of six decades and putting an end to the history of an important civilizational center in the world of Islam. Today another key point has been added to these causes and this key point is the wave of Islamic Awakening which has engulfed the entire region and has opened a new and determining chapter in the history of the Islamic Ummah. This massive movement - which can undoubtedly lead to a powerful, advanced and coherent Islamic alliance in this sensitive part of the world and can put an end to the era of backwardness, weakness and humiliation of Muslim nations relying on Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor and the firm determination of the followers of this movement - has borrowed an important portion of its force and courage from the issue of Palestine. The Zionist regime\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s increasing oppression and bullying and the cooperation of certain autocratic, corrupt and mercenary rulers on the one hand and the spirited Palestinian and Lebanese resistance and the miraculous victories of faithful youth in the 33-day war on Lebanon and in the 22-day war on Gaza on the other hand - were among the important factors which made turbulent the seemingly calm ocean of the Egyptian, Tunisian and Libyan nations as well as other regional nations. It is a fact that the Zionist regime, which is armed to the teeth and claims to be invincible, suffered a decisive and humiliating defeat in Lebanon during an unequal war against the clenched fist of faithful and brave mujahids. Later on it re-tested its blunt sword against the innocent and determined resistance of Gaza and it failed. Serious attention should be paid to these points when analyzing current conditions of the region and the appropriateness of every decision should be evaluated against these points. Therefore, it is an accurate judgment to say that today the issue of Palestine has gained increased importance and urgency and the Palestinian nation has the right to expect more from Muslims countries in the current regional conditions. Let us take a look at the past and the present and prepare a road map for the future. I will discuss certain topics in this regard. More than six decades have passed since the tragic occupation of Palestine. All the main causes of this bloody tragedy have been identified and the colonialist English government is the most important cause. The policies, weapons and military, security, economic and cultural power of the English government and other arrogant western and eastern governments were put to the service of this great oppression. Under the ruthless clutches of the occupiers, the defenseless people of Palestine were massacred and forced out of their homes. Until today even one percent of the human and civil tragedy - which was carried out at that time by the claimants of civilization and ethics - has not been properly portrayed and this tragedy has not had its fair share in the media and visual arts. The owners of visual and cinematic arts and western movie mafias have not been willing to allow this to happen. An entire nation was massacred and displaced in silence. Certain instances of resistance emerged at the beginning, which were harshly and ruthlessly crushed. From outside Palestinian borders and mainly from Egypt, a number of men with Islamic motives made certain efforts which were not sufficiently supported and could not have an effect on the scene. Afterwards there were full-scale and classical wars between a few Arab countries and the Zionist army. Egypt, Syria and Jordan mobilized their military forces, but the unconditional, massive and increasing military and financial support of America, England and France for the Zionist regime overwhelmed Arab armies. Not only did they fail to help the Palestinian nation, but they also lost an important portion of their territories during these wars. After the weakness of Palestine\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Arab neighbors was revealed, cells of organized resistance were gradually established in the form of armed Palestinian groups and after a while they came together to form the Palestinian Liberation Organization. This was a spark of hope which shone brightly, but it did not last long. This failure can be attributed to many factors, but the essential factor was their separation from the people and from their Islamic beliefs and faith. Leftist ideology or mere nationalistic sentiments were not what the complicated and difficult issue of Palestine required. Islam, jihad and martyrdom were the factors that could have encouraged an entire nation to step into the arena of resistance and turned it into an invincible force. They did not understand this properly. During the first few months of the great Islamic Revolution, when the leaders of the Palestinian Liberation Organization had found a new spirit and they used to visit Tehran repeatedly, I asked a pillar of the organization why they did not raise the flag of Islam in their righteous battle. His answer was that there were a number of Christians among them as well. Later on that person was assassinated by the Zionists in an Arab country and I hope Allah the Exalted has bestowed mercy on him. But his reasoning was flawed. I believe a faithful Christian who fights alongside a group of selfless mujahids - who carry out jihad in a sincere way while having faith in God, the Day of Judgment and divine assistance - would be more motivated to fight than a Christian who has to fight alongside a group of people who lack faith, rely on unstable sentiments and lack loyal support of the people. Lack of firm faith and separation from the people gradually made them neutral and ineffective. Of course there were honorable, motivated and valorous men among them, but the organization went off in a different direction. Their deviation has been a blow to the issue of Palestine. Like certain treacherous Arab governments, they too turned their back on the ideal of resistance which has been the only way of saving Palestine. And of course not only did they deliver a blow to Palestine, but they also delivered a strong blow to themselves. As the Christian Arab poet says, لئن اضعتم فلسطيناً فعيشكم طول الحياة مضاضات و آلامٌ Thirty two years were spent in this misery, but suddenly God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s hand of power turned the tables. The victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in the year 1979 completely changed the conditions of this region and turned a new page. Among the amazing global effects of this Revolution and the strong blows that it delivered to arrogant policies, the blow to the Zionist government was the clearest and the most immediate. The statements of the leaders of that regime during those days are interesting to read and they show how unhappy and anxious they were. During the first few weeks after the victory, Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s embassy in Tehran was closed down and its staff was expelled. The embassy was officially given to the Palestinian Liberation Organization whose representatives are still there. Our magnanimous Imam announced that one of the goals of the Revolution was to liberate Palestine and to remove the cancerous tumor, Israel. The powerful waves of this Revolution, which engulfed the entire world at that time, conveyed this message wherever it reached: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Palestine must be liberated.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Even the repeated and great problems that the enemies of the Revolution imposed on the Islamic Republic of Iran failed to discourage the Islamic Republic from defending Palestine. One instance of the problems that they caused was the eight-year war waged on Iran by Saddam Hussein who had been goaded by America and England and was supported by reactionary Arab governments. Thus, new blood was pumped into the veins of Palestine. Muslim mujahid groups started to emerge in Palestine. The Lebanese Resistance formed a powerful and new front against the enemy and its supporters. Instead of relying on Arab governments and seeking help from global organizations such as the United Nations, which were accomplices of the arrogant powers, Palestine started to rely on itself, its youth, its deep Islamic faith and its selfless men and women. This is the key to all achievements. Over the past three decades this process has been accelerated on a daily basis. The humiliating defeat of the Zionist regime in Lebanon in the year 2006, the humiliating failure of the arrogant Zionist army in Gaza in the year 2008, the Zionist regime\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s escape from South Lebanon and withdrawal from Gaza, the establishment of the resistance government in Gaza and in brief, changing the Palestinian nation from a group of helpless and hopeless people to a hopeful, resistant and self-confident nation - these were the outstanding characteristics of the past thirty years. This general picture will be clear when attempts at compromise and treacherous activities - whose goal is to break down resistance and make Palestinian groups and Arab governments acknowledge the legitimacy of Israel - are also reflected upon in an appropriate way. These activities, which were initiated with the Camp David Accords by the treacherous and unworthy successor of Gamal Abdel Nasser, have always been aimed at undermining the steely determination of resistance forces. During the Camp David Accords, for the first time an Arab government officially acknowledged that the Palestinian lands belonged to the Zionists and it signed the papers according to which Palestine was recognized as the homeland of Jews. From that time until the Oslo Accords in the year 1993 and later on in complementary plans - which were imposed one after the other on compromising and careless Palestinian groups with the intervention of America and the cooperation of colonialist European governments - the enemy tried its best to discourage the Palestinian nation and Palestinian groups from resisting through the use of empty and deceptive promises and making them busy with amateur political games. The uselessness of all these accords was revealed very soon and the Zionists and their supporters repeatedly showed that they consider these accords as worthless pieces of paper. The goal of these plans was to create doubt among the Palestinians, make materialistic unbelievers greedy and cripple Islamic resistance. So far, the spirit of resistance among the Islamic Palestinian groups and the Palestinian people has been the antidote to all these treacherous games. They stood up against the enemy with Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s permission and as promised by God, they benefited from divine assistance: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And surely Allah will help him who helps His cause. Most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, Sura al-Hajj, Ayah 40] The resistance of Gaza in spite of a comprehensive siege was an instance of divine assistance. The collapse of the treacherous and corrupt government of Hosni Mubarak was divine assistance. The emergence of the powerful wave of Islamic Awakening in the region is divine assistance. The removal of the mask of hypocrisy from the face of America, England and France and the increasing hatred of the regional nations towards these countries are divine assistance. The repeated and innumerable problems of the Zionist regime - from its domestic political, economic and social problems to its isolation in the world, to public and even academic hatred of the Zionists in Europe - are all instances of divine assistance. Today the Zionist regime is weaker, more hated and more isolated than ever before and its main supporter, America, is more embattled and confused than ever before. Today the general history of Palestine in the past 60 years is in front of our eyes. It is necessary to delineate the future by considering that general history and learning lessons from it. Two points should be clarified in advance. The first point is that our demand is the liberation of Palestine, not the liberation of a part of Palestine. Any plan to divide Palestine is completely unacceptable. The two-state idea which has been presented in the self-righteous clothing of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"recognizing the Palestinian government as a member of the United Nations\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is nothing but giving in to the demands of the Zionists - namely, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"recognizing the Zionist government in Palestinian lands\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". This would mean trampling on the rights of the Palestinian nation, ignoring the historical right of the displaced Palestinians and even jeopardizing the right of the Palestinians settled in \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"1948 lands\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". It would mean leaving the cancerous tumor intact and exposing the Islamic Ummah - especially the regional nations - to constant danger. It would mean bringing back decades-long sufferings and trampling upon the blood of the martyrs. Any operational solution must be based on the principle of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"all of Palestine for all Palestinian people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Palestine is the land that extends \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"from the river to the sea\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", not one inch less than that. Of course it should be noted that through its elected government, the Palestinian people will run the affairs of the any part of the Palestinian soil they manage to liberate, just as they did in the case of Gaza, but they will never forget the ultimate goal. The second point is that in order to reach this lofty goal, what is necessary is action, not words. It is necessary to be serious, not to make ceremonial gestures. It is necessary to have patience and wisdom, not engage in a variety of impatient actions. It is necessary to consider horizons that lie far ahead and to move forward step by step with determination, reliance on God and hope. Muslim governments and nations and the resistance groups in Palestine, Lebanon and other countries can each identify their share of work in this general struggle and solve the puzzle of resistance with Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s permission. The solution of the Islamic Republic to the issue of Palestine and this old wound is a clear and logical proposal that is based on political wisdom accepted by global public opinion and it has been presented in detail previously. We neither propose a classical war with the armies of Islamic countries, nor do we propose throwing Jewish immigrants into the sea or intervention of the United Nations and other international organizations. We propose a referendum among the Palestinian people. Just like any other nation, the Palestinian nation has the right to determine its own destiny and to elect its own government. All the original people of Palestine - including Muslims, Christians and Jews and not foreign immigrants - should take part in a general and orderly referendum and determine the future government of Palestine whether they live inside Palestine or in camps or in any other place. The government that is established after the referendum will determine the destiny of non-Palestinian immigrants who migrated to Palestine in the past. This is a fair and logical proposal which global public opinion understands and it can receive support from independent nations and governments. Of course we do not expect the usurping Zionists to willingly accept this proposal and this is where the role of governments, nations and resistance organizations becomes significant. The most important pillar of supporting the Palestinian nation is to stop supporting the usurping enemy and this is the great duty of Islamic governments. After the people have stepped into the arena and shouted slogans against the Zionist regime in a powerful way, on what logical basis do Muslim governments continue their relations with the usurping Zionist regime? The proof of Muslim governments\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' honesty lies in their support for the Palestinian nation and in their decision to break off their overt and secret political and economic relations with the Zionist regime. The governments that host Zionist embassies or economic offices cannot claim to defend Palestine and no anti-Zionist slogan on their part will be considered serious and genuine. Today Islamic resistance organizations, which have been shouldering the heavy burden of jihad over the past years, are confronted with the same great responsibility. Their organized resistance is an active arm that can help the Palestinian nation move towards the ultimate goal. Brave resistance of the people whose homes and country have been occupied has been recognized in all international conventions and it has been praised. Allegations of terrorism by the political and media network affiliated with Zionism are hollow and worthless claims. The obvious terrorist is the Zionist regime and its western supporters. Palestinian resistance is a movement against the oppressive terrorists and it is a human and sacred movement. In the meantime, it is appropriate for western countries to evaluate the situation from a realistic perspective. Today the west is at a crossroads. It should either stop bullying and acknowledge the right of the Palestinian nation and refuse to follow the plan of the bullying and anti-human Zionists, or they should wait for stronger blows in the not so distant future. These crippling blows are not limited to the continual collapse of their puppet governments in the Islamic region. Rather the day when European and American peoples realize that the majority of their economic, social and ethical problems result from the octopus-like hegemony of international Zionism over their governments and that their statesmen give in to the bullying of parasitic Zionists who own companies in America and Europe for the sake of their personal and partisan interests, they will create a such hell for them in which no salvation will be imaginable. The US President says that Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s security is his red line. What factor has determined this red line? Is it the interests of the American nation or Obama\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s personal need for the money and support of Zionist companies to ensure his second term as US President? How long do you think you will be able to deceive your own nation? What will the American people do with you the day they realize you have agreed to give in to humiliation and obedience to wealthy Zionists for the sake of remaining in power for a few more days? What will they do with you when they realize that you have sacrificed the interests of a great nation at the feet of the Zionists? Dear brothers and sisters, know that this red line drawn by Obama and people like him will be crossed by Muslim nations that have risen up. What is threatening the Zionist regime is not the missiles of Iran or resistance groups, so they can build a missile shield here and there in order to confront it. The real and inescapable threat is the firm determination of men, women and youth in Islamic countries who do not want America, Europe and their puppets rulers, to dominate and humiliate them any longer. Of course those missiles will fulfill their duty whenever the enemy poses a threat. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Therefore, be patient. Surely the promise of Allah is true and let not those who have no certainty make you impatient.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, Sura ar-Room, Ayah 60] Wa salaam alaykum wa rahmat Allah http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1527

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful As-Salamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullah All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings upon our Master, Muhammad, and upon his immaculate household and chosen companions and upon those who follow them appropriately until the Day of Judgment. Allah the All-Wise said: \"Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed and most surely Allah is well able to assist them. Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause only because they say our Lord is Allah. And had there not been Allah\'s repelling some people by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which Allah\'s name is much remembered. And surely Allah will help him who helps His cause. Most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty.\" [The Holy Quran, Sura al-Hajj, Ayahs 39-40] I would like to welcome the all dear guests and the honorable audience. Among all the issues that deserve to be discussed by religious and political figures from across the world of Islam, the issue of Palestine enjoys special importance. Palestine is the primary issue among all common issues of Islamic countries. This issue has unique characteristics. The first characteristic is that a Muslim country has been taken away from its people and entrusted to foreigners who have come together from different countries and formed a fake and mosaic-like society. The second characteristic is that this historically unprecedented event has been accompanied by constant killings, crimes, oppression and humiliation. The third characteristic is that Muslims\' original qiblah and many respected religious centers which exist in that country have been threatened with destruction, sacrilege and decline. The fourth characteristic is that at the most sensitive spot of the world of Islam, this fake government and society has played the role of a military, security and political base for the arrogant governments since the beginning up until today. And the pivot of the colonialist west - which has been opposed to the unity, development and progress of Islamic countries for various reasons - has always used it like a dagger in the heart of the Islamic Ummah. The fifth characteristic is that Zionism - which is a great ethical, political and economic threat to the human community - has used this foothold as a tool and stepping stone to spread its influence and hegemony in the world. Other points that can be added include: heavy financial and human costs that Islamic countries have paid so far, preoccupation of Muslim governments and people, the sufferings of millions of displaced Palestinians many of whom still live in refugee camps after the passage of six decades and putting an end to the history of an important civilizational center in the world of Islam. Today another key point has been added to these causes and this key point is the wave of Islamic Awakening which has engulfed the entire region and has opened a new and determining chapter in the history of the Islamic Ummah. This massive movement - which can undoubtedly lead to a powerful, advanced and coherent Islamic alliance in this sensitive part of the world and can put an end to the era of backwardness, weakness and humiliation of Muslim nations relying on Allah\'s favor and the firm determination of the followers of this movement - has borrowed an important portion of its force and courage from the issue of Palestine. The Zionist regime\'s increasing oppression and bullying and the cooperation of certain autocratic, corrupt and mercenary rulers on the one hand and the spirited Palestinian and Lebanese resistance and the miraculous victories of faithful youth in the 33-day war on Lebanon and in the 22-day war on Gaza on the other hand - were among the important factors which made turbulent the seemingly calm ocean of the Egyptian, Tunisian and Libyan nations as well as other regional nations. It is a fact that the Zionist regime, which is armed to the teeth and claims to be invincible, suffered a decisive and humiliating defeat in Lebanon during an unequal war against the clenched fist of faithful and brave mujahids. Later on it re-tested its blunt sword against the innocent and determined resistance of Gaza and it failed. Serious attention should be paid to these points when analyzing current conditions of the region and the appropriateness of every decision should be evaluated against these points. Therefore, it is an accurate judgment to say that today the issue of Palestine has gained increased importance and urgency and the Palestinian nation has the right to expect more from Muslims countries in the current regional conditions. Let us take a look at the past and the present and prepare a road map for the future. I will discuss certain topics in this regard. More than six decades have passed since the tragic occupation of Palestine. All the main causes of this bloody tragedy have been identified and the colonialist English government is the most important cause. The policies, weapons and military, security, economic and cultural power of the English government and other arrogant western and eastern governments were put to the service of this great oppression. Under the ruthless clutches of the occupiers, the defenseless people of Palestine were massacred and forced out of their homes. Until today even one percent of the human and civil tragedy - which was carried out at that time by the claimants of civilization and ethics - has not been properly portrayed and this tragedy has not had its fair share in the media and visual arts. The owners of visual and cinematic arts and western movie mafias have not been willing to allow this to happen. An entire nation was massacred and displaced in silence. Certain instances of resistance emerged at the beginning, which were harshly and ruthlessly crushed. From outside Palestinian borders and mainly from Egypt, a number of men with Islamic motives made certain efforts which were not sufficiently supported and could not have an effect on the scene. Afterwards there were full-scale and classical wars between a few Arab countries and the Zionist army. Egypt, Syria and Jordan mobilized their military forces, but the unconditional, massive and increasing military and financial support of America, England and France for the Zionist regime overwhelmed Arab armies. Not only did they fail to help the Palestinian nation, but they also lost an important portion of their territories during these wars. After the weakness of Palestine\'s Arab neighbors was revealed, cells of organized resistance were gradually established in the form of armed Palestinian groups and after a while they came together to form the Palestinian Liberation Organization. This was a spark of hope which shone brightly, but it did not last long. This failure can be attributed to many factors, but the essential factor was their separation from the people and from their Islamic beliefs and faith. Leftist ideology or mere nationalistic sentiments were not what the complicated and difficult issue of Palestine required. Islam, jihad and martyrdom were the factors that could have encouraged an entire nation to step into the arena of resistance and turned it into an invincible force. They did not understand this properly. During the first few months of the great Islamic Revolution, when the leaders of the Palestinian Liberation Organization had found a new spirit and they used to visit Tehran repeatedly, I asked a pillar of the organization why they did not raise the flag of Islam in their righteous battle. His answer was that there were a number of Christians among them as well. Later on that person was assassinated by the Zionists in an Arab country and I hope Allah the Exalted has bestowed mercy on him. But his reasoning was flawed. I believe a faithful Christian who fights alongside a group of selfless mujahids - who carry out jihad in a sincere way while having faith in God, the Day of Judgment and divine assistance - would be more motivated to fight than a Christian who has to fight alongside a group of people who lack faith, rely on unstable sentiments and lack loyal support of the people. Lack of firm faith and separation from the people gradually made them neutral and ineffective. Of course there were honorable, motivated and valorous men among them, but the organization went off in a different direction. Their deviation has been a blow to the issue of Palestine. Like certain treacherous Arab governments, they too turned their back on the ideal of resistance which has been the only way of saving Palestine. And of course not only did they deliver a blow to Palestine, but they also delivered a strong blow to themselves. As the Christian Arab poet says, لئن اضعتم فلسطيناً فعيشكم طول الحياة مضاضات و آلامٌ Thirty two years were spent in this misery, but suddenly God\'s hand of power turned the tables. The victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in the year 1979 completely changed the conditions of this region and turned a new page. Among the amazing global effects of this Revolution and the strong blows that it delivered to arrogant policies, the blow to the Zionist government was the clearest and the most immediate. The statements of the leaders of that regime during those days are interesting to read and they show how unhappy and anxious they were. During the first few weeks after the victory, Israel\'s embassy in Tehran was closed down and its staff was expelled. The embassy was officially given to the Palestinian Liberation Organization whose representatives are still there. Our magnanimous Imam announced that one of the goals of the Revolution was to liberate Palestine and to remove the cancerous tumor, Israel. The powerful waves of this Revolution, which engulfed the entire world at that time, conveyed this message wherever it reached: \"Palestine must be liberated.\" Even the repeated and great problems that the enemies of the Revolution imposed on the Islamic Republic of Iran failed to discourage the Islamic Republic from defending Palestine. One instance of the problems that they caused was the eight-year war waged on Iran by Saddam Hussein who had been goaded by America and England and was supported by reactionary Arab governments. Thus, new blood was pumped into the veins of Palestine. Muslim mujahid groups started to emerge in Palestine. The Lebanese Resistance formed a powerful and new front against the enemy and its supporters. Instead of relying on Arab governments and seeking help from global organizations such as the United Nations, which were accomplices of the arrogant powers, Palestine started to rely on itself, its youth, its deep Islamic faith and its selfless men and women. This is the key to all achievements. Over the past three decades this process has been accelerated on a daily basis. The humiliating defeat of the Zionist regime in Lebanon in the year 2006, the humiliating failure of the arrogant Zionist army in Gaza in the year 2008, the Zionist regime\'s escape from South Lebanon and withdrawal from Gaza, the establishment of the resistance government in Gaza and in brief, changing the Palestinian nation from a group of helpless and hopeless people to a hopeful, resistant and self-confident nation - these were the outstanding characteristics of the past thirty years. This general picture will be clear when attempts at compromise and treacherous activities - whose goal is to break down resistance and make Palestinian groups and Arab governments acknowledge the legitimacy of Israel - are also reflected upon in an appropriate way. These activities, which were initiated with the Camp David Accords by the treacherous and unworthy successor of Gamal Abdel Nasser, have always been aimed at undermining the steely determination of resistance forces. During the Camp David Accords, for the first time an Arab government officially acknowledged that the Palestinian lands belonged to the Zionists and it signed the papers according to which Palestine was recognized as the homeland of Jews. From that time until the Oslo Accords in the year 1993 and later on in complementary plans - which were imposed one after the other on compromising and careless Palestinian groups with the intervention of America and the cooperation of colonialist European governments - the enemy tried its best to discourage the Palestinian nation and Palestinian groups from resisting through the use of empty and deceptive promises and making them busy with amateur political games. The uselessness of all these accords was revealed very soon and the Zionists and their supporters repeatedly showed that they consider these accords as worthless pieces of paper. The goal of these plans was to create doubt among the Palestinians, make materialistic unbelievers greedy and cripple Islamic resistance. So far, the spirit of resistance among the Islamic Palestinian groups and the Palestinian people has been the antidote to all these treacherous games. They stood up against the enemy with Allah\'s permission and as promised by God, they benefited from divine assistance: \"And surely Allah will help him who helps His cause. Most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty.\" [The Holy Quran, Sura al-Hajj, Ayah 40] The resistance of Gaza in spite of a comprehensive siege was an instance of divine assistance. The collapse of the treacherous and corrupt government of Hosni Mubarak was divine assistance. The emergence of the powerful wave of Islamic Awakening in the region is divine assistance. The removal of the mask of hypocrisy from the face of America, England and France and the increasing hatred of the regional nations towards these countries are divine assistance. The repeated and innumerable problems of the Zionist regime - from its domestic political, economic and social problems to its isolation in the world, to public and even academic hatred of the Zionists in Europe - are all instances of divine assistance. Today the Zionist regime is weaker, more hated and more isolated than ever before and its main supporter, America, is more embattled and confused than ever before. Today the general history of Palestine in the past 60 years is in front of our eyes. It is necessary to delineate the future by considering that general history and learning lessons from it. Two points should be clarified in advance. The first point is that our demand is the liberation of Palestine, not the liberation of a part of Palestine. Any plan to divide Palestine is completely unacceptable. The two-state idea which has been presented in the self-righteous clothing of \"recognizing the Palestinian government as a member of the United Nations\" is nothing but giving in to the demands of the Zionists - namely, \"recognizing the Zionist government in Palestinian lands\". This would mean trampling on the rights of the Palestinian nation, ignoring the historical right of the displaced Palestinians and even jeopardizing the right of the Palestinians settled in \"1948 lands\". It would mean leaving the cancerous tumor intact and exposing the Islamic Ummah - especially the regional nations - to constant danger. It would mean bringing back decades-long sufferings and trampling upon the blood of the martyrs. Any operational solution must be based on the principle of \"all of Palestine for all Palestinian people\". Palestine is the land that extends \"from the river to the sea\", not one inch less than that. Of course it should be noted that through its elected government, the Palestinian people will run the affairs of the any part of the Palestinian soil they manage to liberate, just as they did in the case of Gaza, but they will never forget the ultimate goal. The second point is that in order to reach this lofty goal, what is necessary is action, not words. It is necessary to be serious, not to make ceremonial gestures. It is necessary to have patience and wisdom, not engage in a variety of impatient actions. It is necessary to consider horizons that lie far ahead and to move forward step by step with determination, reliance on God and hope. Muslim governments and nations and the resistance groups in Palestine, Lebanon and other countries can each identify their share of work in this general struggle and solve the puzzle of resistance with Allah\'s permission. The solution of the Islamic Republic to the issue of Palestine and this old wound is a clear and logical proposal that is based on political wisdom accepted by global public opinion and it has been presented in detail previously. We neither propose a classical war with the armies of Islamic countries, nor do we propose throwing Jewish immigrants into the sea or intervention of the United Nations and other international organizations. We propose a referendum among the Palestinian people. Just like any other nation, the Palestinian nation has the right to determine its own destiny and to elect its own government. All the original people of Palestine - including Muslims, Christians and Jews and not foreign immigrants - should take part in a general and orderly referendum and determine the future government of Palestine whether they live inside Palestine or in camps or in any other place. The government that is established after the referendum will determine the destiny of non-Palestinian immigrants who migrated to Palestine in the past. This is a fair and logical proposal which global public opinion understands and it can receive support from independent nations and governments. Of course we do not expect the usurping Zionists to willingly accept this proposal and this is where the role of governments, nations and resistance organizations becomes significant. The most important pillar of supporting the Palestinian nation is to stop supporting the usurping enemy and this is the great duty of Islamic governments. After the people have stepped into the arena and shouted slogans against the Zionist regime in a powerful way, on what logical basis do Muslim governments continue their relations with the usurping Zionist regime? The proof of Muslim governments\' honesty lies in their support for the Palestinian nation and in their decision to break off their overt and secret political and economic relations with the Zionist regime. The governments that host Zionist embassies or economic offices cannot claim to defend Palestine and no anti-Zionist slogan on their part will be considered serious and genuine. Today Islamic resistance organizations, which have been shouldering the heavy burden of jihad over the past years, are confronted with the same great responsibility. Their organized resistance is an active arm that can help the Palestinian nation move towards the ultimate goal. Brave resistance of the people whose homes and country have been occupied has been recognized in all international conventions and it has been praised. Allegations of terrorism by the political and media network affiliated with Zionism are hollow and worthless claims. The obvious terrorist is the Zionist regime and its western supporters. Palestinian resistance is a movement against the oppressive terrorists and it is a human and sacred movement. In the meantime, it is appropriate for western countries to evaluate the situation from a realistic perspective. Today the west is at a crossroads. It should either stop bullying and acknowledge the right of the Palestinian nation and refuse to follow the plan of the bullying and anti-human Zionists, or they should wait for stronger blows in the not so distant future. These crippling blows are not limited to the continual collapse of their puppet governments in the Islamic region. Rather the day when European and American peoples realize that the majority of their economic, social and ethical problems result from the octopus-like hegemony of international Zionism over their governments and that their statesmen give in to the bullying of parasitic Zionists who own companies in America and Europe for the sake of their personal and partisan interests, they will create a such hell for them in which no salvation will be imaginable. The US President says that Israel\'s security is his red line. What factor has determined this red line? Is it the interests of the American nation or Obama\'s personal need for the money and support of Zionist companies to ensure his second term as US President? How long do you think you will be able to deceive your own nation? What will the American people do with you the day they realize you have agreed to give in to humiliation and obedience to wealthy Zionists for the sake of remaining in power for a few more days? What will they do with you when they realize that you have sacrificed the interests of a great nation at the feet of the Zionists? Dear brothers and sisters, know that this red line drawn by Obama and people like him will be crossed by Muslim nations that have risen up. What is threatening the Zionist regime is not the missiles of Iran or resistance groups, so they can build a missile shield here and there in order to confront it. The real and inescapable threat is the firm determination of men, women and youth in Islamic countries who do not want America, Europe and their puppets rulers, to dominate and humiliate them any longer. Of course those missiles will fulfill their duty whenever the enemy poses a threat. \"Therefore, be patient. Surely the promise of Allah is true and let not those who have no certainty make you impatient.\" [The Holy Quran, Sura ar-Room, Ayah 60] Wa salaam alaykum wa rahmat Allah http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1527

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.

Tehran says the efforts of the countries trying to implement an Iranophobia project are falling flat, and those who are trying to present a bad image of Iran to attain their illegitimate goals are really worried now after the nuclear deal. In an interview on Iranian television, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said the world needs to take a more realistic view of Iran and understand that it is not seeking nuclear weapons. He added that the only thing that Iranians want is respect. Zarif said Iranians will never tolerate receiving orders from others and will never let others decide for them. Zarif also noted that the people of Iran cannot accept that the Israeli regime, which itself possesses nuclear weapons, calls itself the standard-bearer of the non-proliferation campaign.

Iran and the P5+1 resume nuclear talks some three months after reaching an interim deal. Iran says the dismantling of its nuclear facilities is not on the agenda. Just a few days ago, the country\'s leader, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei said he was \"not optimistic\" about the negotiations but would not oppose them. Does Iran have good reasons to distrust the US? Is a final agreement within reach? I\'m Homa Lezgee and you\'re watching the Debate. Guests: -Press TV Newsroom Director, Hamid Reza Emadi (Tehran). - American Institute for Foreign Policy, Michael Linn (Washington). Subjects: 1) In Geneva both parties agreed that \"the Iranian nuclear program will be treated in the same manner as that of any non-nuclear weapon state party to the non-proliferation treaty\". Yet Wendy Sherman, the US nuclear negotiator, told Congress she believes that Iran has no need for either a heavy water reactor or the second enrichment facilities in Fordo. She added that Iran should give up some centrifuges. All these demands go beyond the requirements of the NPT. How do you explain the duplicity? 2) Iran has announced it won\'t suspend activities in the Arak heavy water reactor, will not reduce the number of its centrifuges or stop RD-related projects...so is there going to be major disagreements about the agenda of the talks? 3) American insistence on \"zero enrichment in Iran\" is one reason for the failure of past talks. Last November\'s deal was only possible because the US was prepared to be more realistic. 4) Measures that go beyond the NPT may be required for a time to build confidence. 5) As long as the US keeps repeating its threat that \"all options are on the table\", including military action, compromise seems uncertain... 6) What is a compromise? Iran will probably have to accept temporary limitations on its nuclear program and submit to extra inspections. In return, world powers must respect the country\'s right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology, including enrichment. 7) How do you interpret the recent remarks by Iran\'s leader that he is \"not optimistic\" about the negotiations? Does Tehran have good reasons to distrust the US? 8) Is a final agreement within reach?

[17 June 2014] Iran upbeat draft document can be produced by end of talks - English

Prophet Joseph is a Persian-language mini-series originally broadcast in 2008, which tells the story of prophet Yusuf (or Joseph) according to the Islamic tradition. Realistic depictions of everyday life are represented. Each episode in the series begins with a poly-phonic recitation of the first four verses (ayah) of the chapter (surah) on Yusuf. The 45 episodes of the series are replete with themes on filial love, personal journey through life (within family and on one\'s own), personal character, submission, prayer, prophethood, idolatry, monotheism, loyalty, betrayal, carnal desires, nature of various kinds of love, separation, abandonment, slavery, social organisations at various levels, nature of political authority, governance, strategy, various ideologies (and their implications), anticipation, and finally, forgiveness and salvation. The movie meanders through the existential lives of three principal characters (Yusuf, Zuleikha and Ya\'qub) with dozens of other major and minor characters. The story in the series starts in the south of Babylon, in the second millennium BC, depicting Ya\'qub\'s battle against idolatry (of Ishtar) in Mesopotamia and the miraculous birth of Yusuf