Search Result in All

[14 April 2013] Kashmir sitting on a ticking cancer bomb - English

This session: - Sitting etiquettes - Sitting while facing the Qibla - Sitting with manners and respect - Outstretching legs - Sunnah of Holy Prophet Hujjatul Islam Haq Panah is a Howza teacher in Qom, Iran.

Kids Cartoon - POCOYO - Baby Bird Sitting - English

This session: - Drinking water while standing - Drinking water while sitting - Gulping water in one go - Seerah of Prophet - Bismillah & Alhamdolillah - Drinking with Right hand Hujjatul Islam Haq Panah is a Howza teacher in Qom, Iran.

Etiquettes of Masjid 5 | Islamic Etiquettes (Adaab) Series This session: - Frequently attending the masjid - Worldly talk in the masjid - Religious talk in the masjid - Political talk in the masjid - Sitting in the masjid awainting namaaz - What nullifies the worship? Hujjatul Islam Haq Panah is a Howza teacher in Qom, Iran.

Another tense day here in the old city of East Jerusalem Al Quds. While on our way to meet with the family of 16 year old Hasan Afifi who was arrested on Friday and brutally assaulted by Israeli police, we saw a group of Palestinian men sitting just outside one of the gates leading to the al-Aqsa Mosque compound. The group of men had just been denied entry to the Mosque by the Israeli police. While filming, Israeli police came up to us and instructed us not to film. Reluctantly we moved away few meters and took another position. Minutes after we spotted two under cover police men getting tipped off by the same policemen we encountered few minutes earlier. The following images speak for themselves. The two under cover policemen walked towards the group men and uttered few words: why are you sitting here? immediately tempers flared and they approached one of the men and snatched him. There was no provocation from the side of the Palestinian men.

Peace be upon you. Oh daughter of the Commander of the faithful a.s. Peace be upon you Oh daughter of Fatima a.s. Two Worlds Radiant Lady s.a. Peace be upon you. We speak of Hazrat Zainab s.a. She well conveyed the message of Karbala s uprising and tragedy to the world and today it is a great honor for Muslims to follow this great lady as an example in their lives. Truly when an individual spends his or her life in support of truth and establishment of divine values - his or her name will remain eternal in history and his or her lifestyle will inspire the future generations. That is why the name of Zainab s.a. and her lifestyle has influenced many people - even non Muslims. Ms. Carin from Germany - after embracing Islam - chose Zainab s.a. as her first name. Regarding her incentive in choosing this name she says - I was always interested in the life story of the holy Prophet of Islam s.a.w.a.w and his household. I was specially affected by the story of uprising of Imam Hussein a.s. in Karbala and the personality of Hazrat Zainab s.a. in the events of Karbala. The self-sacrifices of that great lady while bearing the heavy grief of martyrdom of her brother and other companions are praiseworthy. Hazrat Zainab s.a. was a lady of knowledge virtue bravery and patience.These characteristics helped her carry out her mission in Karbala uprising in the company of Imam Hussein a.s. Hazrat Zainab s lifestyle contains instructive points for me and whenever I come across a problem I immediately remember Her. For her name brings me tranquility. That is why I adopted the name of Zainab after embracing Islam. Hazrat Zainab s.a. was brought up under instructions of a father like Imam Ali a.s. and a mother like Fatema s.a. and she benefited greatly from these two personalities. Historians say Hazrat Zainab inherited bravery honesty and fluency in speech from her father Imam Ali a.s. and kindness and loyalty from her mother Hazrat Fatema s.a. She made great efforts in giving religious training to the women of her time and thus many women at that time benefited from Hazrat Zainab s knowledge and teachings. Hazrat Zainab s.a. spent her fruitful life in promoting monotheism and assuming divine responsibilities and her heroic participation in the greatest epic of history - namely the uprising of Imam Hussein a.s. in Karbala brought her a lasting name. You wont find a single person who is familiar with Karbala tragedy and has not heard of Hazrat Zainab s.a. Zainab s.a. conveyed the message of Imam Hussein s uprising to territories beyond Karbala desert. She encouraged the warriors and sympathized with the injured. She was so bound to the fulfillment of her religious obligations that even at those critical conditions she did not forget to say her prayers at night. Imam Sajjad a.s. says - I saw my aunt Hazrat Zainab s.a. saying her prayers while sitting. A major part of Hazrat Zainab s mission started when Karbala tragedy apparently ended with the martyrdom of Imam Hussein a.s. This chapter of Hazrat Zainab s life began with conveying the message of Ashura in which she heroically defended the rights of the household - ahlul bait - and did not permit the enemies to take advantage of Karbala tragedy. In this tragedy the Omayyud ruler Yazid l.a. and his followers l.a. thought that they had succeeded in creating a negative image of the holy Prophet s household but when the caravan of the household members now in captivity arrived in Kufa - Hazrat Zainab s.a. behaved in such a way that she managed to turn the so-called victory of the Omayyud into a defeat. In her famous address She changed the mentality of the people of Kufa and Damascus. She symbolized a shining sun who reflected light into everything. Although Hazrat Zainab s.a. did not live long after Karbala tragedy she sowed the seeds of awareness in the entire Islamic society. This great lady passed away in 62 AH after she made lots of efforts in the path of truth. Once again we offer our condolences and bring you an excerpt from her historic statement addressed to Yazid. She says - O Yazid practice any trick you can and do anything that you think would vanish Islam. But you should know that you can not eradicate our message our path and our remembrance. You should know that our remembrance will never die. MAY OUR LIVES BE SACRIFICED FOR HAZRAT ZAINAB s.a.

learn how to load text from a text file sitting on a web server and display it in flash using dynamic text and actionscript. We will also learn how to load .jpg .gif .png and .swf files using actionscript. All of the files loaded into our flash movie will be loaded from an external web server. Actionscript 2.0 is the actionscript version used in this video.

Iraqi Journalist Throws Shoes At George Bush AT the press conference on 14th dec 2008. The journalist says in Arabic - It is the farewell kiss you dog A journalist has thrown a pair of shoes at George W. Bush, as the President arrived in Baghdad on an unannounced farewell visit to Iraq. The Iraqi journalist threw the shoes, when the US president was shaking hands with the Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Maliki in his office in Baghdad on Sunday, AFP reported. The Iraqi who was sitting in the third row 'jumped up' shouting "It is the farewell kiss, you dog," the report says. He then threw his shoes one after the other towards Bush. The president was reportedly not hurt, as the shoes did not hit him. Iraqi security staff 'frogmarched' the journalist out. Bush arrived in Baghdad on Sunday on what has been called a farewell trip to a country which has cost the US thousands of military servicemen and billions of dollars. Five years of invasion has killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, while according to Human Rights Watch during the deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's reign, 250,000 to 290,000 people were killed over 20 years.

You have to respect this mans restraint. With nearly 1000000 Iraqis dead as a result of Georges war flying shoes are practically flowers and candy. A journalist has thrown a pair of shoes at George W. Bush, as the President arrived in Baghdad on an unannounced farewell visit to Iraq. The Iraqi journalist threw the shoes, when the US president was shaking hands with the Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Maliki in his office in Baghdad on Sunday, AFP reported. The Iraqi who was sitting in the third row 'jumped up' shouting "It is the farewell kiss, you dog," the report says. He then threw his shoes one after the other towards Bush. The president was reportedly not hurt, as the shoes did not hit him. Iraqi security staff 'frogmarched' the journalist out. Bush arrived in Baghdad on Sunday on what has been called a farewell trip to a country which has cost the US thousands of military servicemen and billions of dollars. Five years of invasion has killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, while according to Human Rights Watch during the deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's reign, 250,000 to 290,000 people were killed over 20 years.

Father and son are sitting on a bench. Suddenly a sparrow lands across them.

Clear View of wall of Kaba which was broken at time of Birth of Harat Ali AS and could not constructed as normal as the other walls of Kaba till todate. When the construction is made, it again breaks from this place of Birth of Ali. Its is Allah's Miracle and will be the same forever. Latest Captured During Hajj 2009. Hazrat Ali (A.S,) was born in Makkah on Friday, the 13th day of Rajab, 600 A.D. he (A.S.) is the only unique personality in the world who was born in the Holy Kaaba and was martyred in the Mosque. Both the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.W) and Hazrat Ali (A.S.) belonged to the same clan Bani Hashim. When the time of Ali's birth approached, his mother, Fatima Bint Asad, was asked to enter the Ka'ba. She was explicitly called to enter the Ka'ba, the door of which was locked. She went to the Masjidu'l-Haram. She prayed to Allah in the precinct of the Ka'ba and suddenly the wall of the Ka'ba, which was locked, opened. Another report says that a voice was heard saying: "O Fatima! Enter the House." Fatima went into the House of Allah in front of a crowd of people who were sitting round that place and the wall returned to its original condition. The people were greatly astonished. Abbas was also there. When he saw what had happened, he immediately told Abu Talib because he had the key to the door. He instantly came there and tried his best to unlock the door, but the door did not open. For three days Fatima Bint Asad remained inside the Ka'ba, apparently without sustenance of any kind. This unusual event was the talk of the town. At last, on the third day, the passage through which she had entered again opened, and Fatima came out. The people saw that she had in her hands a lovely child. Both sects (Shias and Sunnis) agree that no one else had ever been given such distinction. The first face that little Ali (A.S.) saw in this world was the smiling face of the Apostle of Allah, Muhammad (S.A.W.), whom he greeted thus: "Assalaamo alaika ya Rasoolallah (Peace be upon thee O Prophet of Allah). Muhammad (S.A.W.) lovingly took him into his arms. The child accepted no other food other than the moisture of Muhammad's tongue, which he sucked for several days after his birth.

Clear View of wall of Kaba which was broken at time of Birth of Harat Ali AS and could not constructed as normal as the other walls of Kaba till todate. When the construction is made, it again breaks from this place of Birth of Ali. Its is Allah's Miracle and will be the same forever. Latest Captured During Hajj 2009. Hazrat Ali (A.S,) was born in Makkah on Friday, the 13th day of Rajab, 600 A.D. he (A.S.) is the only unique personality in the world who was born in the Holy Kaaba and was martyred in the Mosque. Both the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.W) and Hazrat Ali (A.S.) belonged to the same clan Bani Hashim. When the time of Ali's birth approached, his mother, Fatima Bint Asad, was asked to enter the Ka'ba. She was explicitly called to enter the Ka'ba, the door of which was locked. She went to the Masjidu'l-Haram. She prayed to Allah in the precinct of the Ka'ba and suddenly the wall of the Ka'ba, which was locked, opened. Another report says that a voice was heard saying: "O Fatima! Enter the House." Fatima went into the House of Allah in front of a crowd of people who were sitting round that place and the wall returned to its original condition. The people were greatly astonished. Abbas was also there. When he saw what had happened, he immediately told Abu Talib because he had the key to the door. He instantly came there and tried his best to unlock the door, but the door did not open. For three days Fatima Bint Asad remained inside the Ka'ba, apparently without sustenance of any kind. This unusual event was the talk of the town. At last, on the third day, the passage through which she had entered again opened, and Fatima came out. The people saw that she had in her hands a lovely child. Both sects (Shias and Sunnis) agree that no one else had ever been given such distinction. The first face that little Ali (A.S.) saw in this world was the smiling face of the Apostle of Allah, Muhammad (S.A.W.), whom he greeted thus: "Assalaamo alaika ya Rasoolallah (Peace be upon thee O Prophet of Allah). Muhammad (S.A.W.) lovingly took him into his arms. The child accepted no other food other than the moisture of Muhammad's tongue, which he sucked for several days after his birth.

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

More than one hundred thousand people marched through the streets of Islambad on the martyrdom anniversary of Allama Shaheed Arif Hussaini. This video footage shows the enthusiasm among the participants of the rally. Contains an excerpt from speech by Moulana Hasan Zafar to the masses sitting in front of Parliament House.

ISO Dharna in front of CM House in Karachi to protest against recent Blasts and Arrest

Rabbi slammed for promoting 'genocide' The chief Palestinian negotiator has urged worldwide condemnation of Israel's genocidal figures after a top Israeli clergyman wished all Palestinians dead. Referring to the Palestinians, the founder and spiritual leader of Israel's ultra-orthodox Shas party, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef said on Saturday, "All these evil people should perish from this world," Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz reported. He especially desired the demise of acting Palestinian Authority (PA) Chief Mahmoud Abbas, referring to him by name. The remarks raised eyebrows partially as it came from a party partnering with Premier Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud in the ruling coalition. They also preceded upcoming direct peace talks between Israel and the PA. The Palestinian official, Saeb Erekat, called on the international community "to condemn incitement to genocide by public figures in Israel," AFP reported. Yosef "is literally calling for a genocide against Palestinians, and there seems to be no response from the Israeli government," he said in a statement. "He is particularly calling for the assassination of...Abbas who within a few days will be sitting face to face with Prime Minister Netanyahu. Is this how the Israeli government prepares its public for a peace agreement?" Erekat pointed out. He said Tel Aviv had "to do more about peace and stop spreading hatred." The Shas spiritual leader made similar comments in April 2001, calling for the annihilation of Arabs.

آقام ..آقام ..آقام ..آقام My Lord.... My Lord... تو مدينه مهمون فاطمه اي ؟ You are Fatima(a.s) guest In Medina? يا كه امشب زائر علقمه اي ؟ Or you are pilgrim of Alqame tonight? يا نشسته اي كنار قبر حسين Or you're sitting beside Imam Hossein(a.s)'s tomb (grave)? تو وجودم نوحه و زمزمه اي You are mourn(Noha) and hum in my heart. شايد امشب رفتي به شهر دمشق Maybe you went to Damascus به زيارت زينب بانوي عشق making pilgrimage to Zaynab(a.s), Lady of love تو كه امشب تو اون حرم رفتي You went to that sanctuary (haram) به عيادت رقيه هم رفتي ؟ Did you visit Ruqayyah(a.s) (making pilgrimage to her tomb) تو بگو امشب و كجا رفتي ؟ Tell me where did you go tonight? به نجف يا به سامرا رفتي ؟ Did you go to Najaf or Samarra? يا كه رفتي به روضه اي غمگين ؟ Ya ke rafti be rowzei ghamgin? تو بقيع با صداي ام بنين In Baqi' with voice(her mourning) of Umm Banin(a.s)?

Here it is, finally creating a tutorial with a little foresight as far as using what we make here for many other tutorials. We will create a simple metal type panel with these six thumbnails sitting on it. Using CSS to style the panel and the thumbnails we are able to create a really nice clean effect as well as giving out thumbnails rollovers and all of this is done very easily and is also super easy to update! Check it out, follow along using the files at the site!

Two US police officers have been ordered to stand trial in the death of a mentally ill homeless man following a violent arrest last summer. California's Orange County Superior Court Judge Walter Schwarm made the ruling after a hearing that included surveillance video of the confrontation between the officers and 37-year-old Kelly Thomas in the city of Fullerton. Officer Manuel Ramos is charged with second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter. Jay Cicinelli is charged with involuntary manslaughter and assault or battery by a public officer. Both have pleaded not guilty. The officers confronted Thomas while responding to reports that a homeless man was looking into parked cars at a transit center. "This is another victory, on another battle," said Thomas' father, Ron. "We're going to start a new one with the trial." John Barnett, Ramos' attorney, said he would seek another court's review of Schwarm's ruling and did not expect his client would end up facing a jury trial. "We're disappointed that they were held to answer but we will seek review in an appropriate manner," he told reporters after the ruling. "He believes, and he is innocent." Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas said during the hearing that Ramos bullied a shirtless Thomas with his menacing remarks and aggressive stance — actions that would have led anyone to fear they were about to get beaten by police. "Any person, any creature on this earth would have fear at that point," Rackauckas told the court during the preliminary hearing. "You're going to fight or flee because this is an imminent threat of a serious beating by a police officer who is there with a baton and a gun and other police officers.... This is going to be a very bad deal," the prosecutor said. Defence attorneys countered that police — who are authorised and trained to use force when necessary — viewed the incident as an encounter with a man who refused to give his name and continued to resist arrest even as multiple officers rushed to assist. The three-day hearing was marked by repeated showing of clips from surveillance video and audio recordings of the confrontation. The footage includes scenes of officers pummelling and pinning down Thomas as he screams that he can't breathe and moans for his father until he goes silent and is taken away by medics, leaving behind a pool of blood. Barnett, Ramos' attorney, said during the hearing that the video — which was introduced by the prosecution — shows that his client made a conditional threat during his conversation with Thomas, stating he wanted the man to start listening and following police orders, such as sitting with his legs stretched out and providing his name to officers. "All that Kelly Thomas had to do was simply comply," Barnett said. "Officer Ramos just lifts him up, he's going to arrest him. ... Not only can he do it, he must do it. He is bound to do it." "Officer Ramos didn't do anything that should or could kill Kelly Thomas," Barnett said, pointing out that his client is often seen on the video at the man's feet. Prosecutors have argued that Ramos punched Thomas in the ribs, tackled him and lay on him to hold him down while Cicinelli — who arrived later on the scene — used a Taser four times on Thomas as he hollered in pain and hit him in the face eight times with the Taser. Thomas lost consciousness and was taken to a hospital. He was taken off life support and died five days later. The coroner's office found that Thomas died from compression of his chest that made it difficult for him to breathe and deprived his brain of oxygen, and facial injuries stemming from his confrontation with law enforcement. In court, Schwartz, Cicinelli's attorney, challenged those findings, noting that testimony by a paramedic who treated Thomas at the scene indicates that Thomas was breathing, although with difficulty, during the confrontation. Schwartz also defended his client's use of the Taser on Thomas, who was still struggling and resisting officers' efforts to handcuff him, and said Cicinelli only swung the Taser at Thomas' hand when the man made an effort to grab the weapon. "To call that a crime is to effectively handcuff our police officers out in the field from dealing with any combative suspect," Schwartz said. The hearing in a Santa Ana courtroom was marked by lengthy testimony from medical experts and graphic photos of Thomas' injuries, including multiple bruises and a bloodied eye, while he was lying on the autopsy table. Attorneys repeatedly played portions of the grainy surveillance video, which was paired with audio from digital recorders worn by some of the officers who were present and which brought some of Thomas' supporters to tears and prompted them to leave the courtroom. The incident last July prompted an ongoing FBI investigation to determine if Thomas' civil rights were violated, an internal probe by the city, protests by residents and an effort to recall three Fullerton councilmembers that is slated for next month's ballot. The recall was sparked after angry residents chastised the council members for failing to take significant action regarding the incident.

[10 Aug 2012] Syrian army cleans Allepo main parts from armed groups - English It's our second visit to Salah Eldien. Syrian army has restored order here. Foreign backed armed groups have declared a tactical withdrawn blaming it on their sponsoring countries for shortage of weapons, manpower and ammunition. But there is something different in this visit. We didn't have to hide from snipers. We didn't have to run from wall to wall trying to avoid someone sitting a kilometer away trying to kill anything that moves.

An analyst says the \'racist and unjustifiable\' US stance of not accepting Palestine as a legitimate body must be condemned as the Palestinians are the internationally acknowledged real owners of Palestine. The comment comes as the United States has objected to the presence of a senior Palestinian official sitting behind a nameplate that read \'State of Palestine\' at the United Nations Security Council. Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the UN, expressed Washington\'s disapproval of the latest move by Palestinians to capitalize on their upgraded UN status as Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riad al-Malki spoke at the Security Council on Wednesday. It was the first Palestinian address to the Council since the UN General Assembly voted to upgrade the status of Palestine to non-member observer state on November 29, 2012. Press TV has conducted an interview with Kamel Wazni, political commentator in Beirut to further discuss the issue.

It is a nice day and Pingu is out riding his brand new blue scooter. Circling overhead is a Seagull. It squawks, and Pingu hoots back and waves to it. The Seagull then defecates on the scooter, rather annoying Pingu. Pingu goes indoors, cleans up the scooter and puts a cover over it. He then goes outside again. The Seagull is now sitting on top of the igloo, and squawks when it sees Pingu. Pingu makes a snowball and throws it at the Seagull. The snowball narrowly misses as the Seagull takes off. The Seagull retaliates by defecating on Pingu\'s right foot. Pingu cleans himself off, and then spots that the Seagull has landed on the ice nearby. He tries to grab it, but it takes off and flies out of reach. The Seagull lands again, and Pingu has another attempt at grabbing it, but this try also fails. The Seagull lands for a third time, but this time Pingu sneaks up on it from behind and succeeds in getting hold of its legs. The Seagull tries to fly away, and eventually Pingu has to let go. The Seagull circles around, and defecates on Pingu again, this time on his right shoulder. The Seagull then lands to have a drink from a nearby ice hole and is grabbed on the beak by a lobster, which won\'t let go. After initially being amused, Pingu takes pity on the Seagull and tugs the lobster off. The lobster turns on Pingu and follows him into the igloo. Pingu eventually chases the lobster away and back into the pool by banging some pan lids. He pets the Seagull, and just when he thinks he\'s made friends with it, it flies away and defecates on him yet again, right on the top of his head, he shouts at the seagull as it flies away. He goes inside and tells Mother all about it when he\'s been plagued, and she washes his head clean.

Robby, who has a proper curling stone, invites Pingu to have a game with him. Pingu doesn\'t have a curling stone, so he gets his hot water bottle to use instead, which Mother is using while she is asleep, he sneaks up trying to not wake up Mother and gets the bottle successfully. On their first go, Robby gets his the farthest, on the second Robby again gets his the farthest, but both finish up near a neighbour who is sitting on an ice block reading, and he tells them to leave him alone. They swap stones, and play back the way they came. Robby wins this as well. Pingu is annoyed, and plays the stone as hard as he can. Unfortunately, it goes toward the neighbour who is reading and knocks the seat from under him, depositing him on the ice on his backside! Robby laughs; Pingu gets sympathic. He is understandably rather furious at this and goes to tell Pingu off, but Robby tries to pull him back. This annoys him even more and he follows Pingu home. Pingu goes indoors and hides inside his toy box, while Mother is ironing a towel, but she is not paying attention and burns it, much to her dismay. The neighbour bangs on the door and comes in. The neighbour explains to Pingu\'s Mother what happened, and Mother gets Pingu to apologize. Pingu is afraid to apologize because of how mean he is, however Mother comforts Pingu and Pingu apologizes to the neighbour, and he and Pingu make up and shake hands. The neighbour and Pingu then have a game. Pingu gets his the farthest because his jumps over the other!, much to the neighbour\'s annoyance

Full English Voice-over of the speech of the secretary general of Hizbullah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah(HA) delivered on May 9, 2013 on the 25th Anniversary of the al-Nour Radio Station. Syria is to supply Hizbullah with game-changing weapons despite Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s air strikes reportedly aimed at cutting off the flow of arms, Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said on Thursday, vowing to back \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the Syrian popular resistance in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. You Israelis say your objective is to stop the capability of the resistance from growing ... but Syria will provide (Hizbullah) with game-changing weapons it has not had before, Nasrallah said in a televised speech on the 25th anniversary of the establishment of Hizbullah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s al-Nour radio station. We declare that we are ready to receive any game-changing weapons and we\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'re competent to possess and protect such type of weapons and we will use them to defend our people, he added. Nasrallah said the shipments of new types of weapons would serve as the Syrian reaction to Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s airstrikes. Syria has long been a conduit for Iranian weapons bound for Hizbullah. Israeli officials say the Lebanese group has tens of thousands of rockets, but that most of them are unguided. Israeli officials said the shipments targeted twice last week included precision-guided missiles. After the Israeli attacks, there had been speculation about whether Syria would retaliate, at the risk of drawing Israel into Syria\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s civil war. This is the Syrian strategic reaction, said Nasrallah of future weapons shipments. This is more important than firing a rocket or carrying out an airstrike in occupied Palestine, he said. Israel never formally acknowledged the airstrikes, but Israeli officials have said Israel would keep striking any shipments of advanced weapons meant for Hizbullah. Everyone knows what Syria has offered to resistance movements, especially the Palestinian resistance. Israel knows that the source of strength of the resistance in Lebanon and Palestine is Syria, that\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s why it wants to remove it from the equation and to besiege the resistance in Lebanon and Palestine, said Nasrallah. The response was foiling the objectives of the aggression and this is what the Syrian leadership did, although friends and foes wanted Syria to respond and bomb the enemy, added Nasrallah. He noted that Syria\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s highly-strategic response against Israel involves the decision to open the door to popular resistance in the Golan. The same as Syria stood by Lebanon, we in the resistance declare that we will stand by the Syrian popular resistance that is aimed at liberating the Syrian Golan, Nasrallah pledged. I\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'m not speaking out of enthusiasm or sentiments, but a calm evaluation says that the stances issued by the Syrian leadership prove its strength of nerve, said Hizbullah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s leader. He pointed out that Syria has \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"a wise leadership that oversees the battle with the Israelis through a strategic mind, not through anger. Commenting on the joint Russian-U.S. effort to organize a conference to end Syria\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s two-year-old conflict, Nasrallah said it is shameful that the U.S. is being depicted as Syria\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s savior through the proposed political solution. But he added that any time wasted means \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"further destruction and losses and this is all in the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s interest. Addressing the Palestinians, Nasrallah said: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"You won\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t find anyone to stand by your side other than those who have stood by you since years. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The Palestinians benefit from any serious efforts to achieve a political settlement in Syria and prevent its fall into the hands of the Takfiris, the Americans and the Israelis, he said. Nasrallah stressed that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the only choice is resistance for those who want to preserve al-Aqsa Mosque and the Christian holy sites and for those who want to give back Jerusalem to the Palestinian people and to the Ummah. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The choice is neither the Arab League nor the U.N., the choice has always been the resistance, he said. Nasrallah lamented that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"today, after this Arab Spring, the Arab regimes are more willing to offer compromises to the enemy. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The Palestinians were hoping that the Arab Spring would make Arabs less willing to offer compromises, but the scene of the Arab foreign ministers making a dangerous compromise, with the U.S. secretary of state sitting in the middle, indicates that the Palestinian cause is in danger, Nasrallah added. Qatari Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassem has said an Arab League delegation that met U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry in Washington last month recognized the possibility of a land swap. His statement was welcomed by the United States, the main broker in talks between the Palestinians and Israel, and by Israel itself. The Palestinians have played down a shift in the Arab League\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s stance, saying they had already agreed in past talks with Israel on minor land swaps in which Israel would retain some settlement blocs in the West Bank.

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.

Pakistan\\\'s former president Parvez Musharraf is facing treason charges.The government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has decided to proceed against Musharraf for imposing emergency rule and detaining judges in November 2007. Under the Pakistani law, only a sitting government can initiate such proceedings. But previous government was reluctant to pursue the case fearing a possible clash with the powerful army. But the new administration has told the Supreme Court that a panel of four senior officials from the federal investigation agency will look into charges against the former military ruler.