Search Result in All

“How can I be separated from you?” Follow us: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Panahianen/ ... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/PanahianEN/... Twitter: https://twitter.com/PanahianEN Telegram: https://telegram.me/Panahianen/ ============================== May this never happen to you that they tell you that you can’t participate in mourning ceremonies for Husayn (as) anymore. Wouldn’t this be terrible? It is not even imaginable that they stop us from participating in such meetings. But tonight, Zaynab was told that she should give up her Husayn since this is Karbala. You’re not willing to abandon Husayn’s (as) mourning ceremony. But from tonight, Zaynab (as) had to prepare herself to lose Husayn (as). Alas for Zaynab’s heart from tonight. What was the philosophy behind Imam Husayn’s (as) head being carried along with Zaynab from Karbala to Kufa and Damascus? Maybe it was for Zaynab to be able to slowly detach herself from Husayn (as). Alas for Zaynab’s heart from tonight. [When they reached Karbala,] the Imam (as) asked, “What’s the name of this land?” They replied, “Karbala.” He said, “I seek refuge in God from sorrow (Karb) and tragedy (bala).” Whenever he talked about Karbala, he would look at Zaynab (as). [It was as if he was saying,] “My Zaynab, this is Karbala. I’m addressing you. We’re going to be separated from each other here. Be ready.” Zaynab (as) would ignore these words and look in a different direction. Aba Abdillah al-Husayn (as) would glance at Zaynab (as), “Did my Zaynab believe this is Karbala? If she had believed it, she would have started wailing. No, she doesn’t believe it. She doesn’t want to accept it.” He would look at his Zaynab caringly. I talked about this story in the last meeting, and I’m talking about it again now. And I’ll always talk about it. Because it took nine days for Husayn (as) to tell Zaynab (as), “This is Karbala. Believe this.” She ignored this until the evening of Tasu’a when Husayn (as) said, “O world! Woe to you.” When Zaynab (as) heard this, she threw herself in front of Husayn (as), screamed and fainted. “My Husayn, don’t talk about leaving.” “My Zaynab, I have tried to tell you many times that this is Karbala! Why didn’t you want to believe this?” “I can’t tolerate this. Don’t talk about leaving!” This means, “I was trying to ignore the fact that we have been in Karbala during these nine days. No matter how much you said this is Karbala, I tried to keep myself busy and didn’t want to accept it.” Imam Husayn (as) said, “My Zaynab! My ancestor (the Prophet), father, brother and mother were all better than I am. They all passed away and you were patient.” She replied, “I was able to be patient because you were there. How can I be separated from you?” May God’s curse be upon the oppressors.

** Believe it OR NOT ** Today, a new video is flying around the internet of Bush - In Haiti with Bill Clinton helping to raise money for the quake-devastated country - Bush is appearing to wipe his hands on his fellow former president while shaking hands with a crowd. Check it out: ** You Would Not Believe ** - Great BUSH Wiping off his hand after hand shaking Haitians - All Languages

What are some of the differences between the people who believe in the Hereafter and those that don\'t believe in the Hereafter? And how does believing in the Hereafter help one to correct their behavior and their world-view? What belief has the most important effect in one\'s actions and value system? What kind of people are the ones who are truly affected by the Messenger of Allah (S)? Finally, what two beliefs must always be alive in our minds, hearts, and souls? The late Ayatollah Misbah-Yazdi (R) provides us with a short, but profound lesson on the basics of loving Allah. #Akhlaq #Love #Allah #Concepts #Beliefs #Salvation

[26 Mar 2013] Turkish citizens believe Israel\'s apology too little, too late - English

[Love Letter to Allah] Watch Children\'s Believe & Connection with Allah - Farsi Sub English

Why do people not believe in God? - English

What a Muslim should believe ? - English

We believe that Quds is going to be liberated

The Very Truthful: Those Who Believe in Allah (SWT) and His Messengers - H.I. Sheikh Hamza Sodagar Mar 6, 2021

No. The concept of a savior, referring to the one who will come to save the people from oppression and injustice, is common amongst various theologies, though they differ about who the savior is. The savior in Zoroastrianism is known as “Sosyant”, in Hinduism as “Kalki”, in Buddhism as “Maitreya”, in Judaism as “Moshiach”, and in Christianity as “Messiah”. The savior in Islam is known as “Mahdi”, and all the Muslims, regardless of their sects, believe in him. There are frequent narrations from the Prophet about the Mahdi in ‘Kutub al-Sittah’, the primary books of narrations in the Sunni sect of Islam. Also, various books have been authored throughout history by non-Shia Islamic scholars about the Mahdi. All of the Muslims believe in the Mahdi, who is from the progeny of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and has the same name as him. The Shia Muslims believe in the Mahdi as their 12th Imam, who was born in the year 256 Hijri in Samarra, and is still alive.

Al-Ghadir Day has been commemorated in the Yemeni capital by Shia community, who believe that on this day Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) appointed his cousin and son-in-law Ali Ibn Abi Taleb (AS) as the leader of Muslims more than fourteen centuries ago in the prophet\'s farewell speech. Prominent members of the Houthi community who spoke at the podium, said, that Al-Ghadir day is one of the most important events to occur in Islamic history- in which Ali ibn Abi Taleb (AS) was dignified and givev elevated status by God, the Almighty. The Houthi religious leader Abdul-Malik al Houthi also addressed the gathering via video conferencing from the north province of Sa\'ada. In his 40 minute speech, the Houthi leader highlighted the pressing issues facing the Muslim world. He said he believes the reason for chaos across the Islamic world- is their leaders who often seek protection and assistance from those he referred to as enemies of Islam. Houthis in Yemen say they look to commemorate Al-Ghadir Day every year by calling on all Muslim nations to relinquish dependency on the West. The Day of Al-Ghadir is significant in the Islamic history which is commemorated every year by Shia Muslims in Yemen. This is an auspicious day which many believe brought about the completion of the holy religion of Islam more than fourteen centuries ago.

While schools and other public places are closed down, supermarkets are full of food and people are getting on with their lives in Iran. Giving you an exclusive inside look into the Holy City of Qom during the height of the Covid-19 epidemic throughout February and March 2020, Syeda explains how her husband and daughter were tested in hospital for the #coronavirus. Despite what mainstream media will have you believe, things are running smoothly inside the Islamic Republic. Don’t believe what the mainstream media tells you about IRAN! Thanks to a strong leadership and an enduring people, the nation is surviving and thriving. May Allah protect all of the believers and innocent people, wherever they are… #IranFightsCorona #KhameneiTheGreat #Covid19 #CoronavirusLockdown #COVIDIOTS #COVIDー19 #COVID2019 #Corona #coronavirusuk #Corona #Iran

No conversion, no insults, no Taqiyya, but You have a right to KNOW. Part 1, \"Why do Shia Muslims not believe in Quran and Sunnah?\" In an effort to create understanding among Muslims without dogmatic and zealot bias, this is a new series on the Shia side of Islam. For the Sunni brothers.

I am Sunni, What do Shia Believe? Why call yourselves Shia? - English.

[03 June 2012] Iran hosts international confab on Imam Khomeini - English Thinkers and scholars from 60 world countries have taken part in the conference. Iran has hosted an international conference to discuss ethics and politics from the viewpoint of the late Imam Khomeini. The conference comes as Iran is preparing to mark the 23rd anniversary of the demise of late founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini on June 3. Thinkers and scholars from different world countries have already arrived in Tehran to commemorate the occasion. Thinkers believe that the teachings of Imam Khomeini will continue to inspire Muslims around the world in the years to come. Imam Khomeini, who overthrew the Shah regime back in 1979 and established the Islamic Republic believed that the keys to the victory of the Islamic revolution were the faith in God, reliance on the people and unity in words and action. Imam Khomeini died on June 3, 1989.

Afghans are going to pick their future president on April 2014. Many of them believe it would be a new chapter in the history of their country. However, they are already facing a big challenge and that is growing insecurity.

Debunking the Myth of Overpopulation | Population Control | The Makinations 6 Their sinister plot to depopulate the earth depends on your ignorance- do not let them fool you. Those who are pushing for the LGBT pro-abortion agenda are presenting the false premise that the planet has too many people on it and that life cannot be sustained because resources are limited. This is a huge lie. This episode of the Makinations will raise awareness about some of the ways in which they are perpetuating this fallacy and why they are doing it. What are the Georgia Guidestones? How are some of the richest, most powerful men, like Bill Gates and Bloomberg pushing their agenda? What must we do to counter it? \\\"O My servants who believe! surely My earth is vast, therefore Me alone should you serve.” -The Holy Quran [29:56] #Makinations #Feminism #SexualRevolution #IslamicRevolution #Abortion #ProChoice #ProLife #EqualRights #MeToo #GenderFluid #GenderFluidity #GenderIdentity #LGBTRights #LGBT #Totalitarianism

Why do they keep attacking our talented individuals? What are they so afraid of? What does all of this have to do with YOU, wherever you are?! The enemies do not want you to believe in yourself and your own ability to serve the cause of Allah. They want the Muslims to remain downtrodden, brow-beaten and lowly - but the era of accepting their oppression is OVER. The #IslamicCivilization will rise to a new Islamic Golden Era and the world will be filled with knowledge - the likes of which they could never imagine. The only question is: what role will you play? #BACKFIRE #IslamicRevolution #GlobalRevolution #Science #Fakhrizadeh #IranianScientist #MohsenFakhrizadeh #Iran #Iraq #Syria #Lebanon #Pakistan #Egypt #Netanyahu #DeathToAmerica #DeathToisrael via | @islamicpulse

What role does hope have in the life of humanity? What impact does the belief in the 12th Imam has on a human being? What paths has humanity traversed and what is this movement moving toward? What happens to a nation that doesn\'t believe in the relief which springs from the reappearance of the divinely appointed 12th Imam? Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei answers all these questions and more in this beautiful and hope giving clip.

How many Muslims do we know who claim to believe in God, however they still have an aloof and lazy attitude towards carrying out the duties of Islam? What does the Quran tell us about such a people and such a nation who have this laid back attitude towards the religion? Shaykh Usama Abdulghani beautifully explains... #ScholarClips #Islam #Quran #Hadith #Ahlulbayt #ImamMahdi #Submission

Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Khamenei narrates and explains a tradition narrated from the 6th divinely appointed Imam, Imam Ja\'far al-Sadiq (A), where his eminence speaks about a world of depth in the words of Allah in just one short verse of the Qur\'an. What is that verse of the holy Qur\'an? What are just a few of the great many things we learn from this holy verse? And what happens when one truly believes in this holy verse of the Qur\'an? Finally, can it be possible to be surrounded by the flames of the enemy, and still remain unharmed? Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Khamenei expounds upon the words of the holy Qur\'an. It\'s time to truly believe that which Allah - the Exalted - says in the holy Qur\'an.

In this series, Sheikh Azhar Nasser analyzes the Quranic verses relating to Musa and Bani Israel after the Exodus.

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood says its candidate Mohamed Morsi will face former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq in the country’s presidential run-off election. Morsi is in the lead with 25.3 percent of the vote, followed by Shafiq with 24.9 percent. Official results from the electoral body are expected to be announced on Tuesday. The two candidates will compete in a run-off election on June 16 and 17. Electoral commission officials said that turnout was around 43 percent over the two days of voting on Wednesday and Thursday. Press TV has conducted an interview with Yahia Ghanem, editor at the al-Ahram newspaper, to hear his opinion on this issue. The following is a rough transcription of the interview. Press TV: Trying to understand these results specially Shafiq he did not do that well in his campaigning. How did he come up to this second place, finish at this point which is not really finished, it is unofficial results, what is your reaction to that? Ghanem: Well if you talk, if you ask about the reactions I believe that partly it was a shock for a lot of number of the Egyptians whereas it was a pleasant surprise of course for some others. So I believe that as much as Egypt and the Egyptians have been showing strong signs of being united, a united house in their march towards democracy, when it comes to the results of the first round of the elections they started showing strong signs of a house divided in terms of this splinter between Shafiq which is considered to be a remnant of the former regime and Dr. [Morsi], the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood. Press TV: In terms of who came out to vote we are looking at two large majorities, 60 percent saying to be from the urban areas which are farmers and then of course we are looking at the percentage of the youth in the country which is said to be 50 percent below the age of 30. But it does not seem like these results are indicating that which some are saying the silent majority came out. Do you see it that way? Ghanem: Say it again please. Press TV: The silent majority, do you think they were the ones that came out, tilting some of the voting in terms of the results we are seeing right now? Ghanem: I am not quite sure if I understood your question... Press TV: The silent majority of Egyptians is what I am getting at, did they come out, the ones who did not come out to vote for the parliamentary elections maybe came out this time to vote? Ghanem: Well, I believe that there was a large percentage of absence from the voters because everybody expected actually a higher percentage, everybody expected that the Egyptians would break the record that they scored during the first stage of the last parliamentary elections but unfortunately it did not happen. And I believe that there are reasons behind such absence and such reluctance of that large number of voters to practice and to exercise the right in voting the first civilian elected president but I believe that a large number of the youth who actually participated and spot the revolution, also they were reluctant to participate in these elections and I observed that while I was touring the polling stations, I believe that there were reasons actually behind such reluctance, such as the way the military council ran the whole show during the last 16 months and specially running that presidential election show. Press TV: And of course one of the biggest troubles and challenges Yahia Ghanem is the constitution and the presidential powers. When is that going to be resolved? Ghanem: I believe we still have to go for quite a while after the elections to sort out this issue of the right in constitution and specially that issue of writing the constitution. But personally speaking I believe that this issue have been made an issue by certain parties with interest to complicate things in Egypt because writing constitution is not that problem actually and they complicated the whole thing by inciting all different kinds of society, all the [structure] in society to claim the right of being represented in this committee and to share or to take part in writing the constitution. No constitutions in the world are being written that way. It is up to the specialists, the lawmakers or the professors of constitutional law to write the constitution as in many or in all the countries in the world and then for the establishing committee to discuss and to review that draft constitution but of course it does not make any sense for all representatives of all the sectors of the society and the [structure] of the society to take part in writing the constitution. It is funny and it is not true of course.

The following is the full text of the speech delivered on July 23, 2014 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with students. The meeting was held on the eve of Quds Day. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings be upon our Master and Prophet, Muhammad, and upon his immaculate household I thank Allah the Exalted because at this point in time our country is witness to a group of young, religious, enthusiastic, motivated, reasonable and thoughtful people. Today, our meeting was a very good meeting. This matter has two parts: one is related to the details of the statements that the friends madew in this meeting. Well, good and valuable statements were made. It is possible that this humble person agrees or disagrees with these statements. The issue of content is one part of the issue. In my opinion, the part that is important and praiseworthy is the enthusiastic and inquiring spirit of students. This showed itself in the statements of the students who delivered a speech. This is important. It is possible that some of the requests that these students made are reasonable and that some are not reasonable, achievable and acceptable. But the essence of this inquiring spirit and this motivation for wanting, thinking, suggesting and criticizing is perfect. Of course, one should observe morality, piety and religious obligations in all affairs. We should avoid unfair statements. We should avoid baseless and unsubstantiated statements. These points are important in their own respect, but what is of primary importance is that our young students should be inquiring, motivated, enthusiastic, present on the scene and attentive to the issues of the country. Well, let us spend a few minutes discussing some of the issues that the friends raised in the meeting. The first issue is what I just said. I became happy with the spirit that exists in our young students - most of whom are representatives of student groups - and I thank God because one can feel that they enjoy enthusiasm, new ideas, motivation and an inquiring spirit. I hope that by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, this spirit remains in you until you will be in charge of affairs because in the future, you will be officials in charge of affairs and you will be the managers of the country. I hope that by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, this spirit and this critical, inquiring, responsible and dutiful outlook remains in you. If this happens, the country will be saved. The friends in the meeting raised a number of issues which, in my opinion, are noteworthy and important. The issue of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"knowledge for the sake of knowledge without paying attention to its benefits for the country\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" - which was raised by a number of friends - is completely correct and we have repeatedly brought it up as well. Today, scientific work and endeavor in the country and in our universities and research centers is a lively, successful and praiseworthy endeavor. However, everyone should pay attention that knowledge is an introduction to action. Valuable knowledge is the kind of knowledge that helps the country and that is useful for solving its problems. Mere publication of our articles in, say, ISI journals and other such journals - even if they become a reference point - is not an ideal although it is praiseworthy in terms of knowledge. Scientific work should address the needs of the country. This was mentioned by the friends in this meeting as well and I would like to stress it. The officials and high-ranking managers in charge of higher education are present in this meeting. I hope that by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, they pay attention to this point. There was another point in the statements of the friends which was correct. I too would like to place emphasis on it. This point is the relationship between methods of economic management and the culture of society. The idea that we brought up the issue of cultural invasion in the 1370s while the invasion was economic is completely correct. We do not reject this, but our outlook on knowledge as an original and vital issue should receive everyone\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s attention at any level. At that time too, certain complaints were made about the methods of economic management. However, what was important and what is important today is our outlook on cultural orientations. Of course, we agree that the methods of economic management have certain effects on culture, but the opposite is true as well. An issue that was discussed as a peripheral issue - but that is not peripheral to me and that is an important issue - is the issue of youth\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s marriage [students laugh and make noises indicating support]. We knew that you would have such a reaction to this issue. The issue of youth\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s marriage is an important issue. I fear that this indifferent outlook towards the issue of marriage - unfortunately, this indifferent outlook exists more or less today - will have terrible consequences for the future of the country. You brought up the issue of military service, but in my opinion, the issue of military service is not a difficult issue. It is possible to think about and work on this issue. The solution for the problem of military service as an obstacle in the way of marriage is not that we shorten the term. We can adopt other methods for this problem, but it remains an issue. Motivation for marriage should turn into a practical measure. That is to say, marriage should be promoted. Allah the Exalted says, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If they are in poverty, Allah will give them means out of His grace\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 24: 32]. This is a divine promise. We should trust this promise as we trust other divine promises. Marriage and starting a family has not made and will not make individuals experience hard living conditions. This means that one does not necessarily go through rough times because of marriage- on the contrary- marriage may solve the problems of individuals. The academic environment is a good and appropriate environment for preparing the ground for marriage. In my opinion, youth themselves, their families and officials in charge of universities should think about and make a decision about the issue of youth\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s marriage. We should not allow the age of marriage - which has unfortunately gone up today, particularly among women - to continue going up. There are certain wrong notions and traditions that are highly problematic. These wrong traditions are an obstacle in the way of promoting marriage among youth. Therefore, they should be practically broken. In my opinion, you - who are young, inquiring and enthusiastic and you who suggest breaking many habits and traditions - you should break the wrong traditions that exist on the issue of marriage. This is another issue that I deem necessary to stress. Of course, it was common in the past for a number of well-intentioned matchmakers and religious individuals to act as intermediaries and to introduce eligible women and men to one another. In this way, they helped them get married. Such tasks should be carried out. There should really be a movement in society in this regard. Another point that was witnessed in the statements of the friends in the meeting - this point also existed in the questions that students asked me indirectly - is about the compatibility between the political positions of students or student groups, and the viewpoints of the Leadership. Before this meeting, students had been asked: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"What would you say if you were present in this meeting?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" We have received certain answers. They brought us a book that contained 100 - or even more - pages. This book is about the opinions of students. I saw in the book that this question has been posed. And in this meeting, it was posed in a different way. In my opinion, this is not a very good and reasonable question. It is not the case that all the positions that people from different social backgrounds - including students who are among the leading groups among the people - adopt should be a copy of the viewpoints that the Leadership puts forward. This is not the case. As Muslims and as religious and thoughtful individuals, you should take a careful look in order to perceive your responsibilities and to make your own analyses. I will expand on this later on. You should adopt a position and express your viewpoints about individuals, orientations, policies and governments. It is not the case that you should wait and see what position the Leadership adopts about such and such an individual, movement, measure and policy so that you adopt your position on the basis of this position. This will lock affairs up. The Leadership has certain responsibilities. If Allah the Exalted helps him and bestows His blessings on him, he will carry them out. You too have certain responsibilities. You should look at the scene and make your own decisions. However, the standard should be piety. The standard should be piety. Piety means exercising self-restraint in supporting or opposing someone and in criticizing or praising someone. You should observe piety. If it is observed, then both criticizing, and supporting and praising people is good no matter if it is an individual, an administration, a political orientation or a political event that you criticize or support. There is nothing wrong with this criticism and support. Of course, if this humble person expresses his viewpoint about an issue, it is possible that it influences the decision of those who have trust in him and who accept this viewpoint. However, this does not mean that individuals should be absolved of responsibilities and opinions. This is not what I mean. Everyone should take a look and carry out their responsibility. As I said, the standard is that piety should be observed. That is to say, if we make a criticism, if we support someone, if we approve of a movement and a policy or if we reject it, this should really be done out of a sense of responsibility and without engaging our personal interests and temptations. This is another point. One of the friends in the meeting said that students have lost sleep over a certain issue. If concerns make students be so sensitive, this is very good. Of course, we hope that you get enough sleep and go to sleep on time! The expression \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"I have lost sleep over something\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is a very good expression. If this is really the case, we become very happy. This feeling of worry and anxiety about different issues makes you look at issues with open eyes. As for what I have written down to discuss, it has two, three parts and I will discuss each part by paying attention to our time. First of all, we should consider students to be among those individuals who manifest the vigilant conscience of a people and a country. Of course, this is the truth of the matter. If students launch a movement in a society and if they make a move and a request, this shows the general orientation of that society. This is the case all over the world. Students are, in fact, among those groups of people who show the vigilant conscience and orientation of a nation. Therefore, students should pay attention to issues in a very wise way. They should know their conditions and their environment. They should know threats, opportunities, enemies and enmities. Of course, we do not expect students to forget about their lessons and different affairs in order to engage in political work only. This is not what we expect them to do. Rather, we expect them to look at issues with open eyes, with a clear outlook, with a sense of responsibility and with a high motivation. This is our expectation of students. Some of the issues that we are faced with today are issues related to our surrounding environment and to the region. Regional issues are not separate from the issues of the country. Today, one important and fundamental issue is the issue of Palestine and Gaza. Well, the issue of Gaza and the disasters that have befallen the people of Gaza today and that have a long history should receive our attention from two perspectives: one perspective is that this shows the truth of the Zionist regime. This is the Zionist regime. In my opinion, this is not the important part of the issue. The Zionist regime is a regime that has set itself the goal of showing blatant violence since the beginning of its illegitimate birth. They do not even deny this violence. They have set themselves the goal of clenching an iron fist. They say this everywhere and they are proud of it. This is their policy. Since the year 1948 - when this fake regime came into being officially - until today, they have been pursuing this policy. It is 66 years now that they have been pursuing this policy. Of course, it had committed many crimes in Palestine even before it was officially recognized and even before colonialists imposed it on the world and on the region. But during these 66 years, they did whatever they could as a government and as a political system. They committed any violent act that one can think a government can do to a people. And they have no scruples whatsoever. This is the truth of the Zionist regime. There is no cure for this except the annihilation of this regime. Annihilating the Zionist regime does not at all mean massacring the Jewish people in the region. The logical statement that our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) made - that Israel should be annihilated - is based on a human principle. We presented to the world the practical solution for this and no one could criticize it in a reasonable way. We said that a poll and a referendum should be conducted so that the people who live in, come from and belong to this region determine who should rule over it. We said that the people should resolve this issue. This is the meaning of annihilating the Zionist regime. This is the solution. This is a solution that is understandable and favored by today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s standards of logic in the world. This is a practical solution. We even put forward a proposal to the United Nations and a number of international organizations in charge of such affairs. And this proposal was discussed by them. There is no cure for the problem that this savage and wolfish regime - whose policy is to behave towards people with iron fists, cruelty and savagery and that does not care about and deny killing people and children, attacking different regions and causing destruction - has created except its destruction and annihilation. If, by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, that day comes and if it is annihilated, then so much the better. But what is the cure as long as this fake regime survives? The cure is decisive and militant resistance against this regime. The Palestinians should display power in the face of the Zionist regime. No one should think that if it had not been for the missiles of Gaza, the Zionist regime would have stopped their incursions. This is not the case. Notice what they are doing in the West Bank. This is while there is no missile, weapon and gun in the West Bank. The only weapon that the people have there is stones. Notice what the Zionist regime is doing there. It is doing whatever it can. It destroys people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s homes, it destroys their gardens, it destroys their lives and it humiliates and belittles them. If it is necessary, it closes water on them and it blacks out electricity. The Zionists could not tolerate someone like Yasser Arafat who compromised with them. They besieged, humiliated, poisoned and destroyed him. It is not the case that if we do not display power in the face of the Zionists, they will tolerate and show mercy to people and observe their rights. This is not the case at all. The only cure that exists before the Zionist regime is annihilated is that the Palestinians manage to act in a powerful way. If they act in a powerful way, it is possible that the other side - which is this wolfish and violent regime - will retreat, as they are looking for a truce with all their power. This means that they have become desperate. They kill people and children and they show cruelty in an excessive way. But they are desperate as well. They are in dire straits and this is why they are after a truce. Therefore, we believe that the West Bank should become armed like Gaza. It is necessary to show power. Those people who are interested in the fate of Palestine should do whatever they can. This is what should be done: the people in the West Bank should become armed as well. The only thing that can alleviate the Palestinians\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' pains is to show power. Otherwise, if we act in a tame, subservient and obedient way, nothing that is to the advantage of the Palestinians will be done and the violence that this violent, malevolent and wolfish creature is showing will not decrease. Today, the responsibility of people all over the world is political support. There is no doubt about this. As you can see, there are popular movements in Islamic and even non-Islamic countries. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, the world will witness the loud and great voice of the people of Iran on Quds Day. God willing, on Quds Day, the people of Iran will show how motivated they are about Palestine. Of course, some people wanted to show the opposite of this with the slogan \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"neither Gaza nor Lebanon\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". They are wrong. The people of Iran believe in defending the oppressed: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Be an enemy of the oppressor and helper of the oppressed\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Nahjul Balaghah, Letter 47]. This is what the people of Iran want and by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, it will be shown. This is one perspective about the issue of Gaza. This is important and great emphasis should be placed on it. Today, western imperialist powers - that is to say, a few large, rich and powerful western powers which are headed by America and malevolent England behind it - have stood firm in order to defend this usurping, oppressive and cold-hearted regime. This is a very important issue. They are supporting it openly. What are they supporting? They are supporting a creator of disasters and no ordinary and fair-minded person can accept any indifference towards these crimes. A small area and a piece of land named Gaza is being attacked by airplanes, missiles, armies and tanks. They have used all kinds of munitions on these people. This is really an astonishing event. So many children are being killed, so many houses are being destroyed and people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s lives are being accompanied by so much bitterness, cruelty and torture. This is while these so-called gentlemen are supporting it. With what reason do they support this regime? They support it with the stupid reason that the President of America gives. He says, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Israel has the right to ensure its own security\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Well, do the Palestinians not have the right to ensure their security? Is it acceptable for a government to threaten the lives of a people who have been cruelly besieged by it and who show no reaction? Does anyone accept this? How will history judge this reason? The officials of these arrogant countries do not understand what they are doing - with these kinds of support - to their dignity and the dignity of their countries and regimes in history. They stand up with complete shamelessness and say that they support Israel. They do not at all point to the events that are happening in the region and to the disasters that this destructive and dangerous element is creating. This shows that today, the logic of liberal democracy - the logic and the intellectual system on the basis of which western countries are ruled and controlled - does not benefit from the slightest moral value. There is not any moral value and humane feeling in it. In fact, they are disgracing themselves. They are disgracing themselves in the face of the critical look of nations throughout the world, whether those who live in the present time or those who will live in the future. We should preserve this as an important experience for ourselves and we should know America. This is liberal democracy. This will and should influence our actions, our judgment and our behavior. This is the camp - that is to say, the government of the United States of America and its followers - that has stood up against the Islamic Republic today and that has challenged the Islamic Republic in different events. This is the truth about them. The truth about them is this: not only do they not show any sensitivity about the massacre of human beings and defenseless people but they also defend and support oppressors and perpetrators of appalling and great crimes - such as what is happening in Gaza today. This should be a standard for us. The people of Iran, our intellectual apparatus, our students and our broad-minded personalities should not forget this. This is America. This is western power and its intellectual basis - which is liberal democracy. Today, it is this intellectual basis that is confronting the Islamic system. Today, the politicians who are most indifferent to human rights are those who are in charge of managing these countries. They do not at all believe in human beings, human rights and human principles. Their behavior in Gaza and other such events is proving this. They do not at all believe in human rights, human dignity and respect, people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s votes and anything else. The only thing that they believe in is money and bullying. There is no other reason for their behavior. In my opinion, whatever comes out of their mouths about the issue of freedom, human rights and other such things is a travesty of freedom and human rights. Well, we are not saying this as a piece of advice to America, the President of America and American politicians. It is clear [that they do not listen]. We are saying this for ourselves so that when we want to carry out an analysis, make a judgment and adopt a measure, we understand who we are dealing with and who the people we are faced with are. We are saying this so that we know what exists at the bottom of their thoughts. We should determine our responsibilities. What is important is that we should have a correct analysis of the west\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s behavior in the present time. Their confrontation with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic movement and Awakening is part of their major polices. The major policy of global arrogance is enslaving nations and dominating their fate without paying the least attention to their interests and requests. This is the major policy of arrogance and we should pay attention to it. Anti-American, anti-western and anti-arrogance slogans in our country reflect this truth. Some people should not immediately jump to the conclusion that a biased or completely unreasonable task is being carried out as soon as they hear an anti-western or anti-American slogan. They should not think like this because this is not the case. This anti-western and anti-American outlook in the Islamic Revolution is based on a correct experience, outlook and calculation. On that day, I said to the executive officials and decision-makers of the country that the main goal of the enemy is to create disruption in our calculation system. When one\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s calculation system is disrupted, it produces wrong outputs out of correct inputs. That is to say, experiences will no longer be useful to it. When our calculation system does not function properly and correctly and when calculation is not carried out in the right way, experiences will no longer be beneficial. Notice how westerners and the leaders of the current western civilization have treated our country during the past 80, 90, 100 years. We have a long experience of receiving blows from the west. There are some people in the country - some western-oriented, westernized and westoxicated individuals - who witness these experiences in front of their eyes, but who do not learn a lesson from them. Well, they saw that westerners brought Reza Khan to power and helped him dominate the country. As a result of this, a bizarre Reza Khani dictatorship was established in the country by the English. They helped a thuggish and unreasonable person who was completely indifferent to the principles of the country. Afterwards during the 1320s, the same powers came and occupied Iran. In fact, they divided it among themselves in one sense. The same powers looted our oil and imposed cruel contracts on this country. The same powers launched the coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état of the 28th of Mordad and overthrew and destroyed a national government which originated from the votes of the people despite all its flaws. The same powers made our national oil movement deviate from its path and consequently, they once more dominated our natural and material sources. The same powers established Mohammad Reza\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s dictatorship in the country for a long time and they supported it with all their power. During the 30-plus-year rule of Mohammad Reza over the country, our material and spiritual sources of wealth were looted. They created a disastrous situation for our people. They kept them in poverty and ignorance, they promoted public corruption in all bases of the country and they truly destroyed the culture of the country, the people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s religion and everything. This was done with the support of the same western governments. They created as many obstacles as they could during their confrontation with the Iranian peoples\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' Revolution and great movement. They supported and defended Saddam Hussein although they did not approve of him. Because Saddam was against the Islamic Republic, they helped him as much as they could. Westerners, England, America and France provided him with chemical bombs and different kinds of military weapons. Well, these are our experiences. Westoxicated intellectuals do not benefit from these experiences and they do not analyze them correctly because their calculation system has been disrupted. One of the most important services of the Islamic Revolution was reviving true logic and reason in the country. The fact that you young students analyze regional issues, look at different events with complete precision, identify the enemy, analyze regional events and stand firm shows the reasonable life of a country. It was the Revolution that offered this to us, but today, some people still want to go back to prior conditions. The same westernized orientations - the ones that love the west, that humiliate our people and our achievements and that humiliate national culture and identity to the advantage of western powers - want the same powers to come again and to define and introduce standards for the affairs, culture and orientation of the country. Those who are working against the Islamic Republic under the flag of the bloody enemies of the people of Iran are people who are after dominating the same ignorance - calculational ignorance - and the same satanic temptation that once existed opposed to the rationality of this country. I advise the dear students to strengthen their studies - both on the issue of religious and political areas - as well their scientific work. You should try to strengthen your power of analysis. Of course, when I take a look at students\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' statements today, I witness good and outstanding points. This really requires our gratitude. It really requires that we thank God, but you should work on this as much as you can. Today, we did not have the time to discuss different issues of the country. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, we will discuss these issues in the other meetings that we will hold with students or other groups of people. Students should provide people with analyses on different issues of the country including social, economic and political issues. The people should be able to benefit from students\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' analyses. Students\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' power of analysis should be like this. This depends on studying. Therefore, students should study. It should not be the case that students\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' outlook is a purely emotional one. Your intellectual products should not only be based on tabloid issues. You should deeply study, think about and discuss issues. Many of the statements that the friends in this meeting discussed are statements that should be resolved in student meetings and in free discussions. I have written this down. The free debates that we brought up and that requires free discussions in academic environments can resolve and clarify many of the issues that the friends discussed in this meeting. Students should be able to find the pros and cons of every issue in their student discussions. Another point that I want to discuss is that competitive discourse in academic environments is a good thing provided that it is accompanied by tolerating the opposing views. One should not become surprised, angry and intimidated at the existence of opponents. None of these three feelings is acceptable in the face of opponents. If we become surprised at the existence of opponents, this means that we are overconfident about ourselves. This is the reason why we are surprised when someone is opposed to us, but there is no room for surprise. Well, every individual, every thought, every movement and every orientation has certain opponents. And it is not the case that we think those opponents are necessarily wrong. This is not the case. There are certain weak points and these weak points make some people oppose us. Therefore, the existence of opponents should not make us surprised, as it should not provoke our anger. We should not become angry at their opposition. Opposition is understandable and acceptable. We should not be intimidated either. Being afraid of the existence of opponents shows that we are not confident about the power and strength of our position. This should not be the case. We have a reason. We should strengthen and build up the bases of our reason and then we should enter the arena of competitive discourse and engage in discussion. The spirit of students should be like this. Therefore, academic environments should continue working with the same spirit that they thankfully enjoy today. They should tolerate one another, they should speak to one another, they should discuss different issues with one another and they should strengthen the bases. In practical areas, the basis of their work should be piety and in intellectual areas, the basis of their work should be observing Islamic limits, knowing the enemy and knowing the methods that he uses for showing his enmity. I hope that Allah the Exalted bestows success on all of you and preserves you youth for furthering the goals of the Revolution. I hope that He increases your achievements on a daily basis. I hope that by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, you youth create a good future for your Revolution and for your country. Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings.

Message of Thaqalayn \"Al-Ghadir\" and its Relevance to Islamic Unity ________________________________________ Ayatullah Murtaza Mutahhari Translated by Mojgan Jalali Vol. 3, No. 1 and 2 (1417 AH/1996 CE) The distinguished book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" has raised a huge wave in the world of Islam. Islamic thinkers shed light on the book in different perspectives; in literature, history, theology, tradition, tafsir, and sociology. From the social perspective we can deal with the Islamic unity. In this review the Islamic unity has been dealt with from a social point of view. Contemporary Muslim thinkers and reformists are of the view that unity and solidarity of Muslims are the most imperative Islamic exigencies at the present juncture when the enemies have made extensive inroads upon the Islamic community and have tried to resort to different ways and means to spread the old differences and create new ones. We are aware that Islamic unity and fraternity is the focus of attention of the Holy Legislator of Islam and is actually the major objective pursued by this Divine religion as firmed by the Qur\'an, the \"Sunnah\", and the history of Islam. For this reason, some people have been faced with this question: Wouldn\'t the compilation and publication of a book such as \"al-Ghadir\" which deals with the oldest issue of differences among the Muslims- create a barrier in the way of the sublime and lofty objective of the Islamic unity? To answer this question, it is necessary first to elucidate the essence of this issue, that is, the Islamic unity, and then proceed to examine the role of the magnum opus entitled \"al-Ghadir\"and its eminent compiler \'Allamah Amini in bringing about Islamic unity. Islamic Unity What is meant by the Islamic unity? Does it mean that one Islamic school of thought should be unanimously followed and others be set aside? Or does it mean that the commonalties of all Islamic schools of thought should be taken up and their differences be put away to make up a new denomination which is not completely the same as the previous ones? Or does it mean that Islamic unity is in no way related to the unity of the different schools of Fiqh (jurisprudence) but signifies the unity of the Muslims and the unity of the followers of different schools of Fiqh, with their different religious ideas and views, vis-a-vis the aliens? To give an illogical and impractical meaning to the issue of the Islamic unity, the opponents of the issue have called it to be the formation of a single Madhhab, so as to defeat it in the very first step. Without doubt, by the term Islamic unity, the intellectual Islamic \'Ulama\' (scholars) do not mean that all denominations should give in to one denomination or that the commonalties should be taken up and the different views and ideas be set aside, as these are neither rational and logical nor favorable and practical. By the Islamic unity these scholars mean that all Muslims should unite in one line against their common enemies. These scholars slate that Muslims have many things in common, which can serve as the foundations of a firm unity. All Muslims worship the One Almighty and believe in the Prophethood of the Holy Prophet (s). The Qur\'an is the Book of all Muslims and Ka\'abah is their \"qiblah\" (direction of prayer). They go to\"hajj\" pilgrimage with each other and perform the \"hajj\" rites and rituals like one another. They say the daily prayers and fast like each other. They establish families and engage in transactions like one another. They have similar ways of bringing up their children and burying their dead. Apart from minor affairs, they share similarities in all the aforementioned cases. Muslims also share one kind of world view, one common culture, and one grand, glorious, and long-standing civilization. Unity in the world view, in culture, in the civilization, in insight and disposition, in religious beliefs, in acts of worship and prayers, in social rites and customs can well turn the Muslim into a unified nation to serve as a massive and dominant power before which the big global powers would have to bow down. This is especially true in view of the stress laid by Islam on this principle. According to the explicit wording of the Qur\'an, the Muslims are brothers, and special rights and duties link them together. So, why shouldn\'t the Muslims use all these extensive facilities accorded to them as the blessing of Islam? This group of \'Ulama\' are of the view that there is no need for the Muslims to make any compromise on the primary or secondary principles of their religion for the sake of Islamic unity. Also it is not necessary for the Muslims to avoid engaging in discussions and reasons and writing books on primary and secondary principles about which they have differences. The only consideration for Islamic unity in this case is that the Muslims- in order to avoid the emergence or accentuation of vengeance - preserve their possession, avoid insulting and accusing each other and uttering fabrications, abandon ridiculing the logic of one another, and finally abstain from hurting one another and going beyond the borders of logic and reasoning. In fact, they should, at least, observe the limits which Islam has set forth for inviting non-Muslims to embrace it: \"Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good exhortation, and have disputations with them in the best manner... \"(16: 125) Some people are of the view that those schools of fiqh, such as, Shafi\'i and Hanafi which have no differences in principle should establish brotherhood and stand in one line. They believe that denominations which have differences in the principles can in no way be brothers. This group view the religious principles as an interconnected set as termed by scholars of Usul, as an interrelated and interdependent set; any damage to one principle harms all principles. As a result, those who believe in this principle are of the view that when, for instance, the principle of \"imamah\" is damaged and victimized, unity and fraternity will bear no meaning and for this reason the Shi\'ah and the Sunnis cannot shake hands as two Muslim brothers and be in the same rank, no matter who their enemy is. The first group answers this group by saying: \"There is no reason for us to consider the principles as an interrelated set and follow the principle of \"all or none\". Imam \'Ali (\'a) chose a very logical and reasonable approach. He left no stone unturned to retrieve his right. He used everything within his power to restore the principle of \"imamah\", but he never adhered to the motto of \"all or none\". \'Ali (\'a) did not rise up for his right, and that was not compulsory. On the contrary, it was a calculated and chosen approach. He did not fear death. Why didn\'t he rise up? There could have been nothing above martyrdom. Being killed for the cause of the Almighty was his ultimate desire. He was more intimate with martyrdom than a child is with his mother\'s breast. But in his sound calculations, Imam \'All (\'a) had reached the conclusion that under the existing conditions it was to the interest of Islam to foster collaboration and cooperation among the Muslims and give up revolt. He repeatedly stressed this point. In one of his letters (No.62 \"Nahj al Balaghah\") to Malik al-Ashtar, he wrote the following: \"First I pulled back my hand until I realized that a group of people converted from Islam and invited the people toward annihilating the religion of Muhammad(s). So I feared that if I did not rush to help Islam and the Muslims, I would see gaps or destruction which calamity would be far worse than the several-day-long demise of caliphate.\" In the six-man council, after appointment of \'Uthman by \'Abdul-Rahman ibn \'Awf, \'Ali (\'a) set forth his objection as well as his readiness for collaboration as follows:\" You well know that I am more deserving than others for caliphate. But now by Allah, so long as the affairs of the Muslims are in order and my rivals suffice with setting me aside and only I am alone subjected to oppression, I will not oppose (the move) and will give in (to it).\" (From Sermon 72, \"Nahj al- Balaghah\"). These indicate that in this issue \'Ali (\'a) condemned the principle of \"all or none\". There is no need to further elaborate the approach taken by \'Ali (\'a) toward this issue. There are ample historical proofs and reasons in this regard. \'Allamah Amini Now it is time to see to which group the eminent \'Allamah, Ayatullah Amini - the distinguished compiler of the \"al-Ghadir\" - belonged and how he thought. Did he approve of the unity of the Muslims only within the light of Shi\'ism? Or did he consider Islamic fraternity to be broader? Did he believe that Islam which is embraced by uttering the \"shahadatayn\" (the Muslim creed) would willy-nilly create some rights for the Muslims and that the brotherhood and fraternity set forth in the Qur\'an exists among all Muslims? \'Allamah Amini personally considered this point - i.e. the need to elucidate his viewpoint on this subject and elaborate whether\"al-Ghadir\" has a positive or a negative role in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In order not to be subject to abuse by his opponent - be they among the pros and cons - he has repeatedly explained and elucidated his views. \'Allamah Amini supported Islamic unity and viewed an open mind and clear insight. On different occasions, he set forth this matter in various volumes of the \"al-Ghadir\'. Reference will be made to some of them below: In the preface to volume I, he briefly mentions the role of \"al-Ghadir\" in the world of Islam. He states: \"And we consider all this as service to religion, sublimation of the word of the truth, and restoration of the Islamic \'ummah\' (community).\" In volume 3 (page 77), after quoting the fabrications of Ibn Taymiyah, Alusi, and Qasimi to the effect that Shi \'ism is hostile to some of the Ahl al-Bayt (the Household of the Prophet) such as Zayd bin \'Ali bin al-Huseyn, he notes the following under the title of \"Criticism and Correction\": \"These fabrications and accusations sow the seeds of corruption, stir hostilities among the \'ummah\',create discord among the Islamic community, divide the \'ummah\', and clash with the public interests of the Muslims. Again in volume 3 (page 268), he quotes the accusation leveled on the Shi\'ahs by Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida to the effect that \"Shi\'ahs are pleased with any defeat incurred by Muslims, so much as they celebrated the victory of the Russians over the Muslims.\" Then he says: \"These falsehoods are fabricated by persons like Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida. The Shi\'ahs of Iran and Iraq against whom this accusation is leveled, as well as the orientalists, tourists, envoys of Islamic countries, and those who traveled and still travel to Iran and Iraq, have no information about this trend. Shi\'ahs, without exception, respect the lives, blood, reputation, and property of the Muslims be they Shi\'ahs or Sunnis. Whenever a calamity has befallen the Islamic community anywhere, in any region, and for any sects, the Shi\'ahs have shared their sorrow. The Shi\'ahs have never been confined to the Shi\'ah world, the (concept of) Islamic brotherhood which has been set forth in the Qur\'an and the \'sunnah\'(the Prophet\'s sayings and actions), and in this respect, no discrimination has been made between the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis.\" Also at the close of volume 3, he criticizes several books penned by the ancients such as \"Iqd al-Farid\" by Ibn Abd al-Rabbih, \"al-Intisar\" by Abu al-Husayn Khayyat al-Mu\'tazili,\"al Farq bayn al-Firaq\" by Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi, \"al-Fasl\" by Ibn Hazm al-Andulusi, \"al-Milal wa al-Nihal\" by Muhammad ibn Abdul-Karim al-Shahristani \"Minhaj al-Sunnah\" by Ibn Taymiah and \"al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah\"by Ibn Kathir and several by the later writers such as \"Tarikh al-Umam al-Islamiyyah\" by Shaykh Muhammad Khizri, \"Fajr al Islam\" by Ahmad Amin, \"al-Jawlat fi Rubu al-Sharq al-Adna\" by Muhammad Thabit al-Mesri, \"al-Sira Bayn al-Islam wa al-Wathaniyah\" by Qasimi, and \"al- Washi\'ah\" by Musa Jarallah. Then he states the following: \"By quoting and criticizing these books, we aim at warning and awakening the Islamic \'ummah\' (to the fact) that these books create the greatest danger for the Islamic community, they destabilize the Islamic unity and scatter the Muslim lines. In fact nothing can disrupt the ranks of the Muslims, destroy their unity, and tear their Islamic fraternity more severely than these books.\" \'Allamah Amini, in the preface to volume 5, under title of\"Nazariyah Karimah\" on the occasion of a plaque of honor forwarded from Egypt for \"al-Ghadir\", clearly sets forth his view on this issue and leaves no room for any doubt. He remarks: \"People are free to express views and ideas on religion. These (views and ideas) will never tear apart the bond of Islamic brotherhood to which the holy Qur\'an has referred by stating that \'surely the believers are brethren\'; even though academic discussion and theological and religious debates reach a peak. This has been the style of the predecessors, and of the \'sahaba\' and the\'tabi\'un\', at the head of them. \"Notwithstanding all the differences that we have in the primary and secondary principles, we, the compilers and writers in nooks and corners of the world of Islam, share a common point and that is belief in the Almighty and His Prophet. A single spirit and one (form of) sentiment exists in all our bodies, and that is the spirit of Islam and the term\'ikhlas,\" \"We, the Muslim compilers, all live under the banner of truth and carry out our duties under the guidance of the Qur\'an and the Prophetic Mission of the Holy Prophet (s). The message of all of us is \'Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam ... (3:18)\' and the slogan of all of us is \'There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger.\' Indeed, we are (the members of) the party of Allah and the supporters of his religion. In the preface to volume 8, under the title of \"al-Ghadir Yowahhad al-Sufuf fil-Mila al-Islami\", \'Allamah Amini directly makes researches into the role of \"Al- Ghadir\" in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In this discussion, this great scholar categorically rejects the accusations leveled by those who said: \'Al-Ghadir\' causes greater discord among the Muslims. He proves that, on the contrary, \"Al-Ghadir\"removes many misunderstandings and brings the Muslims closer to one another. Then he brings evidence by mentioning the confessions of the non-Shi\'i Islamic scholars. At the close, he quotes the letter of Shaykh Muhammad Saeed Dahduh written in this connection. To avoid prolongation of this article, we will not quote and translate the entire statements of \'Allamah Amini in explaining the positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" in (establishing) Islamic unity, since what has already been mentioned sufficiently proves this fact. The positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" is established by the facts that it firstly clarifies the proven logic of the Shi\'ahs and proves that the inclination of Muslims to Shi\'ism - notwithstanding the poisonous publicity of some people - is not due to political, ethnic, or other trends and considerations. It also verifies that a powerful logic based on the Qur\'an and the \"sunnah\" has given rise to this tendency. Secondly, it reflects that some accusations leveled on Shi\'ism - which have made other Muslims distanced from the Shi\'ah- are totally baseless and false. Examples of these accusations are the notion that the Shi\'ites prefer the non-Muslims to the non- Shi\'i Muslims, rejoice at the defeat of non-Shi\'ite Muslims at the hands of non-Muslims, and other accusations such as the idea that instead of going to hajj pilgrimage, the Shi\'ahs go on pilgrimage to shrines of the Imams, or have particular rites in prayers and in temporary marriage. Thirdly, it introduces to the world of Islam the eminent Commander of the faithful \'Ali (\'a) who is the most oppressed and the least praised grand Islamic personality and who could be the leader of all Muslims, as well as his pure offspring. Other Comments on \"al-Ghadir\" Many unbiased non-Shia Muslims interpret the \"al-Ghadir\" in the same way that has already been mentioned. Muhammad Abdul-Ghani Hasan al-Mesri, in his foreword on\"al-Ghadir\", which has been published in the preface to volume I, second edition, states: \"I call on the Almighty to make your limpid brook (in Arabic, \'Ghadir\' means brook) the cause of peace and cordiality between the Shia and Sunni brothers to cooperate with one another in building the Islamic \"ummah.\" \'Adil Ghadban, the managing editor of the Egyptian magazine entitled \"al-Kitab\", said the following in the preface to volume 3: \"This book clarifies the Shi\'ite logic. The Sunnis can correctly learn about the Shi\'i through this book. Correct recognition of the Shi\'ahs brings the views of the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis closer, and they can make a unified rank\". In his foreword to the \"al-Ghadir\" which was published in thepreface to volume 4, Dr. Muhammad Ghallab, professor of philosophy at the Faculty of Religious Studies al-Azhar University said: \"I got hold of your book at a very opportune time, because right now I am busy collecting and compiling a book on the lives of the Muslims from various perspectives. Therefore, I am highly avidfor obtaining sound information about \'Imamiyah\' Shi\'ism. Your book will help me. And I will not make mistakes about the Shi\'ahs as others have\". In this foreword published in the preface to volume 4 of the\"al-Ghadir\", Dr. \'Abdul-Rahman Kiali Halabi says the following after referring to the decline of the Muslims in the present age and the factors which can lead to the Muslims\' salvation, one of which is the sound recognition of the successor of the Holy Prophet (s): \"The book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" and its rich content deserves to be known by every Muslim to learn how historians have been negligent and see where the truth lies. Through this means, we should compensate for the past, and by striving to foster the unity of the Muslims, we should try to gain the due rewards\". These were the views of \'Allamah Amini about the important social issues of our age and such were his sound reflections in the world of Islam. Peace be upon him. Text Source: http://www.al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=ghadir-relevance.htm

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.

The Leader of Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says Iran will not back down an iota from its rights and will never give in to pressure. Ayatollah Khamenei said the rights of the nation including its nuclear rights must be recognized. The leader expressed his support for the Iranian government and officials including the nuclear negotiating team. Ayatollah Khamenei also said he will not get involved with the details of the negotiations between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany. But he said there are red lines and limitations that the Iranian negotiators will have to heed. Ayatollah Khamenei made the remarks in an address to commanders and members of the Basij volunteer force in Tehran. Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech in Meeting with Basij Commanders Print 20/11/2013 Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech in Meeting with Basij CommandersThe following is the full text of the speech delivered on November 20, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with fifty thousand Basij commanders. The meeting was held at the Musalah in Tehran. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings be upon our Master and Prophet, Ab-al Qassem al-Mustafa Muhammad and upon his immaculate, pure and chosen household, especially the one remaining with Allah on earth. Greetings be upon you Abi Abdullah and upon those who laid down their lives for you. I will send you God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s eternal greetings as long as I live and as long as night and day prevail. May God not make this prayer my last covenant with you. Greetings be upon Hussein, upon Ali ibn al-Hussein, upon the children of Hussein and upon the companions of Hussein - those who laid down their lives for Hussein (a.s.). This meeting is a very important meeting. Basij is the manifestation of the greatness of our nation and the domestic capability of our country. This meeting is the meeting of commanders. You tens of thousands of commanders of Basij have gathered in this place and one can guess from this large gathering how glorious Basij is. You are a source of satisfaction, hope and trust for the supporters of the Islamic Republic, the Revolution and the country and you are a source of intimidation and fear for the ill-wishers, enemies and those who bear a grudge [against the Revolution and the Islamic Republic]. The coincidence of Basij Week with these days, which are the days of the great epic of the history of Islam, is a good and valuable occasion. What I mean by this great epic is the epic created by Zaynab al-Kubra (s.a.) which complements the epic of Ashura. The epic that Zaynab al-Kubra (s.a.) created revived and preserved the epic of Ashura. The greatness of what Zaynab al-Kubra (s.a.) did, cannot be compared to other great events in history. It should only be compared to the event of Ashura itself and truly, these two events complete one another. This great personality and this great lady of Islam and all of humanity managed to stand firm in the face of the great mountain of hardships and there was not even a tremble in her voice because of all these events. She stood firm like a glorious mountain peak both in the face of enemies and in the face of hardships and bitter events. She became a lesson, a role model, a leader and a pioneer. At the bazaar of Kufa, while she was held captive, she made this astonishing speech: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Oh people of Kufa, who are treacherous and disloyal, do you cry for us? May your tears not dry and may your moans not stop. You are like a woman who loosens her threads after she pulls them together\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [al-Ihtijaj, Volume 2, page 303]. The words are as firm as steel and the meaning flows like a river and it influences hearts and souls. In such conditions, Zaynab al-Kubra delivered a speech, which was like the Commander of the Faithful (a.s.), and she shook hearts and souls and she shook history with these words. This speech became eternal in history. It was delivered in front of the people while she was held captive. After that, she delivered a speech in front of Ibn Ziad in Kufa and a few weeks later, she spoke in front of Yazid with such strength that it both humiliated the enemy and the hardships which the enemy had imposed. She said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Do you foolishly think that you can defeat, suppress and humiliate the household of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.)?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Honor belongs to Allah and His Messenger, and to the believers\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 63: 8]. Zaynab al-Kubra is the manifestation of dignity, as Hussein ibn Ali (a.s.) was the manifestation of dignity in Karbala on the day of Ashura. The way she looks at events is different from the way other people look at those events. Despite all those hardships, when the enemy wants to taunt her, she says, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"I did not see anything except for beauty\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Lohuf, page 160]. She said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"What I saw was beautiful. It was martyrdom. Although it was difficult, it was in the way of God and it was done for preserving Islam. It was the creation of an epic in history so that Islamic Ummah knows what it should do and how it should move forward and stand firm\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". This is a great achievement made by the epic of Zaynab (s.a.). This is the dignity of God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s saint. Zaynab al-Kubra (s.a.) is one of God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s saints. Her dignity is the dignity of Islam and she made Islam and the Holy Quran valuable. Of course, we are not as aspirational and determined as Zaynab al-Kubra (s.a.) and therefore we cannot say that the behavior of this great lady is our model. We are too inferior to say such things, but anyway, our movement should be in line with the movement of Zaynab (s.a.). Our efforts should be focused on bringing dignity for Islam, the Islamic community and the entire humanity. This is the same responsibility that Allah the Exalted has entrusted to prophets through Islamic obligations and rules. In the first part of my speech, what I want to briefly discuss with you dear basijis and dear youth is that one of the factors which brought about this spirit and this patience in Zaynab al-Kubra (s.a.) and other divine saints - who moved forward with such spirit and patience - is sincerity and honesty. It is very important to honor our promises to Allah the Exalted and to devote our hearts to the path of God in a sincere way. In the Holy Quran, this sincerity is necessary for divine prophets as well: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And remember We took from the prophets their covenant, as We did from you, from Noah, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus the son of Mary: We took from them a solemn covenant, that (Allah) may question the custodians of Truth concerning the Truth they (were charged with)\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 33: 7-8]. God says that this covenant is very firm and serious. In the phrase \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Leyasala\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" lam signifies results and consequences. The result of this covenant is that these great prophets will be questioned about their sincerity in this covenant. That is to say, our Holy Prophet (s.w.a.) and other great prophets should prove before God the level of their sincerity concerning the conditions of this covenant. This part is related to prophets. God also says to ordinary people and believers: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Among the Believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah: of them some have completed their vow (fully), and some (still) wait: but they have never changed (their determination) in the least, that Allah may reward the men of Truth for their Truth, and punish the Hypocrites if that be His Will\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 33: 23-24]. When addressing great prophets, God referred to unbelievers as the opposite of honest individuals: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And He has prepared for the unbelievers a grievous Penalty\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 33: 8]. And when addressing these believers, He referred to hypocrites as the opposite of honest individuals and there are important points in this comparison. You and I will be questioned about our promise to God. We have a covenant with God. In the holy ayah \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Among the Believers are men who have been true to their covenant with Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", the pledge that believers made to God and that was honored by them is the same as another ayah in this holy sura: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And yet they had already covenanted with Allah not to turn their backs\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 33: 15]. All of us should pay attention to such points. Believers promised Allah the Exalted not to escape in the face of the enemy and not to turn their backs. The Holy Quran stresses that abandoning one\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s positions and retreating in the face of the enemy are among the things which should not be done. One should stand up against the enemy in any military, political and economic war and in any arena which is a test of strength. Your determination should overcome the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s determination. Your willpower should overcome the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s willpower. This can be done and this is possible. From the viewpoint of the Holy Quran and Islam, running away and retreating from the enemy are forbidden in any arena of jihad and confrontation. When we used the phrase \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"heroic flexibility\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", some people defined it as abandoning the ideals and the goals of the Islamic Republic. Some of the enemies too used it to accuse the Islamic Republic of betraying its principles. These interpretations were wrong and they misunderstood this phrase. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Heroic flexibility\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" means an artful maneuver for reaching one\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s goal. It means that the followers of God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s path - any divine path - should utilize different methods, in any way possible, in order to reach their goal and this should be done whenever they move towards the different ideals of Islam. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If any do turn his back to them on such a day - unless it be in a stratagem of war, or to retreat to a troop (of his own)- he draws on himself the wrath of Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 8: 16]. Like the arena of war, any movement - whether forward or backward - should be launched in order to reach one\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s predetermined goals. There are certain goals and at each stage, the Islamic government pursues one of these goals in order to make progress, achieve transcendence and create the great Islamic civilization. The Islamic government should try to achieve this goal at this stage. Of course, there are certain stages and phases to reach these goals. Experts, intellectuals and officials in charge of this are identifying these phases and goals and, as a result, our collective movement will begin. Everyone should try to make any movement, at any stage, reach its goal. This is a proper system which is based on logical and rational measures. All activists in the arena of politics and macromanagement of the country should always keep this in mind. All the people and you dear basijis too - who are activists in the arena of Basij - should always keep this in mind. Well, when we say that we want to move forward, does this mean that the Islamic government is warmongering? Does this mean that the Islamic government wants to confront all nations and all countries in the world? Sometimes one hears that the enemies of the Iranian nation - specifically the najis-mouthed dirty dog of the region, the Zionist regime - move their jaws to say that Iran is a threat for the entire world. This is the claim of the enemy, but this is exactly the opposite of Islamic principles. On the contrary, those evil and malevolent forces - including the fake Zionist regime and some of its supporters - that show nothing except for malevolence, are a threat for the entire world. The lesson that the Islamic government learned from the Holy Quran, the Holy Prophet of Islam (s.w.a.) and the Commander of the Faithful (a.s.) is a different lesson: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Allah commands justice and the doing of good\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 16: 90]. Allah the Exalted invites us to administer justice and do good. The commander of the Faithful (a.s.) said that we should be kind to everyone because \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Those who have the same religion as you have, they are brothers to you, and those who have religions other than that of yours, they are human beings like you\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Nahjul Balaghah, Letter 53]. People are either your Islamic brothers or human beings like you. This is the logic of Islam. We want to render services and show kindness to everyone. We want to establish a friendly and kind relationship with all human beings and all nations. We even have no enmity with the American people despite the fact that the government of America is an arrogant, hostile and evil government which bears a grudge against the Iranian nation and the Islamic Republic. The American people are like other peoples. What the Islamic Republic is opposed to is arrogance. The hostility of the Islamic Republic is oriented towards global arrogance. We are opposed to and fight against arrogance. Arrogance is a Quranic word and it has been used in the Holy Quran to refer to people like Pharaoh and the groups of people who are ill-wishers and who are opposed to truth. Arrogance existed in the past as well and it has continued to prevail until the present time. In all eras, arrogance has had the same structure. Of course, it has used different methods and tactics in different eras. There is arrogance today as well and it is led by the United States of America. We should know arrogance and its characteristics. We should know the methods and the orientation of arrogance so that we can organize our behavior in the face of arrogance. We are opposed to unreasonable behavior in all arenas. We believe that we should move forward with wisdom and acumen in all arenas, in all collective and individual orientations and in all plans. If we do not know the scene, if we do not know our friends and our enemies, if we do not know imperialism and arrogance in the present time, then how can we move forward with wisdom and acumen? How can we make accurate plans? Therefore, we should know these things. What I am saying about arrogance is a few examples regarding the behavior of today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s global arrogance in the world. In many of these examples and cases, today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s arrogance shares the characteristics of arrogance in previous centuries and previous eras. One of the characteristics of arrogance is egotism. When arrogant groups - those people who have taken everything in their hands as the highest-ranking individuals in a country, in a group of countries or in a global system - consider themselves to be superior to other people, when they regard themselves as the pivot, when they place everyone, except for themselves, on the periphery, then a wrong and dangerous equation will be formed in global interactions. When arrogance views itself as superior and as the pivot and core [of everything], then the result will be that it grants itself the right to interfere in the affairs of other people and other nations. If arrogance considers something to be a value and if other people do not, this will grant it the right to interfere in their affairs and bully and pressure them. This egotism makes them claim to be the guardian of nations and to be responsible for global management. It also makes them consider themselves to be the boss of all the people in the world. As you can hear, American officials and politicians speak about the government of America as if it were the leader of all countries. They say that they cannot let this be done. They say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We cannot allow this person to be or not to be in charge\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". They speak about our region in a way that it seems they are the owners of this region. They speak about the Zionist regime in a way that it seems regional nations have to accept this imposed and fake regime. They behave towards independent nations and governments as if they did not have the right to live. This egotism and this attitude of considering oneself to have a special position among all people, all nations and all human beings is the main foundation on which arrogance has been built and this is its biggest problem. This egotism will lead to another characteristic and another criterion for arrogance which is the tendency to ignore other people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s rights. They neither accept truth nor the rights of other nations. They do not at all acknowledge other people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s rights. In international negotiations, someone says something which is right, but America does not accept it. It tries to deny such rights with different methods and it does not accept truth. This has happened many times. In the present time, one of the examples of this behavior is our current issues related to nuclear activities and industries. Imagine that someone says something which is true. If one is fair, reasonable and rational, he should give up when he faces the truth. But arrogance does not give up. It hears the truth, but it does not accept it. This is one of its characteristics. It does not acknowledge the rights of other nations either. It does not acknowledge the right of a people to choose, to do what they want and to adopt those economic and political measures which they want. They believe in imposing things on other nations. Another characteristic of colonialism and arrogance is that it condones crimes against nations and the entire humanity and that it is indifferent towards such crimes. This is one of the greatest disasters of arrogance in modern times. Modern times means the era of scientific progress and the era of the emergence of dangerous weapons. When these weapons became available to arrogant powers, they created a disaster for all nations. They do not attach any value on the lives of individuals - those individuals who do not follow, obey and surrender to them. There are many examples in this regard. One example is the behavior of arrogant powers towards Native Americans - those people whose financial and natural resources, whose geography and whose entire properties are in the hands of non-natives now. Well, there were native people in America. Their behavior towards these Native Americans was so violent and so disgusting that it is one of the darkest points in the history of modern America. The Americans themselves have written many things about the massacres that took place and the pressures that they exerted. The same thing was done by the English in Australia. The English hunted people, for pleasure, like animals and like kangaroos. They did not attach any value on the lives of human beings. This is only one example. There are hundreds of examples which have been recorded in their own history books. Another example is the nuclear bombardment that was launched in the year 1945 of the Christian calendar - that it to say, the year 1324 of the Hijri calendar - when the Americans destroyed two Japanese cities and, as a result, hundreds of thousands of people were killed. Over the course of time, the number of people who suffered from deformities and different diseases because of nuclear radiations was several times larger than this and these problems have persisted until the present time. They did not have any cogent reason for this - I will refer to this later on. They easily dropped these bombs. Until now, atomic bombs have been used twice and both times, they were used by the Americans who consider themselves to be the main responsible party for the nuclear issues of other countries. They like to forget these events, but it is not forgettable. All these lives were destroyed, but it was not at all important to them. For arrogance, the lives of human beings have no value and it is easy for arrogant regimes to commit crimes. They massacred the people in Vietnam. In Iraq, their security services and their mercenary security agencies - such as Blackwater which I referred to in the year 1390 - committed certain crimes. They are still committing crimes in Pakistan with their drones. In Afghanistan, they conduct a number of bombardments and they commit crimes. They are not afraid of committing crimes in each area they can get their hands on and in each area their interests dictate. These crimes include murder and torture. The Guantanamo prison - which belongs to the Americans - still has prisoners. It is 10, 11 years now that they have been arresting a number of people from different countries and putting them in this prison on different charges. They have been keeping them in this prison without any trial and with extremely difficult conditions and they have been torturing them. In Iraq, the Abu Ghraib prison was one of the American prisons. In this prison, they used to torture and set dogs on prisoners. Looting the vital resources of other nations is easy for them. Capturing and enslaving Africans is one of the tragic events in history which American imperialism and other such regimes do not like to be reviewed. They do not like the issue of enslaving the people of Africa to be reflected on. They used to sail ships from the Atlantic Ocean and anchor them on the coast of West African countries such as Gambia and other countries in this continent. Then, they used to go and capture hundreds of thousands of men and women and old and young people with guns and other weapons which were not available to people at that time. While these people were in difficult conditions, they were taken to America on such ships for slavery. They captivated free people who were living in their houses and in their own cities. In the present time, the black people who live in America are the descendents of those slaves. For several centuries, the Americans exerted such an eccentric pressure and there are many books in this regard such as the book \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Roots\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" written by Alexander Haley. This book is a very valuable book for showing part of these crimes. How can today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s modern man forget such events? Despite all these crimes, the white people continue to discriminate against blacks in America. Another characteristic of arrogance is deception and hypocritical behavior. You should pay attention to this issue. They try to justify the crimes which were referred to and they try to show that they were rendering services by committing these crimes. Global arrogance, which intends to dominate all nations, is frequently using this method in its entire life: the method of justifying crimes and taking on the appearance of rendering services. When the Americans want to apologize for their attack on Japan - that is to say, the two bombs which exploded in Hiroshima and Nagasaki - they say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Although tens of thousands or perhaps hundreds of thousands of people were killed by the two bombs that we dropped on these two cities, this was the cost of ending World War II. If we the Americans had not dropped these bombs, the war would have continued. If we had not done this, then two million people - instead of the 200 thousand people who were killed as a result of these bombs - would have been killed. Therefore, we rendered a service by dropping these bombs\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Notice that this is a statement which the Americans make in their official propaganda. Now, around 65 years have passed from that day, but they have repeatedly said this. This is one of the deceptive and hypocritical statements and one of the elaborate lies that is not made and told by anyone except arrogant regimes. These bombs were dropped on and exploded in these two cities in the summer of the year 1945 of the Christian calendar and this crime was committed in that year. This was while four months before that - that is to say, in the early spring of 1945 - Hitler, who was the primary warmonger, had committed suicide. Moreover, Mussolini - the president of Italy at that time, who was the second important element in the war - had been arrested and the war was practically over. Japan too, which was the third important element in the war, had announced that it was ready to surrender. Therefore, there was practically no war, but these bombs were dropped anyway. Why? It is because these bombs had been built and they must have been tested somewhere. Certain weapons had been built and they must have been tested somewhere. Where should they test them now? The best option was to drop these bombs on the innocent people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with the excuse of war so that it becomes clear whether these bombs work properly or not. Such is their deceit. They claim to be the supporters of human rights, but they target the Iranian passenger plane in the air and they kill about three hundred passengers who are unaware of this. Moreover, they do not apologize and they award a medal to the person who commits this crime. You have heard that in recent weeks, the Americans - from the President to lower-ranking politicians - have created uproar about the use of chemical weapons in Syria. They accused the Syrian government of using chemical weapons. I do not want to judge who has used these weapons. Of course, evidence shows that terrorist groups have used them, but anyway, they said that the Syrian government has used such weapons. They created uproar about this and they said that the use of chemical weapons is our red line. American officials said this 10 times or more. But not only did the government and the regime of the United States of America not express any opposition to Saddam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s use of chemical weapons during its criminal attacks on Iran, but it also provided him with 500 tons of hazardous and lethal chemicals which could be turned into mustard gas. Many of our dear youth of those times are still suffering from the effects of those chemicals and it is several years that they have been suffering from various diseases. The Americans helped Saddam to be equipped with such chemicals. Of course, he had bought such chemicals from other countries as well, but it was America that provided Saddam with 500 tons of lethal chemicals - which could turn into mustard gas - and that helped him to use it. After that, when the United Nations Security Council decided to issue a resolution against Saddam, it was America that prevented this. This is the meaning of hypocritical behavior. On the issue of Syria, the use of chemical weapons is a red line, but on the issue of Iran, it can be allowed and supported. This is because on this issue, chemical weapons are used against an independent Islamic government and against a nation which does not want to give in to America. These are some of the characteristics of arrogance. Of course, the characteristics of arrogance are more than these. Arrogant powers wage wars, create discord and confront independent governments. They even confront their own people when the interests of specific groups dictate so. During the war that Saddam waged against Iran, they offered all kinds of help - which was possible for them - to Saddam. I referred to the case of chemicals, but they also gave him secret information about Iran. After the war, when the head of intelligence services of Saddam was interviewed, he said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"I used to go to the U.S. embassy in Baghdad three times a week and they gave me a sealed package in which all satellite information about the movements of the Iranian Armed Forces existed and therefore, we knew where they were\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". They offered such kinds of help to Saddam. The Islamic government is opposed to such arrogance. The Islamic government is not opposed to people and nations. It is not opposed to human beings. Rather, it is opposed to arrogance. This opposition has existed since the time of Abraham - God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Friend - Noah, the Holy Prophet of Islam and other great prophets and it has continued until today. Since that time, the camp of right has confronted arrogance. Why is that? Why does today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Islamic government confront arrogance? It is because arrogance with the characteristics that I described cannot tolerate an Islamic government such as the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is because the Islamic Republic of Iran was formed on the basis of opposition to arrogance. The Revolution was carried out in Iran in opposition to arrogance and the agents of arrogance. It was formed on the basis of this opposition. It grew, it became strong and it challenged the logic of arrogance on the basis of this opposition. Arrogance cannot tolerate this unless it is frustrated. The Iranian people, the Iranian youth, the Iranian activists and those Iranians who believe in their homeland and their country for any reason - even if it may be a non-Islamic reason - should do something to make the enemy hopeless. The enemy should become hopeless. It is very difficult for global arrogance and for the government of the United States of America in the present time to see that in this sensitive region - in West Asia, which is the one of the most sensitive regions in the world in terms of politics and economy and which influences the entire world - a country, a government and a people have emerged who do not consider themselves to be dependent on and to be the followers of this self-proclaimed superpower. This Islamic government is independent and despite the strong opposition that it is faced with, it overcomes all problems and hardships. As the Americans themselves admit, this government is challenging the influence of America in the region and it is extending its own influence. This Islamic government is becoming a role model for regional nations and this is very difficult for the Americans to tolerate. The Americans want to say that the lives of all nations depend on America. Now a people have emerged who not only are not dependent on America, but who also have not been influenced by all these hostilities. From the first day, the Americans did whatever they could, but it was not effective. These people have achieved growth and they have become stronger on a daily basis. The hostilities that the government of the United States of America has shown against the Islamic Republic happened during the time of different presidents, but all of these hostilities are of the same nature. All of these hostilities are the same. Therefore, no one should say that such and such a plot was hatched during the time of such and such a president and this plot has not been hatched during the time of the current President of America. This is not the case. All of these presidents behave in the same way. First, they provoked ethnicities in Iran, then they launched a coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état and after that, they made Iraq attack us. The next thing that they did was to help our enemy - which was the regime of Saddam - in his war against us and after the war, they imposed sanctions on us. Then, they provoked all media networks in the world and they made them align themselves against the Islamic Republic. All of these things have been done during the time of different presidents of America and now too, these things are being done. In the fitna of the year 1388 - during the term of the current President of America - one of the social networks, which could be used to further the goals of fitna and those who provoked the fitna, needed to fix some technical problems. The government of America asked this network to delay fixing these technical problems because they hoped to overthrow the Islamic Republic with the help of media activities and networks such as Facebook, Twitter and other such networks. They had these foolish delusions. Therefore, they did not let this network fix its technical problems and they said that it should delay it and attend to this task which is more important. They used all kinds of tools against the Islamic Republic and sanctions are one of these tools. From their viewpoint, this tool is enough for defeating the Islamic Republic. Their mistake is that they do not know the Iranian nation. Their mistake is that they do not know the element of faith and unity among our people. Their mistake is that they did not learn a lesson from their past mistakes. Therefore, they hope that they can bring the people of Iran to their knees by imposing sanctions, exerting pressures and other such measures. Of course, they are making a mistake. The permanent experience of the Islamic Republic during the past 35 years shows that the only way to get rid of the interference of the enemy is national power and national resistance. This is the only factor which can make the enemy retreat. Of course, the enemy is the enemy. He uses all kinds of tools. As I said, he has used and is using sanctions. We should know what it is that can help us achieve our goal. I would like to say a few things about Basij and after that, I would like to briefly speak about the current issues regarding our foreign policies. As I said, Basij is a source of dignity for the country and the Islamic Republic. Why? It is because the meaning of Basij is the presence of all the people in arenas of fundamental activities for the sake of the people and the country. Any government that has people by its side and any country in which the people show their presence and move towards a specific direction, will definitely achieve victory. This is completely clear. Countries receive a blow and they are defeated whenever the people are not present on the scene or whenever they do not have unity of action. Whenever the people are present on the scene and whenever there is unity among them, victory and progress will be certain. Basij is the example of such presence. Basij is the manifestation of the presence of the people on the scene and the unity of the people. We should adopt such an outlook towards Basij. On the issue of sincerity, which I referred to in the beginning of my speech, Basij has emerged victorious out of the test of sincerity. Basij was put to this test during the imposed war and the Sacred Defense Era which was a time when the country was in difficult conditions. Also, during the different events that took place after the Sacred Defense Era until the present time, Basij has emerged victorious out of the test of sincerity. The Basij organization has shown that it enjoys sincerity. Of course, in my opinion, Basij is not confined to this number of people who are active in the Basij organization. There are many people whose hearts are with you. They praise and respect you and they appreciate your value. These people are not active in the Basij organization, but they are basijis as well. In my opinion, those people who believe in and respect your values and who respect your efforts, your services and your jihad are basijis as well. Being present on the scene is one of the most important tasks. Moreover, the capabilities of Basij help us solve problems. Fortunately, today inside the organization of Basij, there are many scientific, artistic, social and political personalities and there are many social activists and people who can influence the people. Until today, Basij has represented a group of people who have been achieving growth and transcendence on a daily basis and it should act in the same way from now on too. What I recommend is that we should increase the capabilities of Basij. There are certain prerequisites for this: moral, behavioral and practical prerequisites. Moral prerequisites means that we should build and develop Islamic virtues in our hearts and souls. A number of these virtues are patience, forgiveness, fortitude, self-control and humility. We should strengthen these characteristics in ourselves. Behavioral prerequisites means that we should utilize these virtues when we interact with the people, the environment, society and human beings in general. Imam Sadiq (peace and greetings be upon him) used to say to his companions, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"You should act in a way that whenever people see you, they say, ‘These people are the companions of Imam Sadiq. God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy be upon Imam Sadiq. You should make us be proud of you\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [al-Kafi, Volume 2, page 233]. Each and every one of you dear basijis, you dear youth with your pure and enlightened hearts and souls should behave towards all the people - as I said, many of the people are basijis in the real sense of the word - in a way that they say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"These people are students of the Islamic government. They are a source of respect for the Islamic government and the Islamic Republic\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". And practical, jihadi and social prerequisites are the tasks that should be carried out. That is to say, we should strengthen these virtues in ourselves. It means that we should behave in a kind, diligent and praiseworthy way towards the [social] environment. It means that we should act in a serious way in all arenas including the arena of science, the arena of social services, the arena of work, the arena of politics and the arena of production. Wherever you are, you should work in a serious way without any feeling of tiredness and any laziness. We should work. This great group of basijis - tens of thousands of people from this great group are present in this meeting - can move the country towards positive paths in the real sense of word. This group of people can be a source of solidity and stability. It can be a source of grandeur for the Islamic Republic and thankfully it is playing such a role today. Today, Basij is a source of grandeur and honor for the Islamic Republic. I would like to raise a point about the recent contentions over the arena of foreign policies, our nuclear issues, the current negotiations and other such things. First of all, I insist on supporting the officials who are in charge of this. I support all administrations and all officials - whether officials in charge of domestic affairs or officials in charge of foreign affairs - and this is our responsibility. I myself have been an executive official. I have been in the middle of the arena and I felt with all my heart the difficulty of the work. I know that the responsibility of managing the country is difficult. Therefore, these officials need help and I help and support them. This is one part of the issue which is clear. On the other hand, I also insist on establishing the rights of the Iranian nation including the issue of our nuclear rights. We insist that these officials should not even take one step back on the rights of the Iranian nation. Of course, we do not interfere in the details of these negotiations. There are certain red lines and limits in this regard. These limits should be observed. We have said this to officials in charge and it is their responsibility to observe these limits. They should not be afraid of the fuss that the enemies and opponents make. They should show no fear in the face of such fuss and uproar. Everyone should know that primarily, the sanctions which have been imposed on the Iranian nation result from the arrogant grudge of America. The grudge that the Americans bear against us is like the grudge of a camel. They want to exert pressures on the Iranian nation in the hope that they can perhaps make the Iranian nation surrender. They are making a mistake because the Iranian nation will not surrender to anyone under pressure. You Americans have failed to know the people of Iran. They are a people who can, by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, endure these pressures and who will turn these threats and pressures into an opportunity. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, the Iranian nation will do this. We have had certain weak points in the area of economic decisions and plans. These weak points have made the enemy feel that he can create a rift. This is an opportunity for us to know and eliminate these weak points and, by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, we will eliminate them. The Americans should know and I think they know that sanctions do not work. The reason why we say they themselves know that sanctions do not work is the military threats they issue. Well, if sanctions can serve the purpose, then why do they issue military threats? This shows that sanctions have not served the purpose and that they do not work. They have to issue military sanctions. Of course, the act of issuing military threats is a very disgusting and despicable act. Instead of issuing military threats against different countries, you Americans should go and improve your own devastated economy. You should do something so that your government will not be shut down for 15, 16 days. You should go and pay your debts. You should think of improving your own economy. As I said, the Americans should know that the Iranian nation behaves in a brotherly way towards all nations: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Those who have the same religion as you have, they are brothers to you, and those who have religions other than that of yours, they are human beings like you\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". The people of Iran respect other nations, but they behave towards transgressors in a way that they become regretful. They slap transgressots across the face in a way that they will never forget. The Americans consider themselves responsible for saying something in support of the Zionist regime and the capitalist Zionists and this is a source of weakness and humiliation for them. In fact, the Zionist regime is a regime whose foundations are extremely shaky. The Zionist regime is doomed to destruction. It is a regime which is imposed [on regional nations] and it has been formed on the basis of bullying. Any phenomenon and any organism which has come into being by use of force cannot survive and this regime cannot survive either. The support of the Americans - who are indebted to Zionist capitalists - for the wretched Zionist regime is a source of disgrace for them. Unfortunately, a number of European countries flatter this regime. These Europeans go and flatter these creatures who do not deserve to be called human beings and they humiliate themselves and their people in front of these creatures. The leaders of the Zionist regime are really like wild animals and one cannot call them human beings. One day in Europe, the French nation gained a good political reputation because the president of France in those days did not allow England to enter the European Community due to the fact that England was dependent on America. This became a source of dignity for France. On that day, the dignity of the French government increased because it stood up against America and because it did not let England - which was dependent on America - enter the European Community. A people achieve dignity in such a way. Today, the politicians of this country [France] go and humble themselves not only before America, but also before these damned and dirty Zionists. This is a source of humiliation for the French nation. Of course, the people of France themselves should find a cure for this problem. I would like to speak to you dear youth about a few things. You youth should know that without a doubt, the bright and promising future of this country and the Islamic Republic belongs to you. You will manage to help your country and your people reach the peak of glory. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, you will be able to build a perfect model of the modern Islamic civilization in this country. In order to carry out these great tasks, you should promote and strengthen - as much as you can - religion, piety, morality and purity of soul among yourselves. Today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s youth need religion, piety, science, enthusiasm, trustworthiness, morality, social services and physical exercise. These are the things which today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s youth need and by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, you dear basijis will succeed in doing this. Dear God, by the blessedness of Muhammad (s.w.a.) and his household (a.s.), bestow Your blessings on these people and on all the basijis of our country. Dear God, make the Iranian nation conquer the peaks of honor on a daily basis. Dear God, by the blessedness of Muhammad (s.w.a.) and his household (a.s.), make the immaculate soul of Imam satisfied with us and with these people. Dear God, make the pure souls of martyrs satisfied and pleased with us. Dear God, by the blessedness of Muhammad (s.w.a.) and his household (a.s.), make the holy heart of the Imam of the Age satisfied and pleased with us and hasten the re-appearance of this great Imam. Make us be among his companions and his accompanying mujahids and make us be martyrs by his side. Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings. Source: http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1839&Itemid=4