Search Result in All

[1] Julian Assange: Safe passage to Ecuador - 17 Aug 2012 - English

[2] Julian Assange Safe passage to Ecuador - 17 Aug 2012 - English

SAFE at Michigan State University (MSU) invites Finkelstein - English

[28 July 2015] UN calls for safe, unhindered access of aid workers to Yemen - English

Hundreds of tour guides from all over Iran have gathered in Kerman province to say it\'s safe again after the earthquake that happened 10 years ago, and that Iran itself is a safe tourist destination. Nearly a thousand Iranian tour guides have converged in Iran\'s southeastern province of Kerman, they have celebrated International tour guides day. The event was a hit this year as more support seems to be heading towards these guides. Ali Zandipour, the organizer of the event said \"This event was welcomed greatly this year; we had high ranking officials from a presidential deputy to city and provincial officials.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Gholam-Ali Haddad Adel No Place in Israel Will Be Safe. The Blood of Khomeini in Nasrallahs Veins 7-18-2006

Pat & Mat - Part 46: Safe - All Languages

Health Canada, a federal agency, has removed 20,000 safe & effective natural health products from sale to the public. It also promotes prescription drugs that have a 1-in 6- chance of harming or killing you.

The Dutch Finance Minister who was a leader in the EU bailout of Cypress said that account confiscation is the new bailout model That means that all bank accounts within the eurozone now are at risk Cypress was considered by Europeans as an offshore banking haven and banks employ 25 PERCENT of the entire workforce Massive layoffs have already begun causing even more woe for the Cypriots

Press TV talks with Medea Benjamin, the co-founder of CODEPINK in Washington, regarding the United States\' drone strikes in several Muslim countries including Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia.

Sarah Ali (SAFE) Speaking at Toronto Hands Off Jerusalem Al-Quds Rally

The American regime is accustomed to creating enemies after enemies. One can safely say that no nation in the world has kept safe from the American hegemony. The bullying, arrogance, and assumed supremacy of the United States of America has been evident for over a century now. So, really all nations around the globe hate America for what it is. #DeathToAmerica slogan echos throughout the world; the most burnt flag across the world is the US flag today. That said, who is going to bring down the evil system of the US? Who is America\'s real enemy? Watch what Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei, the Leader of the Muslim Ummah, has to say regarding this.

What If You Stop Sleeping | Why Sleep Is Important | Sleeping | Stay Safe | Best Kids Show | Dr Binocs Show | Dr Binocs | Peekaboo Kidz Hey kids, in this video, Dr Binocs will explain, What If You Stop Sleeping? | Not SLEEPING | Dr Binocs Show | Peekaboo Kid Make sure you watch the whole video to know all the answers to your curious questions! Leave your ideas, suggestions and questions for Dr. Binocs at this Email Id: [email protected] For more fun learning videos SUBSCRIBE to Peekaboo Kidz: http://bit.ly/SubscribeTo-Peekabookidz Watch Guess The Shapes With Baby Binocs here - Watch other fun learning episodes of Dr. Binocs here - http://bit.ly/2kfNS22 Watch our NEW SERIES of Baby Binocs, stay tuned to this playlist - http://bit.ly/2kyC2jU Copyrights and Publishing: Rajshri Entertainment Private Limited All rights reserved #WhatIfYouStopSleeping #PeekabooKidz #DrBinocsShow Catch Dr.Binocs At - https://goo.gl/SXhLmc To Watch More Popular Nursery Rhymes Go To - https://goo.gl/CV0Xoo To Watch Alphabet Rhymes Go To - https://goo.gl/qmIRLv To Watch Compilations Go To - https://goo.gl/nW3kw9 Catch More Lyricals At - https://goo.gl/A7kEmO Subscribe to Peekaboo Kidz: http://bit.ly/peekabookidz Like our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/peekabootv

A very beautiful clip that has the words of Imam Khomeini and Imam Khamenei where they speak about the assassination attempt on the life of Imam Khamenei. How does Imam Khomeini speak about Imam Khamenei? And how does Imam Khamenei speak about Imam Khomeini? It is truly beautiful to see how these two great, esteemed, and honorable leaders speak about one another. We are willing to sacrifice ourselves as long as the leader of the Islamic Revolution remains safe.

How has the struggle in the occupied territories of Palestine gained a universality? How strong is the Resistance Front in the present-day? Besides, how was Palestine able to arm itself with missiles in spite of the seemingly impassable barriers of the illegal Zionist regime? And how does the Palestinian Resistance continue to produce more missiles? Furthermore, what is the range of the missiles of the Resistance Front? Additionally, is the power of the Resistance Front limited to missiles only or does it have more dimensions? And finally, what is the deciding factor in a battle between the Zionist regime and the courageous soldiers of the Resistance Front? Major-general Husayn Salami sheds light on the growing power of the Resistance Front in Palestine.

Saudi Arabia Kidnapped Shahram Amiri for CIA, Muslim Brotherhood Missing Iranian scientist Shahram Amiri has taken refuge in the Iranian interests section of the Pakistani embassy in Washington. Here is a chronology of events since he disappeared in June last year. June 2009 The scientist, in his early 30s, disappears while undertaking the Hajj pilgrimage in the Saudi Arabian city of Mecca, soon after telephoning his wife in Iran. 7 September 2009 The Iranian government announces Mr Amiri has disappeared. Referring to the scientist only as an "Iranian citizen", Iran's semi-official Fars news agency suggests he is being held in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, and says it holds the Saudi authorities "accountable" for his disappearance. The agency quotes Mr Amiri's wife as complaining that Saudi Arabia was unable to safeguard pilgrims' security during visits to holy sites in the country. 29 September 2009 Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki publicly suggests for the first time that Mr Amiri is being held by the US authorities. Meanwhile, the Saudi-owned al-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper reports that Mr Amiri has sought asylum in Saudi Arabia. Mystery over Iranian researcher December 2009 At a news conference, Mr Mottaki accuses the US of abducting Mr Amiri, citing "existing pieces of evidence that we have at our disposal". "We expect the American government to return him," he says. Mr Mottaki and the speaker of Iran's parliament, Ali Larijani, accuse Saudi Arabia of complicity in the alleged abduction, saying he was taken from Saudi soil. The Saudis deny the accusation and the US government declines to comment on the issue. "We are aware of the Iranian claims," US state department spokesman Philip Crowley says. "I have no information on that." Iranian scientist 'held by US' 31 March 2010 US television network ABC reports that Mr Amiri has defected to the CIA and has settled in the US, citing anonymous officials briefed by intelligence agents. ABC says the scientist has been extensively debriefed and has helped to confirm US intelligence assessments about the Iranian nuclear programme. Iranian scientist 'defects to US' 7 June 2010 A man claiming to be Mr Amiri appears in a video posted online, claiming he was kidnapped by CIA agents during the Hajj. Continue reading the main story A man claiming to be Shahram Amiri in the YouTube video Iran scientist video: Transcripts "They took me to a house located somewhere that I didn't know," he says in the video. "They gave me an anaesthetic injection." He says he is living in Tucson, Arizona, and says he has been subjected to eight months of "the most severe tortures and psychological pressures". But another video message appears on YouTube on the same day, recorded apparently by the same man, entirely contradicting this version of events. In this video, he says he is in the US to continue his education, adding: "I am free here and I assure everyone that I am safe." He says he is "not involved in weapons research and have no experience and knowledge in this field". Videos worsen Iran scientist row 29 June 2010 A man claiming to be Mr Amiri resurfaces on another video shown on Iranian state television, this time claiming he has escaped from US custody in the US state of Virginia and is in hiding. "Presently, I am producing this video in a safe place," he says. "I could be re-arrested at any time." Iran scientist 'flees US captors' 13 July 2010 Mr Amiri turns up in the Iranian interests section of the Pakistani embassy in Washington and demands to go back to Iran. Iranian state radio reports that Mr Amiri has said in a telephone interview from inside the Iranian interest section that he has been "under enormous psychological pressure and supervision of armed agents in the past 14 months".

The Story of Cosmetics released on July 21st 2010 examines the pervasive use of toxic chemicals in our everyday personal care products from lipstick to baby shampoo Produced with Free Range Studios and hosted by Annie Leonard the seven-minute film by The Story of Stuff Project reveals the implications for consumer and worker health and the environment and outlines ways we can move the industry away from hazardous chemicals and towards safer alternatives. The film concludes with a call for viewers to support legislation aimed at ensuring the safety of cosmetics and personal care products

This is a ‘meccan’ sūrah. The Holy Prophet (saw) said that reciting this sūrah carries the reward of reciting a quarter of the Holy Qur’an. The recitation of this sūrah drives away Shaitan and keeps one safe from Shirk. It is also among the five sūrahs that have been recommended to be recited during a journey, the others being sūrah an-Nasr, at-Tawhid, al-Falaq and an-Naas. Reciting sūrah al-Kafirun and at-Tawheed in compulsory prayers is a means for forgiveness of sins for the reciter, his parents and his children. If a person dies after reciting this sūrah, it is as if he has died a martyr. Recitation of this sūrah before sleeping keeps one safe the whole night.

This is a ‘meccan’ surah. This surah refers to an incident in the history of Makka, as an example of how ALLAH (swt) deals with those who oppose HIS will. About fifty days before the birth of the Holy Prophet, Abraha, the Abyssinia\'s viceroy of Yemen, Christian by religion, proceeded against Makka, as the head of a large army, with the object of destroying the Kaabah, because he wanted that there should be no place or structure more glorious than the church he was building at Sana. He had with him elephants. Therefore he and his army is known as ashab al fil, those who brought elephants. At the outskirts of Makka he captured a large number of camels belonging to the chief of Makka, Abd al Muttalib, the grandfather of the Holy Prophet. After receiving the information that Abraha was coming to destroy the holy Ka-bah, Abd al Muttalib went to see him and said: \"I have come to collect my camels. The Ka-bah belongs to God. He will surely protect it from your evil design.\" Abraha gave the captured camels to Abd al Muttalib He returned to the city and asked the people to retire to the neighbouring hills, leaving the Lord of Ka-bah to protect it. When Abraha entered Makka, suddenly a large flock of birds, like swallows, came flying from the sea-coast and pelted the invading army with pebbles of baked clay. They all died. They were like a dead and useless field from which all the produce is eaten up and only straw with stubble is left. Abraha escaped and went directly to the king in Abyssinia. All the way a bird with a stone in her beak followed him. When the king asked Abraha as to what kind of birds they were, Abraha looked to the sky and the bird at once dropped stone in her beak and killed him on the spot.The lesson to be drawn is twofold. The pagans of Makka were forewarned that as the Holy Prophet was superior to the Kaabah, ALLAH, who protects whatever is HIS own, shall protect him from all their evil schemes. It is also a warning to men in all ages that \"if a man intoxicated with power comes out to defeat ALLAH\'s holy plan, he cannot prevail against ALLAH (swt), but his plan will fail and destroy him as well.“ It is narrated from Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq (as) that whoever recites this surah in his faraa’idh prayers, the mountains will bear witness on the Day of Judgement that he prayed and he will be taken to Jannah on the command of ALLAH (swt). The person who recites this surah is kept safe from his enemies and has his difficulties and problems solved quickly. Recitation of this surah is also helpful in remaining safe from evil tyrant rulers.

This is a ‘meccan’ surah. The Holy Prophet (saw) has said that whoever recites this surah will be safe from the Wrath of ALLAH (swt) on the Day of Reckoning. Those who recite this surah in their faraa’idh prayers, will be counted among the pious and will given a highly status in the company of the Prophets and martyrs. Writing this surah as a talisman and tying it around the neck of a child keeps him/her safe from illness. Water in which this surah has been dissolved, if put in the nostrils, acts as a cure for nose ailments.

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah called on the US administration and the Zionist entity to understand very well that a war against Iran and Syria will not stay inside Iran and Syria, but will roll instead and spread out to the entire region. During a ceremony on the Martyr’s Day in Master of Martyrs Complex (PBUH) in the southern suburb of Beirut Friday afternoon, his eminence delivered his speech via video link at the rally, noting that despite all the threats in the region, all the local, regional and international situations of today are in favor of the peoples of the region and the axis of defiance and resistance more than any time ever. Sayyed Nasrallah believed that talk of an attack or a new war on Lebanon is an intimidation. “We still rule out such an enemy assault on Lebanon regardless the developments in the region and the regional situation,” his eminence said, pointing out that if there is no plan for a regional war, any plan for an imminent war on Lebanon is ruled out. His Eminence went on to call upon those who bet on the fall of the Syrian regime to abandon their bet. “Put this bet aside, it will fail just like previous bets had failed,” he said. In his speech, Sayyed Nasrallah saw no reason why Lebanon should be expected to contribute its share of the tribunal\\\\\\\'s funding given Washington\\\\\\\'s decision to cut off funds to the United Nations cultural agency UNESCO after members voted to admit Palestine as a full member. \\\\\\\"Isn\\\\\\\'t the funding of UNESCO an international obligation for the US?\\\\\\\" he said. \\\\\\\"Why can it shirk its obligation and not Lebanon?\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"If Lebanon doesn\\\\\\\'t fund this unconstitutional and illegal court, Feltman comes along and threatens sanctions,\\\\\\\" he added, referring to Jeffrey Feltman, the US assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs. OUR SOUTH, STRONG and SAFE At the beginning of his speech, Sayyed Nasrallah said that martyrs are “life makers” by the will of God, and that Jihad, martyrdom and the will of those resisting and steadfasting constitute the key path of this concept. Noting that lovers of Imam Mousa al-Sadr live today special sentiment waiting for his return to Lebanon, God willing, his eminence read the words of Imam al-Sadr said in 1978, when he felt sorry for what suffered by Southern Lebanon attacked by Zionist entity. “I told him to myself when you return you will be proud of your students, sons and the resistance, which was founded and sacrificed in order to be,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, adding “the South today is safe, strong and constant firm. It is no more under the mercy of anyone, but strongly present in the regional equation.” TURNING TABLE OVER THE AGRESSOR His Eminence added: “We still rule out an enemy assault on Lebanon regardless the regional developments and situation,” his eminence said, pointing out that if there is no plan for a regional war, any scheme for an imminent war on Lebanon is ruled out. He stressed this is not due to the moral generosity of Israel, the US and the UN Security Council, but because “Lebanon is not weak anymore. It is a strong state and is able - with his army, people and resistance - to defeat.” “Lebanon has become able to turn the table on anyone who attacks him. Lebanon has become able to turn the threats into real opportunities,” he noted, stressing that Resistance did not sleep one day. In Martyr\\\\\\\'s Day, Hezbollah S.G. went on to call for adherence to the resistance, the army and the popular will for being the real element of force. LOCALS AND SECURITY The Lebanese government has so far proved to be the government of diversity, for it represents a popular majority, a cabinet of research, discussion and dialogue. “Members of Lebanese cabinet discuss and make decisions. They neither wait for \\\\\\\"sms\\\\\\\", nor receive signals or suggestions from anyone. We call upon cabinet today to work, achieve, follow-up files and not to listen to all the noise, Sayyed Nasrallah said. “The most important of the government\\\\\\\'s work is giving priority to livelihood issues.” Addressing the Lebanese Army, his eminence called to neutralize the army as a guarantor of the sovereignty, national unity and security. “All harsh experiences of Lebanon had proven that at the end of the day Lebanon was lost and divided, while this institution remained the salvation stage,” he added. UNESCO SCANDAL Sayyed Nasrallah said that the issue of STL fund should be discussed in the cabinet, calling to learn lessons from the UNESCO event. “It is useful that Lebanese and the public recognize what happened in the issue of UNESCO, an international organization recognized the state of Palestine. The USA became angry and stopped funding the organization. Why Lebanon should be expected to contribute its share of the tribunal\\\\\\\'s funding given Washington\\\\\\\'s decision to cut off funds to the United Nations cultural agency UNESCO?\\\\\\\" his eminence asked. IRAN AND SYRIA Hezbollah Secretary General assured that betting on regional developments will eventually fail. Touching the recent US and Zionist threats against Syria and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that Iran will not be afraid of fleets and intimidation. “Iran and Syria were the two countries that opposed the US occupation of Iraq and the killing of its people. Iran did neither weaken nor subjected to the American terms. \\\\\\\"Whoever dares to launch war against Iran will be met with doubly that force,\\\\\\\" he warned. \\\\\\\"Iran is strong, solid and united; Iran is powerful and has a leader unique to the whole world.\\\\\\\" He added that any military action against Iran or Syria would engulf the entire region. “They want to drag Iran into negotiations, and to force Syria to accept what it rejected in the past,” he noted. “American defeat in Iraq has strategic results at every level of our region. I call to shed light upon American withdrawal and defeat in Iraq. Ben Ali\\\\\\\'s and Gaddafi\\\\\\\'s regimes fall is a loss to the US project; fall of Mubarak\\\\\\\'s regime is a major loss for the US and Israel,” his eminence added addressing the US project defeat in the Middle East. “We affirm that since the reign of martyr Ahmad Qasir to the day we entered the era of victories, where days of defeats had gone. Local, regional and international situations are today in the interests of peoples of the region, as well as the axis of defiance and resistance more than any time ever”. “As long as we are the people of faith, determination and will in all next expectations, God willing we will win,” Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah concluded.

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.

I’m not infatuated with anyone but God. Follow us: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Panahianen/ ... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/PanahianEN/... Twitter: https://twitter.com/PanahianEN Telegram: https://telegram.me/Panahianen/ ============================== What is faith? Faith is something that eliminates your useless entanglements and makes you ready to understand this point that the only thing worth living for is the excitement of getting close to God. How close have I become to Him? Our likings and fears are keeping us busy. These don’t let us see our high goal in life, which is getting close to God. What does faith do? Faith wants to give us peace of mind so that we can abandon the games they have designed for our minds and our hearts’ entertainments. It keeps you safe in calamities and fears. It keeps you safe from the harms of the sweet points in life! Do you know what is one of the harms of this sweetness? When you experience this sweetness, you’ll be repelled by it afterwards. This is one of its harms. [One might think,] “Having too much calm is not good either! If I’m too calm, I won’t work anymore. If I’m too calm, where will I experience excitements? People want a life with excitement. But by talking about faith, you are calming everything down. The excitement of marriage! Thinking about what will happen! The excitement of having a relationship. Excitement…” But God says, “These excitements are not enough for you. I’m not against excitements. I want to give you a deeper excitement.” People pay money to be in an exciting atmosphere. One says, “If we don’t have such excitements, we’ll rot.” He’s right. One cannot live without excitements. But what does God say? He says, “I want to give you a deeper excitement.” Nothing will remain from these excitements for you afterwards, and you’ll feel upset. And they’re not useful for you. What happens? You became rich? You used all your money. What was added to you? And you’re bored by these too. One says, “I’ve seen this show before and I’m tired of it. Couldn’t we go to a different show?” “I’ve seen this movie before.” “I’ve gone to this amusement park before.” So he goes to do something else. He is constantly trying different things. People say, “Islam is against us having excitements.” But Islam is against our wrong lifestyle. Islam has announced many relations are unlawful. Why? They have some sort of excitement, but Islam says, “Why do you waste yourself for such excitements? You won’t gain anything afterwards. Instead, have a serious excitement. Pure Lady Fatimah Zahra (as) would pray in such a way that she experienced spiritual excitement and its effects could be seen in her appearance. Even if we have the best worldly life, we won’t have such excitements even once a year. The spiritual excitements are without harms, but those excitements have many harms. Spiritual excitements are useful, but those excitements are harmful. Spiritual excitements are eternal. I confess to you that I don’t believe in a god whom when one goes to him for the second time, it feels like the first time again [in terms of enjoyment]. I don’t believe in such a god. God is not like this. It is said in the traditions that on the eve before Fridays, the Friends of God receive a new understanding of God. Their new understanding is such that when they look back, it’s as if they didn’t know God before. But such a thing doesn’t happen in our lives even once! See what excitement they experience. What does having faith do? It takes away false excitements so that there is space for the main excitement. What is the name of that main excitement? “Getting close to God.” I want to get close to God. How should we communicate with God? The way is to have faith. Faith cuts your dependance on others. That is why the main dhikr of faith is«لا إله ‌إلّا ‌الله» [There is no god but Allah]. What does “Ilah [god]” mean? It means whoever you’re infatuated with.«لا إله ‌إلّا ‌الله» I’m not infatuated with anyone but God. Faith gives a person this safety. Faith tells a person, “Forget the sweetness and bitterness of the world. You don’t want the small excitements from the sweetness of this world, nor do you want the useless fears. Let me give you safety.” Faith wants to give us peace of mind so that we can abandon the games they have designed for our minds and our hearts’ entertainments.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Gholam-Ali Haddad Adel No Place in Israel Will Be Safe. The Blood of Khomeini in Nasrallahs Veins

The biotech industry claims that the FDA has thoroughly evaluated GM foods and found them safe This is untrue Internal FDA documents made public from a lawsuit reveal that agency scientists warned that GM foods might create toxins allergies nutritional problems and new diseases that might be difficult to identify 131-140 Although they urged their superiors to require long-term tests on each GM variety prior to approval the political appointees at the agency including a former attorney for Monsanto ignored the scientists Official policy claims that the foods are no different130 and do NOT require safety testing

This lecture was delivered in last Moharram - > Ummot E Kay Urooj o Zawal main Muktlai Tabaqaat ka kirdar (Maslhat Pasan Tabqa) . Visit www.islamimarkaz.com for full lecture of H.I. Sayyed Jawad Naqvi.

In line with foreign media attempts to disrupt post-election stability in Iran, CNN has broadcast a false report which contradicts footage obtained by Press TV. CNN broadcast an interview with a so-called anonymous witness of Wednesday's protest in Tehran's Baharestan Square, with the aim of depicting Iranian security forces as villains. Footage obtained by Press TV reporters display some 200 protesters 'illegally' gathering in front of Iran's parliament and at a nearby subway station on Wednesday, to protest the result of the June 12th election. The CNN's report, however, contains a call from an alleged female witness in Tehran who supposedly describes the situation as the 'massacre' of protesters by the police in Baharestan Square. The following is an excerpt from CNN newscaster's conversation with the alleged witness: CNN: You tell us what you saw today when you tried to go to Baharestan Square? Witness: Police stopped everyone at Sa'di. They emptied the buses that were taking people there and let the private cars go on. All of a sudden 500 people with clubs and woods came out of Hedayat Mosque and poured into the streets. They started beating everyone and throwing them off Sa'di Bridge. This was a massacre. CNN: We are not only getting this report from you. We got a report from another source in Tehran describing the situation today being terrible, saying people were being shot like animals; they beat people like animals. Are you safe right now? Witness: Yes, exactly, exactly. This is what was happening. They beat people so bad. However, Press TV, which is based in Tehran and was present at the scene, did not find even traces of the false and unfounded report. It remains unclear, whether CNN -- which has resorted to 'unreliable' sources like social network websites in its coverage of Iran -- was duped by the 'anonymous' caller or was simply faking the phone call in line with the Western agenda of destabilizing Iran. Iranian officials have condemned foreign media outlets including Britain's state-run BBC over dramatizing the situation in the country by provoking the post-election violence in Iran. Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hassan Qashqavi on Sunday pinned the blame for the recent post-election turmoil across the country on US and British media outlets. Post-election unrests were sparked after the Interior Ministry declared Ahmadinejad as the president of the country for yet another four-year term by almost two-thirds of the vote. People have staged rallies across the country to protest the results of the election. Some of the demonstrations have turned violent.