Search Result in All

Syrian President Bashar al Assad says the Geneva 2 conference should focus on the war against terrorism. He\\\'s also suggested he\\\'ll seek a new term in the upcoming presidential elections. How successful can the conference be with the government objecting to the idea of Assad\\\'s departure, a fractious opposition and the growing threat from terrorists? Russia and the EU have welcomed the official UN invitation extended to Iran but why does the US want the invitation withdrawn?

Syrian President Bashar al Assad says the Geneva 2 conference should focus on the war against terrorism. He\\\'s also suggested he\\\'ll seek a new term in the upcoming presidential elections. How successful can the conference be with the government objecting to the idea of Assad\\\'s departure, a fractious opposition and the growing threat from terrorists? Russia and the EU have welcomed the official UN invitation extended to Iran but why does the US want the invitation withdrawn?

Israeli security forces stormed al Aqsa mosque compound on Tuesday in order to disperse protesters and Muslims praying in the compound. The attacks came ahead of a Knesset debate on a bill that would determine the future status Islam\'s third holiest site. The debate was initiated in the Israeli Knesset by right-wing extremist members who suggested that the al Aqsa mosque compound be partitioned into two -- one for Jewish and the other for Muslim worshippers. They further suggested that the Israeli authorities take full sovereignty of the mosque by relinquishing control from the Jordanian authorities, who have been the protectors of the Mosque for 20 years.

Latest News: 15th May 2008 Saudi-Israeli plot against Hezbollah Thu, 15 May 2008 16:36:28 Prince Bandar bin Sultan (L), Ehud Olmert Former Saudi Ambassador to the US Prince Bandar bin Sultan asks Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert to move against Hezbollah. Saudi's Prince Bandar bin Sultan has formally requested Olmert to move the Zionist regime's military forces in the north of the Occupied Lands on the border with Lebanon as a threat against Hezbollah if the latter did not stop attacking government of Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, Filkka - Israel website revealed Wednesday. Bandar bin Sultan arrived in the Occupied Territories in his private plane directly from Jeddah airport to Lod Airport in Tel Aviv. Bin Sultan asked Olmert to do what is necessary to support PM Siniora, offering to bear all the financial costs of any Israeli war against Hezbollah. Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert who is under investigation in a bribe case, said that he could not do so now, assuring his guest that he could not wage a war on behalf of Saudi Arabia, but he will discuss the issue with the Israeli officials in order to carry out military maneuvers in the south of Lebanon. Old News UK bribery disgrace in trade with Saudi Arabia: Former Saudi Ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar bin Sultan received hundreds of millions of pounds in secret payments from Britain's top defence manufacturer with the knowledge of Prime Minister Tony Blair's government, according to the BBC. The payments made by BAE Systems were actually a conduit to Bandar for his role in the multi-billion al-Yamamah arms agreement, Britain's biggest ever export deal signed in 1985, the state-funded broadcaster said it had learned Thursday. The alleged bribes were said to have been discovered during a year-long inquiry conducted by Britain's Serious Fraud Office (SFO), but which was abruptly halted last December after Blair said the investigation was a threat to national security. The dropping of the investigation also came amid concerns that it might jeopardize a new multi-billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia to supply Eurofighters. The BBC said that the payments, believed to total more than Pnds one billion (Dlrs 1.9 bn), were sent to two Saudi embassy accounts in Washington, were written into the government-to-government arms deal contract in secret annexes. Allegations previously made in the British press have also suggested that Mark Thatcher, son of the British prime minister at the time, was also involved in the deal. The al-Yamamah deal included the supply of more than 100 Tornado aircraft and is estimated to have been worth over Pnds 40 billion (Dlrs 78 bn) over more than a decade. The new claims, to be made in the BBC's current affairs Panorama programme next Monday prompted the head of parliament's committee which investigates strategic exports, Labour MP Roger Berry, to call for a proper investigation into the allegations. Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman Vince Cable said that if ministers in either the present or previous governments were involved there should be a "major parliamentary inquiry". "It is one thing for a company to have engaged in alleged corruption overseas. It is another thing if British government ministers have approved it," Cable said

Russia will not be isolated because it protected its citizens and upheld its peacekeeping mission the Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has said In an interview on German TV Putin suggested that if Russia had not responded to Georgian aggression there could have been a tragedy along the scale of what happened in the former Yugoslavia

Former Cuban president Fidel Castro says al-Qaeda terrorists have been engineered in order to advance the Bush administration's agenda. In an essay published on Sunday, Castro said the terrorist group "was born from the empire's own entrails", using the term "empire" to refer to the United States. After the Sept. 11 attacks, the Bush administration vowed to capture al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, who has reportedly taken responsibility for the deadly attacks on US soils. "[Al-Qaeda] is a typical example of an enemy that the hegemonic power dangles in a place of its choosing where it needs to justify its actions, as it has done throughout its history, fabricating enemies and attacks destined to strengthen its plans of domination," the former Cuban leader argued. According to Castro, the American public has been mislead by the US government about the real extent of the terrorist attacks in 2001. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has also suggested that Washington could have been somehow involved in the planning of the attacks. In the aftermath of the attacks, the White House launched the 'War on Terror' in a bid to disband al-Qaeda. While many civilians have been killed since the 2001 invasions of Afghanistan, followed by the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the US has failed to achieve its objectives in the region. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) program called "Operation Cyclone" is reportedly responsible for the creation of the terrorist group, when the CIA funded native Afghan militants in the conflict with the Soviet Union. The al-Qaeda leader is reportedly planning a new terror attack against the US as President-elect Barack Obama takes office from the incumbent president, George W. Bush. Earlier this month, a source close to the group claimed that Bin Laden is supervising preparations for another attack which will be far greater than those of 9/11. US Vice President-elect Joe Biden had warned in October that Obama would face an international crisis early in his presidency

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has questioned the motive behind the prolonged seven-year Washington presence in Afghanistan. "By keeping its forces in Afghanistan, the US has inflicted a heavy financial burden on its economy," the Iranian president said in a televised interview on Tuesday. Washington and its allies seek a long-time strategy with regards to their policies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, he continued. Seven years of occupation have not made Afghanistan any safer, as this year alone over 5,000 people have been killed and US military casualties have increased to the highest levels since the 2001 invasion. Since the US invasion of the country, Afghanistan has also seen a phenomenal increase in the cultivation of opium, which is used to make heroin. The country now feeds the world with nearly 90 percent of its heroin. "Their ulterior motive is to weaken India and China," suggested the president, adding that extra-regional presence can only help create a launching ground for further problems. President Ahmadinejad said the 60-hour assault on Mumbai which killed nearly 172 people and injured almost 300 others was also orchestrated by elements outside the region. "The main motive behind the terrorist attacks, which were orchestrated from outside the region, was to strain relations between Indian and Pakistan," he said. India last week blamed Pakistani-based "elements" over the attacks across its financial capital, saying the terror bore the fingerprint of Lashkar-e-Taiba -- a group blamed for previous attacks in India. "Even if the militants are linked to Lashker-e-Taiba, who do you think we are fighting?" commented Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari in reference to his government's operations against al-Qaeda and Taliban-linked militants near the Afghan border.

Rooz-e jahaany-e Qods was observed in Kashmir today. The procession started from Bagwanpora and ended at Iqbal Khomeinei Hall Mohalla Syed Afzal - International Day of Al-Quds is an annual event opposing Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories. The parade originated in Iran after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The observance was suggested by Ayatollah Khomeini then Supreme Leader of Iran in August of that year saying I invite Muslims all over the globe to consecrate the last Friday of the holy month of Ramadan as Al-Quds Day and to proclaim the international solidarity of Muslims in support of the legitimate rights of the Muslim people of Palestine

Special documentary by Press TV\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s excellent Iran Today team on the recent visit by Imam Khamenei(HA) to Qum. Discusses the Islamic Seminary, Foreign Students, Importance of Education and Research from the Islamic Seminary (Hawza or Hawzeh Ilmiyyeh). Discuss the relationship of Wilayat al-Faqih (Governance of the Jurist), Marja\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'iyyah (Islamic Judicial Leadership) and the Islamic Seminaries in depth. Also dispells lies spread by the Western Media and those who have been dupped by the media, and have suggested a rift between the Islamic Leadership and the people. Well worth watching.

Imam Khomeini and Ayatullah Khamenei Talking about Egypt Revolution.

Previous academic studies have suggested that representation of Islam and Muslims in the news media tend to be confined to a narrow framework of understanding. Findings suggest that the coverage of British Muslims has increased significantly since 2000. This rise is however, partly explained by the increase in coverage devoted to terrorism and terrorism related stories. 36% of stories about British Muslims overall are about terrorism. In this edition of the show we ask the following question: Does the British media devote enough time to its Muslim community?

Saudi Ayatollah Nimr Al-Nimr Dares Saudi Regime to Attack Iran and Declares: We Are Loyal to Allah, Not to Saudi Arabia or its Royal Family Following are excerpts from a Friday sermon delivered by Saudi Ayatollah Nimr Al-Nimr, which was posted on the Internet on October 7, 2011. Nimr Baqir Al-Nimr is from the city of Awwamiyah in the eastern part of Saudi Arabia. He is an outspoken Shia cleric known for his criticism of the Saudi government and his constant call for freedom of religion, equality, and justice for the Shia minority in Saudi Arabia. In 2009, Al-Nimr said that the dignity of the Saudi Shia is more precious than the unity of the land, and suggested that Saudi Shia might secede from Saudi Arabia. Fearing arrest, Al-Nimr currently is in hiding. Nimr Al-Nimr: �For the past 100 years, we have been subjected to oppression, injustice, fear, and intimidation. From the moment you are born, you are surrounded by fear, intimidation, persecution, and abuse. We were born into an atmosphere of intimidation. We feared even the walls. Who among us is not familiar with the intimidation and injustice to which we have been subjected in this country? I am 55 years old, more than half a century. From the day I was born and to this day, I�ve never felt safe or secure in this country. �You are always being accused of something. You are always under threat. The head of the State Security Service admitted this to me in person. He said to me when I was arrested: �All you Shi�ites should be killed.� That is their logic. The head of the State Security Service in the Eastern Province said so himself. [...] �They are still plotting to carry out a massacre. They are more than welcome. We are here. Our blood is a small price to pay in defense of our values. We do not fear death. We long for martyrdom. [...] �A few months ago, the flame of honor was sparked in the spirits of the youth. The torch of freedom was lit. The people took to the streets demanding reform, honor, and freedom. There are people who have been held in prison unjustly for more than 16 years. In addition, the Peninsula Shield Force and the Saudi army invaded Bahrain. Then there were more and more arrests. �So who was it who instigated strife and unrest? [...] �The strife and unrest in Awwamiya were instigated by the regime, not the people. [...] �We will continue to defend both the veteran and the new prisoners. We will stand by them. We don�t mind being arrested, and joining them. We don�t even mind shedding our blood for their sake. We will continue to express even stronger solidarity with Bahrain. It is our own kin in Bahrain. Even if the Saudi army and the Peninsula Shield Force had not intervened, it still would have been our duty to stand by the people of Bahrain, our kin, let alone when the Saudi army takes part in oppression, the killing, the violation of women�s honor, and the plundering of money. [...] �[The Saudi regime says] that we are acting �at the behest of a foreign country.� They use that false pretext. By �foreign country� they mean Iran, of course. You can�t really tell if it�s Iran, Turkey, a European country, or the U.S., but they usually mean Iran. In December 1978, there was an Intifada to defend the honor of Awwamiya, when the riot police attacked the town. This was on December 10, 1978, before the Shah was deposed, before the Islamic Republic of Iran was even established. �It was in 1978 � four months before the fall of the Shah. A group of people convened to perform the religious rite of taziyeh for Imam Hussein. It had nothing to do with political or security matters, but the security forces arrived and attacked them, and a confrontation ensued. People were defending themselves, as well as their faith and their honor. That night, they arrested 100 people. This was in December 1978, prior to the fall of the Iranian [Shah]. So how can they talk about foreign interferen

http://pknews.tv - on tripartite summit - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was born in village of Aradan near city of Garmsar, southeast of Tehran in 1956. He is the fourth son of an ironworker who had seven children. Mahmoud and his family migrated to Tehran when he was one-year-old. He went to primary and high school in Tehran and got his diploma and was admitted to the University of Science and Technology (Elm-o-Sanaat) in the field of civil engineering after he ranked 132nd in the nationwide university entrance exams in 1975. He was accepted as an MS student at the same university in 1986 and became a member of the scientific board of the Civil Engineering College of University of Science and Technology. Later on he got his doctorate in 1987 in the field of engineering and traffic transportation planning. He is married with two sons and one daughter. Following the 1979 Islamic revolution he became a member the conservative faction of the Office for Strengthening Unity [OSU] Between Universities and Theological Seminaries. The OSU was established by Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, one of Ayatollah Khomeini's key advisors, to organize Islamic students against the rapidly growing Islamic group of Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK). With invasion of Iraq and start of the Iran-Iraq war in 1980, Ahmadinejad rushed to the western fronts to fight against the enemy and joined the voluntary (basij) forces of the Islamic Revolution's Guards Corps (IRGC). He served in different units of the Islamic Revolution Guards Engineering Corps. He served as governor of Maku and Khoy cities in the northwestern West Azerbaijan province, and as an advisor to the governor general of the western province of Kurdistan for two years. While serving as the cultural advisor to then Ministry of Culture and Higher Education in 1993, he was appointed as governor general of the newly established northwestern province of Ardebil from 1993 to 1997. He was elected as the exemplary governor general for three consecutive years. But in 1997 the newly-installed Khatami administration removed Ahmadinejad from his post as Ardebil governor general. He returned to the University of Science and Technology (Elm-o-Sanaat) again to teach in 1997. In April 2003 Ahmadinejad was appointed mayor of Tehran by the capital's municipal council, which is dominated by the hard-line Islamic Iran Developers Coalition (Etelaf-e Abadgaran-e Iran-e Islami). In some of Ahmadinejad's public statements, he has appeared to identify himself as a Developer. He lives a very Spartan lifestyle and that's how he projected himself. As Mayor, he reversed many of the policies of previous moderate and reformist mayors, placing serious religious emphasis on the activities of the cultural centers by turning them into prayer halls during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. He also suggested the burial of the bodies of martyrs of the Iran-Iraq war in major city squares of Tehran. On 24 June 2005 Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected as Iran's sixth president. He swept to the presidential post with a stunning 17,046,441 votes out of a total of 27,536,069 votes cast in the runoff election. In the 2009 presidential election Ahmadinejad was nominated to run for the second term. In the presidential election of 2009, 39,165,191 ballots were cast on 12th June, according to Iran's election headquarters. Ahmadinejad won 24,527,516 votes, (62.63%). In second place, Mir Hossein Mousavi won 13,216,411 (33.75%) of the votes. The election drew unprecedented public interest in Iran. The election results remain in dispute as Mir Hossein Mousavi and his supporters who believe that electoral fraud occurred during the election. This popular belief ignited protests and demonstrations in the large cities with a united slogan of “Where is my vote”, which resulted in the birth of “Green Movement” of Iran. Finally Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei formally endorsed Ahmadinejad as President on 3 August 2009, and Dr. Ahmadinejad was sworn in for a second term on 5 August 2009 Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran have agreed to expand socio-economic cooperation and more particularly neutralize foreign interference in this part of the world. At the conclusion of a tripartite summit in Islamabad, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the regional cooperation will lead to an end to foreign interference, a reference to the US-led NATO military presence in Afghanistan. The Iranian President said that the nuclear weapon do not empower any state and must be eliminated from political relations. Howerver, Afghan President Hamid Karazi’s focus was to gain regional support for the Taliban talks, a reference to his demand to include Kabul in the talks between the US and Taliban. Islamabad asserted that it would lend its support to President Karazi in any future Taliban talks. The Taliban have so far refused to negotiate with Kabul describing Karzai administration as the puppet. The three neighboring countries also decided to step up their efforts to combat drug production and trafficking in Afghanistan, a particular source of concern for Pakistan. The summit also decided to enhance trilateral trade through facilitative measures like preferential tariff and free trade arrangements and barter trade. The three countries in their summit declaration sounded determined to ensure the territorial integrity and sovereignty of regional states. This is a clear reference to the frequent US drone strikes in Pakistan's tribal region that have killed large number of civilians since 2004. However, analysts believe more than any thing else, it depends on Islamabad if it is willing to scrap secret deals with Americans that allows them to carry out drone attacks in the tribal areas.

Saudi Ayatollah Nimr Al-Nimr Dares Saudi Regime to Attack Iran and Declares: We Are Loyal to Allah, Not to Saudi Arabia or its Royal Family Following are excerpts from a Friday sermon delivered by Saudi Ayatollah Nimr Al-Nimr, which was posted on the Internet on October 7, 2011. Nimr Baqir Al-Nimr is from the city of Awwamiyah in the eastern part of Saudi Arabia. He is an outspoken Shia cleric known for his criticism of the Saudi government and his constant call for freedom of religion, equality, and justice for the Shia minority in Saudi Arabia. In 2009, Al-Nimr said that the dignity of the Saudi Shia is more precious than the unity of the land, and suggested that Saudi Shia might secede from Saudi Arabia. Fearing arrest, Al-Nimr currently is in hiding. Nimr Al-Nimr: �For the past 100 years, we have been subjected to oppression, injustice, fear, and intimidation. From the moment you are born, you are surrounded by fear, intimidation, persecution, and abuse. We were born into an atmosphere of intimidation. We feared even the walls. Who among us is not familiar with the intimidation and injustice to which we have been subjected in this country? I am 55 years old, more than half a century. From the day I was born and to this day, I�ve never felt safe or secure in this country. �You are always being accused of something. You are always under threat. The head of the State Security Service admitted this to me in person. He said to me when I was arrested: �All you Shi�ites should be killed.� That is their logic. The head of the State Security Service in the Eastern Province said so himself. [...] �They are still plotting to carry out a massacre. They are more than welcome. We are here. Our blood is a small price to pay in defense of our values. We do not fear death. We long for martyrdom. [...] �A few months ago, the flame of honor was sparked in the spirits of the youth. The torch of freedom was lit. The people took to the streets demanding reform, honor, and freedom. There are people who have been held in prison unjustly for more than 16 years. In addition, the Peninsula Shield Force and the Saudi army invaded Bahrain. Then there were more and more arrests. �So who was it who instigated strife and unrest? [...] �The strife and unrest in Awwamiya were instigated by the regime, not the people. [...] �We will continue to defend both the veteran and the new prisoners. We will stand by them. We don�t mind being arrested, and joining them. We don�t even mind shedding our blood for their sake. We will continue to express even stronger solidarity with Bahrain. It is our own kin in Bahrain. Even if the Saudi army and the Peninsula Shield Force had not intervened, it still would have been our duty to stand by the people of Bahrain, our kin, let alone when the Saudi army takes part in oppression, the killing, the violation of women�s honor, and the plundering of money. [...] �[The Saudi regime says] that we are acting �at the behest of a foreign country.� They use that false pretext. By �foreign country� they mean Iran, of course. You can�t really tell if it�s Iran, Turkey, a European country, or the U.S., but they usually mean Iran. In December 1978, there was an Intifada to defend the honor of Awwamiya, when the riot police attacked the town. This was on December 10, 1978, before the Shah was deposed, before the Islamic Republic of Iran was even established. �It was in 1978 � four months before the fall of the Shah. A group of people convened to perform the religious rite of taziyeh for Imam Hussein. It had nothing to do with political or security matters, but the security forces arrived and attacked them, and a confrontation ensued. People were defending themselves, as well as their faith and their honor. That night, they arrested 100 people. This was in December 1978, prior to the fall of the Iranian [Shah]. So how can they talk about foreign interferen

The following is the full text of Ayatollah Khamenei’s inaugural address delivered on August 30, 2012 at the 16th Non-Aligned Summit in Tehran. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful All praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the Two Worlds, and may peace and blessings be upon the greatest and trustworthy Messenger and on his pure progeny, his select companions, and all the prophets and divine envoys. I welcome you honorable guests, the leaders and delegations representing the member states of the Non-Aligned Movement, and all the other participants of this great international summit. We have gathered here to continue a movement with God’s guidance and assistance and to give it new life and momentum on the basis of the current conditions and needs in the world. The movement was founded almost six decades ago thanks to the intelligence and courage of a few caring and responsible political leaders who were aware of the conditions and circumstances of their time. Our guests have gathered here from different geographical locations, far and near, and they belong to different nationalities and races with different ideological, cultural and historical characteristics, but just as Ahmad Sukarno, one of the founders of this movement said in the famous Bandung Conference in the year 1955, the basis of establishing the Non-Aligned Movement is not geographical or racial and religious unity, but rather unity of needs. At that time, the member states of the Non-Aligned Movement were in need of a bond that could safeguard them against authoritarian, arrogant and insatiable networks and today with the progress and spread of the instruments of hegemony, this need still exists. I would like to point out another truth. Islam has taught us that in spite of their racial, linguistic and cultural differences, human beings share the same nature, which calls them to purity, justice, benevolence, compassion and cooperation. It is this universal human nature which – if it can safely steer away from misleading motives – guides human beings to monotheism and understanding of God’s transcendent essence. This brilliant truth has such potential that it can form the foundation of societies which are free and proud and at the same time enjoy progress and justice. It can extend the light of spirituality to all material and worldly endeavors of humankind and it can create a paradise on earth for human beings in advance of the other-worldly paradise, which has been promised by divine religions. And it is this common and universal truth that can form the foundations of brotherly cooperation among the nations that do not share any similarities in terms of outward structures, historical background and geographical location. Whenever international cooperation is based on such a foundation, governments will build their relationships with each other not on the basis of fear and threats, or greed and unilateral interests, or mediation of treasonous and venal individuals, but on the basis of wholesome and shared interests and more importantly, the interests of humanity. In this way, governments can relieve their awakened consciences and put the minds of their peoples at ease. This values-based order is the exact opposite of the hegemony-based order, which has been upheld, propagandized and led by hegemonic Western powers in the recent centuries and by the domineering and aggressive government of America today. Dear guests, today after the passage of nearly six decades, the main values of the Non-Aligned Movement remain alive and steady: values such as anti-colonialism, political, economic and cultural independence, non-alignment with any power blocs, and improving solidarity and cooperation among the member states. The realities of today’s world fall short of those values, but the collective will and comprehensive efforts to change the existing realities and achieve these values, though full of challenges, are promising and rewarding. In the recent past, we have been witness to the failure of the policies of the Cold War era and the unilateralism that followed it. Having learnt lessons from this historical experience, the world is in transition towards a new international order and the Non-Aligned Movement can and should play a new role. This new order should be based on the participation of all nations and equal rights for all of them. And as members of this movement, our solidarity is an obvious necessity in the current era for establishing this new order. Fortunately, the outlook of global developments promises a multi-faceted system in which the traditional power blocs are replaced with a group of countries, cultures and civilizations from different economic, social and political origins. The striking events that we have witnessed over the past three decades clearly show that the emergence of new powers has coincided with the decline of the traditional powers. This gradual transition of power provides the non-aligned countries with an opportunity to play a significant and worthy role on the world stage and prepare the ground for a just and truly participatory global management. In spite of varying perspectives and orientations, we member states of this movement have managed to preserve our solidarity and bond over a long period of time within the framework of the shared values and this is not a simple and small achievement. This bond can prepare the ground for transitioning to a just and humane order. Current global conditions provide the Non-Aligned Movement with an opportunity that might never arise again. Our view is that the control room of the world should not be managed by the dictatorial will of a few Western countries. It should be possible to establish and ensure a participatory system for managing international affairs, one that is global and democratic. This is what is needed by all the countries that have been directly or indirectly harmed as a result of the transgression of a few bullying and hegemonic countries. The UN Security Council has an illogical, unjust and completely undemocratic structure and mechanism. This is a flagrant form of dictatorship, which is antiquated and obsolete and whose expiry date has passed. It is through abusing this improper mechanism that America and its accomplices have managed to disguise their bullying as noble concepts and impose it on the world. They protect the interests of the West in the name of “human rights”. They interfere militarily in other countries in the name of “democracy”. They target defenseless people in villages and cities with their bombs and weapons in the name of “combating terrorism”. From their perspective, humanity is divided into first-, second- and third-class citizens. Human life is considered cheap in Asia, Africa and Latin America, and expensive in America and Western Europe. The security of America and Europe is considered important, while the security of the rest of humanity is considered unimportant. Torture and assassination are permissible and completely ignored if they are carried out by America, the Zionists and their puppets. It does not trouble their conscience that they have secret prisons in various places on different continents, in which defenseless prisoners who have no legal representation and have not been tried in a court of law are treated in the most hideous and detestable way. Good and evil are defined in a completely one-sided and selective way. They impose their interests on the nations of the world in the name of “international law”. They impose their domineering and illegal demands in the name of “international community”. Using their exclusive and organized media network, they disguise their lies as the truth, their falsehood as true, and their oppression as efforts to promote justice. In contrast, they brand as lies every true statement that exposes their deceit and label every legitimate demand as roguish. Friends, this flawed and harmful situation cannot continue. Everybody has become tired of this faulty international structure. The 99 percent movement of the American people against the centers of wealth and power in America and the widespread protests of the people in Western Europe against the economic policies of their governments show that the people are losing their patience with this situation. It is necessary to remedy this irrational situation. Firm, logical and comprehensive bonds between member states of the Non-Aligned Movement can play an important role in finding a remedy. Honorable audience, international peace and security are among the critical issues of today’s world and the elimination of catastrophic weapons of mass destruction is an urgent necessity and a universal demand. In today’s world, security is a shared need where there is no room for discrimination. Those who stockpile their anti-human weapons in their arsenals do not have the right to declare themselves as standard-bearers of global security. Undoubtedly, this will not bring about security for themselves either. It is most unfortunate to see that countries possessing the largest nuclear arsenals have no serious and genuine intention of removing these deadly weapons from their military doctrines and they still consider such weapons as an instrument that dispels threats and as an important standard that defines their political and international position. This conception needs to be completely rejected and condemned. Nuclear weapons neither ensure security, nor do they consolidate political power, rather they are a threat to both security and political power. The events that took place in the 1990s showed that the possession of such weapons could not even safeguard a regime like the former Soviet Union. And today we see certain countries which are exposed to waves of deadly insecurity despite possessing atomic bombs. The Islamic Republic of Iran considers the use of nuclear, chemical and similar weapons as a great and unforgivable sin. We proposed the idea of “Middle East free of nuclear weapons” and we are committed to it. This does not mean forgoing our right to peaceful use of nuclear power and production of nuclear fuel. On the basis of international laws, peaceful use of nuclear energy is a right of every country. All should be able to employ this wholesome source of energy for various vital uses for the benefit of their country and people, without having to depend on others for exercising this right. Some Western countries, themselves possessing nuclear weapons and guilty of this illegal action, want to monopolize the production of nuclear fuel. Surreptitious moves are under way to consolidate a permanent monopoly over production and sale of nuclear fuel in centers carrying an international label but in fact within the control of a few Western countries. A bitter irony of our era is that the U.S. government, which possesses the largest and deadliest stockpiles of nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction and the only country guilty of its use, is today eager to carry the banner of opposition to nuclear proliferation. The U.S. and its Western allies have armed the usurper Zionist regime with nuclear weapons and created a major threat for this sensitive region. Yet the same deceitful group does not tolerate the peaceful use of nuclear energy by independent countries, and even opposes, with all its strength, the production of nuclear fuel for radiopharmaceuticals and other peaceful and humane purposes. Their pretext is fear of production of nuclear weapons. In the case of the Islamic Republic of Iran, they themselves know that they are lying, but lies are sanctioned by the kind of politics that is completely devoid of the slightest trace of spirituality. One who makes nuclear threats in the 21st century and does not feel ashamed, will he feel ashamed of lying? I stress that the Islamic Republic has never been after nuclear weapons and that it will never give up the right of its people to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Our motto is: “Nuclear energy for all and nuclear weapons for none.” We will insist on each of these two precepts, and we know that breaking the monopoly of certain Western countries on production of nuclear energy in the framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty is in the interest of all independent countries, including the members of the Non-Aligned Movement. The Islamic Republic\\\\\\\'s successful experience in resistance against the bullying and comprehensive pressures by America and its accomplices has firmly convinced it that the resistance of a unified and firmly determined nation can overcome all enmities and hostilities and open a glorious path to its lofty goals. The comprehensive advances made by our country in the last two decades are facts for all to see, as repeatedly attested by official international observers. All this has happened under sanctions, economic pressures and propaganda campaigns by networks affiliated with America and Zionism. The sanctions, which were regarded as paralyzing by nonsensical commentators, not only did not and will not paralyze us, but have made our steps steadier, elevated our resolve and strengthened our confidence in the correctness of our analyses and the inborn capacities of our nation. We have with our own eyes repeatedly witnessed divine assistance in these challenges. Honored guests, I deem it necessary to speak about a very important issue, which though related to our region has dimensions extending far beyond it and which has influenced global policies for several decades. This issue is the agonizing issue of Palestine. The summary of this matter is that on the basis of a horrible Western plot and under the direction of England in the 1940s, an independent country with a clear historical identity called “Palestine” has been taken away from its people through the use of weapons, killings and deception and has been given to a group of people the majority of whom are immigrants from European countries. This great usurpation – which at the outset was accompanied with massacres of defenseless people in towns and villages and their expulsion from their homes and homeland to bordering countries – has continued for more than six decades with similar crimes and continues to this very day. This is one of the most important issues of the human community. Political and military leaders of the usurping Zionist regime have not avoided any crimes during this time: from killing the people, destroying their homes and farms and arresting and torturing men and women and even their children, to humiliating and insulting that nation and trying to destroy it in order to digest it in the haraam-eating stomach of the Zionist regime, to attacking their refugee camps in Palestine itself and in the neighboring countries where millions of refugees live. Such names as Sabra and Shatila, Qana and Deir Yasin have been etched in the history of our region with the blood of the oppressed Palestinian people. Even now after 65 years the same kind of crimes marks the treatment of Palestinians remaining in the occupied territories by the ferocious Zionist wolves. They commit new crimes one after the other and create new crises for the region. Hardly a day passes without reports of murder, injury and arrests of the youth who stand up to defend their homeland and their honor and protest against the destruction of their farms and homes. The Zionist regime, which has carried out assassinations and caused conflicts and crimes for decades by waging disastrous wars, killing people, occupying Arab territories and organizing state terror in the region and in the world, labels the Palestinian people as “terrorists”, the people who have stood up to fight for their rights. And the media networks which belong to Zionism and many of the Western and mercenary media repeat this great lie in violation of ethical values and journalistic commitment, and the political leaders who claim to defend human rights have closed their eyes on all these crimes and support that criminal regime shamelessly and boldly and assume the role of their advocates. Our standpoint is that Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and that continuing its occupation is a great and intolerable injustice and a major threat to global peace and security. All solutions suggested and followed up by the Westerners and their affiliates for “resolving the problem of Palestine” have been wrong and unsuccessful, and it will remain so in the future. We have put forth a just and entirely democratic solution. All the Palestinians – both the current citizens of Palestine and those who have been forced to immigrate to other countries but have preserved their Palestinian identity, including Muslims, Christians and Jews – should take part in a carefully supervised and confidence-building referendum and chose the political system of their country, and all the Palestinians who have suffered from years of exile should return to their country and take part in this referendum and then help draft a Constitution and hold elections. Peace will then be established. Now I would like to give a benevolent piece of advice to American politicians who always stood up to defend and support the Zionist regime. So far, this regime has created countless problems for you. It has presented a hateful image of you to the regional peoples, and it has made you look like an accomplice in the crimes of the usurping Zionists. The material and moral costs borne by the American government and people on account of this are staggering, and if this continues, the costs might become even heavier in the future. Think about the Islamic Republic\\\\\\\'s proposal of a referendum and with a courageous decision, rescue yourselves from the current impossible situation. Undoubtedly, the people of the region and all free-thinkers across the world will welcome this measure. Honorable guests, now I would like to return to my initial point. Global conditions are sensitive and the world is passing through a crucial historical juncture. It is anticipated that a new order shall be born. The Non-Aligned Movement, which includes almost two-thirds of the world community, can play a major role in shaping that future. The holding of this major conference in Tehran is itself a significant event to be taken into consideration. By pooling our resources and capacities, we members of this movement can create a new historic and lasting role towards rescuing the world from insecurity, war and hegemony. This goal can be achieved only through our comprehensive cooperation with each other. There are among us quite a few countries that are very wealthy and countries that enjoy international influence. It is completely possible to find solutions for problems through economic and media cooperation and through passing on experiences that help us improve and make progress. We need to strengthen our determination. We need to remain faithful to our goals. We should not fear the bullying powers when they frown at us, nor should we become happy when they smile at us. We should consider the will of God and the laws of creation as our support. We should learn lessons from what happened to the communist camp two decades ago and from the failure of the policies of so-called “Western liberal democracy” at the present time, whose signs can be seen by everybody in the streets of European countries and America and in the insoluble economic problems of these countries. And finally, we should consider the Islamic Awakening in the region and the fall of the dictatorships in North Africa, which were dependent on America and were accomplices to the Zionist regime, as a great opportunity. We can help improve the “political productivity” of the Non-Aligned Movement in global governance. We can prepare a historic document aimed to bring about a change in this governance and to provide for its administrative tools. We can plan for effective economic cooperation and define paradigms for cultural relationships among ourselves. Undoubtedly, establishing an active and motivated secretariat for this organization will be a great and significant help in achieving these goals. 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.

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.

http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=103321&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=14&s1=1 S. Nasrallah: EU Decision Means Involvement in any Israeli Aggression Eslam al-Rihani Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah said on Wednesday that the latest EU decision regarding Hezbollah will only doom to failure, advising the European states to soak their paper in water and drink it, for the Resistance will remain vital and victorious by the will of Allah Almighty. Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan NasrallahDuring his speech at the annual Iftar ceremony held by the Women\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Committee of Islamic Resistance Support Association of Hezbollah, Sayyed Nasrallah noted that the resistance has its own presence and influence in the regional equations, and has been always a concern at the Lebanese, Arab, regional and international levels, whether positively or negatively. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"A positive interest from those who believe in the resistance, pin their hopes on it and consider it to be a source of pride, and negative interest from those who consider it a source of threat for their occupation and hegemony,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he said. His eminence indicated that the Resistance is not on the margin and there is always attempts to eliminate and crush it, whether militarily, politically, morally or culturally, expressing beliefs that such decisions have no more than psychological effects. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The most important for the Lebanese Resistance is to get the support of its people and to express their will, pride and view in defending their land and their sovereignty.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Resistance has gained credibility among people in Lebanon and the Arab and Islamic world and in many places of the world due to its sacrifices and steadfastness because it did not back down, retreat or get defeated and also due to its achievements and field victories.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Resistance has changed the game rules and dropped projects and liberated captives, dignity and sovereignty of Lebanon. It also imposed a leading position for Lebanon in the region and will remain a solid fork in the eye of the Zionists and those who want Lebanon to get worse,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" his eminence added. Touching on the EU member-states\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' decision that blacklisted what they dubbed \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'the military wing\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' of Hezbollah, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the decision has been announced in the media without issuing a formal statement to unfold its motives, evidence and logic. His eminence noted that the EU official statement will be issued within days, and the party will see then whether it will hold any argument or logic to be discussed, pointing out that the historical course of the European states confirms that their stance is not subjected to any values. Thanking all presidents, leaders, personalities and institutions that rejected the EU decision and condemned it, his eminence stated that the party wasn\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t surprised by the decision but the leadership has expected it since the previous period. Iftar 2013Hezbollah Secretary General went on to say that the Zionists have expressed that the decision was the result of diplomatic efforts they exerted, recommending some of those who rejoiced in Lebanon to hide their joy a little bit so they wouldn\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t express the same state of happiness as the Israelis. Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that the EU countries have insulted themselves and their principles, interests and sovereignty when they submitted to the Israelis and Americans, stating that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"EU countries should know they are giving legal cover for Israel to launch any war on Lebanon because Israel can claim it is waging war on the terrorists.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"These countries make themselves a full partner in the Israeli aggression on Lebanon, on the Resistance and on any target for the resistance in Lebanon.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" The Lebanese Resistance leader asked why the military wing of Israeli army wouldn\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t be put on the list of terror? While the EU \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"repeatedly admits that Israel occupies Arab land and does not implement international resolutions since tens of years, and the whole world witnessed the Israeli massacres.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" He also voiced that the EU stance is subjected to the interests and pressures, not to the values and principles, where its effects are nothing more than psychological. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"In this country, resistance fighters fought the Israeli occupation and have endured a lot of pressure and sacrificed martyrs. Then you come to those who are the sons of this people and say they are terrorists. This is a very bad abuse for the fighters, for their people, and for their successive governments that were supporting the Resistance by their ministerial statements,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he said. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"This is bad for Lebanon and the Lebanese government and people and not only for Resistance fighters,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he added, stressing that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"this will not undermine our morale.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Addressing the European states, Sayyed Nasrallah said: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We are nationalists even in holidays. You can retake the visas you were granting for us. We do not have money in Europe. We do not have commercial or trade projects in Lebanon or abroad. therefore, this decision has no effects in this regard.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Yesterday, European delegates in Lebanon tried to say that the decision will not affect relations with Lebanon,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" recalling that some in the March 14 bloc are working to frustrate the people and descend walls on their hopes. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"This decision aims at making us bow, to force us to step back and to be afraid. But I tell you that all you will get is failure and frustration,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" his eminence told the European Union. Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan NasrallahIn the same context, Hezbollah Secretary General said that those who think that the resistance, which confronted in such days the strongest army in the region over 33 days, will be undermined by a silly decision is either will be subjugated by this decision are either delusional or ignorant. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"This decision will not be able to achieve any of its goals and we invite them (EU states) to correct this mistake because it will not lead to result,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he stressed. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Dip it (the decision) in water and drink it,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he added to the EU. Touching on the local situation, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the other camp in Lebanon will not be able to exploit the decision in their domestic political calculations, or to isolate the party and form a cabinet without it. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"A government without Hezbollah will not be formed, not because we are eager for it but for other things.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" His eminence jokingly suggested that Hezbollah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s ministers in the next government will be of the military wing of the party. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"So do not bet on exploiting the decision internally,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he told the Lebanese political rivals. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We call for the formation of a political government that preserve Lebanon and play in the heart of the storms moving around us.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Resistance will remain and will be victorious by God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Will,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah concluded.

[28 August 2013] Ban Ki moon Military action in Syria needs UN permit - English

Israel approves plans to build more than two thousand new settler units in Jerusalem al-Quds and the occupied West Bank. As Israeli soldiers hand out more eviction orders to Palestinian families, we\'re asking is Tel Aviv under enough international pressure to stop its settlement activities that the UN has called illegal? Are the US-brokered talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority doomed? I\'m Homa Lezgee and you\'re watching the Debate. Guests: - Political Activist & Commentator, Kevin Ovenden (London). - Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute, Richard Weitz (Washington). Subjects: 1- Some observers say Israel\'s settlement expansions at this point in time are in fact meant to undermine talks since Israel is not interested in a two-state solution...do you agree? 2- Is a two-state solution possible? 3- Israel\'s economy minister Naftali Benner has said a two-state solution will harm Tel Aviv and that the establishment of an independent Palestinian state will destroy Israel\'s economy...what does that say about Israel\'s willingness for talks to get anywhere? 4- There was some friction between Tel Aviv and Washington when an Israeli minister said John Kerry\'s proposal on the Jordan Valley wasn\'t worth the paper it was written on and suggested that Kerry was naïve. How have the settlement expansions effected US-Israeli relations? 5- Is the US going to put enough pressure on Israel to stop the settlement expansions? 6- \"Israel teaching the US a lesson since the Obama administration is being a bit too serious\"... 7- What do you think about the EU position against settlements? Will a growing boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign help? 8- Should Israel be taking the academic and economic sanctions more seriously? 9- Similarities between Israel and South African apartheid regime... 10- How long is this stalemate going to last? How long can Israel continue to defy international law?

Israel approves plans to build more than two thousand new settler units in Jerusalem al-Quds and the occupied West Bank. As Israeli soldiers hand out more eviction orders to Palestinian families, we\'re asking is Tel Aviv under enough international pressure to stop its settlement activities that the UN has called illegal? Are the US-brokered talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority doomed? I\'m Homa Lezgee and you\'re watching the Debate. Guests: - Political Activist & Commentator, Kevin Ovenden (London). - Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute, Richard Weitz (Washington). Subjects: 1- Some observers say Israel\'s settlement expansions at this point in time are in fact meant to undermine talks since Israel is not interested in a two-state solution...do you agree? 2- Is a two-state solution possible? 3- Israel\'s economy minister Naftali Benner has said a two-state solution will harm Tel Aviv and that the establishment of an independent Palestinian state will destroy Israel\'s economy...what does that say about Israel\'s willingness for talks to get anywhere? 4- There was some friction between Tel Aviv and Washington when an Israeli minister said John Kerry\'s proposal on the Jordan Valley wasn\'t worth the paper it was written on and suggested that Kerry was naïve. How have the settlement expansions effected US-Israeli relations? 5- Is the US going to put enough pressure on Israel to stop the settlement expansions? 6- \"Israel teaching the US a lesson since the Obama administration is being a bit too serious\"... 7- What do you think about the EU position against settlements? Will a growing boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign help? 8- Should Israel be taking the academic and economic sanctions more seriously? 9- Similarities between Israel and South African apartheid regime... 10- How long is this stalemate going to last? How long can Israel continue to defy international law?

On August 21st, we marked Mosque Day. What is the background behind this day? Who suggested that a day be dedicated to mosques and why? The Leader speaks.

Was Aisha, the wife of the Holy Prophet (S) 9 years old? Islamaphobes choose to attack Islam by claiming that the Holy Prophet (S) married Aisha when she was 9 years old and that this is pedophilia. BISKIT debunks this completely- showing that 9 year old women were not considered as children and presenting solid arguments to show that Aisha, Mother of the Believers, was much older than has been suggested anyway. Sectarian comments will be deleted.

He wants to prove to you that He is the only power. Follow us: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Panahianen/ ... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/PanahianEN/... Twitter: https://twitter.com/PanahianEN Telegram: https://telegram.me/Panahianen/ ============================== We want God to give us security. We want to seek refuge in God as a result of having experienced insecurity. What do we need to know to make this come about better? What is it? God\'s power. His power! I will tell you now. Read the Qur\'an a lot. God, the Almighty, seriously intends to convince everyone who reads these verses that He is the first and last power in the universe. He wants to prove to you that He is a superpower, and actually He is the only power. God is the absolute power. He does whatever He wants. He forgives, guides and grants sustenance to whomever He wants. [Qur’an 3:129, 74:31, 2:212] He attributes many things to Himself. “We [God] created heaven and earth. We said this and that.” God creates an upheaval! A person gradually accepts this. Therefore, I ask you to first look at the Qur\'an as an educational, spiritually effective, constructive book, not as a book that should be translated scientifically to take rulings and lessons from it. Let it correct you. For example, they give eggplant stew to someone in a laboratory and say, “Test this and see if it’s good or not. Check the amount of vitamins in it.” This scientist won’t eat it even if he is dying from hunger. He wants to test this food. Many of us who go toward the Qur’an act like this scientist in the laboratory does. “Let’s see what’s in it.” Eat it! Eat it! You’re weak from hunger. Consume the Qur’an! For example, one is listening to music. [Someone says,] “You’re listening to music a lot. You really enjoy it!” [He replies,] “No, I’ve been asked to write down the lyrics of these 100 songs. That’s what I’m doing. I don’t like them at all. I can’t relate to them. I don’t know their genres or anything about them.” This is a meaningless connection with music. The purpose of music is not for you to write the lyrics! A person who does this is a researcher and doesn’t understand the elements of music. He doesn’t fly with music. Does anyone fly with music? Yes, as much as a hen can fly! But with the Qur’an, one flies to God Himself. He flies through the atmosphere and through the galaxy. Once there was an art student in the university who was also a painter. As I was walking through the university campus, I saw him painting. There was a small cassette player next to him playing music. I asked him very cautiously, “Why are you listening to this music?” He said, “Music makes the soul more delicate, and I am doing something delicate now. I want this delicacy to be conveyed.” He was right. I said, “If I suggest something, will you try it? Listen to the Qur’an for a while.” He said, “Qur’an?” I remember he said this in surprise. I answered, “Yes, see if it has the same effect.” I went to that same college the next month. He came to me very upset! I asked myself, “What should I do now? It seems my suggestion wasn’t appropriate for him.” He was truly upset. He came forward and said angrily, “I’ve wasted my life! Why hadn’t I ever done this before? You don’t know what an impact this has had on me!” He was ahead of the one who had suggested this! Use the Qur’an. Recite the Qur’an a lot. God, the Almighty, seriously intends to convince everyone who reads these verses that He is the first and last power in the universe. He wants to prove to you that He is a superpower, and actually He is the only power.

The auspicious personality of Imam Khomeini (R) is an ocean of lessons that serves as a practical guide even in our present-day. Yet, what are the societal and the spiritual aspects of Imam Khomeini (R) and the Islamic Revolution, sometimes referred to as the Socio-Spiritual aspect of the Islamic Revolution? And what are two books authored by Imam Khomeini (R) that are highly suggested to be read by us? What aspects of Imam Khomeini (R) are witnessed in the aforementioned books that have been authored by Imam (R)? And did the great spiritual status of Imam Khomeini (R) prevent him from being an active leader who created and led one of the greatest movements of humanity? Is there a contradiction between deep spirituality and taking a proactive and \\\'on the ground\\\' stand on socio-political issues? Did the holy Prophet Muhammad (A) and the divinely appointed Imams (A) merely sit in their houses and/or the Masjid to worship Allah and that\\\'s it? What are some examples in the history of the Muslims that depicts the real and untainted stance of the previous divinely appointed Prophets (A), the holy Prophet Muhammad (S), and the Immaculate Imams (A) when it came to societal matters? What is the meaning of a \\\"vacuum/hole\\\" as it appears in the well-known tradition that when a religious scholar dies, a vacuum/hole is created that cannot be filled up? And what aspects of the Ahl al-Bayt (A) should be represented by us in our capacity as a good Muslim, as a devout Mo\\\'min, and as a righteous religious scholar? In reality, do we create our own spirituality or is there another ultimate source which endows us with spirituality? And what is the ultimate goal and purpose of creation as it relates to a Towheedi society? Did Imam Khomeini (R) bring about any innovations in Islam or was that which Imam Khomeini (R) preached, the original and pure Islam? What is the role of the governmental establishment when it comes to the nurturing of the people\\\'s spirituality? And in this regard, is there anything such as a neutral government? And are governments such as those in America, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and etc., considered to be neutral or so called \\\'secular\\\' governments? The fact that people can organize rally\\\'s for the LGBT people, but a Muslim woman cannot wear a Hijab, shows what fundamental attribute of the West? What effects did Imam Khomeini\\\'s spirituality have on great individuals such as Shaheed Mutahhari and on the people in general? How is it possible for a human being to be both at the epitome of spirituality and courage, simultaneously. And finally, why were the superpowers of Imam Khomeini\\\'s time and the superpowers of the present-day afraid of Imam Khomeini (R), the school of thought of Imam Khomeini (R), and the successor to Imam Khomeini (R), the current Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei? In order to answer these questions and more, we decided to invite Sayyid Muhammad Hashemi from the Islamic Republic of Iran to discuss \\\"Imam Khomeini & The Socio-Spiritual Revolution\\\". #IslamicPulse #IPTalkShow #ImamKhomeini #Khomeini #IslamicRepublic #IslamicRevolution #Revolution #Justice #Truth #ImamKhamenei #Khamenei #Iran #Oppressed #Tyrant #Taghut #SocioSpiritual #Culture #Shia #Erfan #spirituality #Akhlaq #PureMuhammadanIslam #Islam #AhlulBayt #Quran #Allah