Search Result in All

Just Think and have some free time to think about creation , who are we where we came form where we are going towards , and you will conclude and will reach Him One day

[09 Oct 2013] Iran Leader: West should not think Islamic Awakening has stopped - English

[27 Jan 2013] 75Per of Brits think Islam is a threat: Survey - English

Think Ink! - Chemical Clock Reaction - Sick Science - English

[30 May 2014] Major UK think tank calls Iraq, Afghanistan wars failures - English

A new opinion poll shows that most Americans disapprove of their country\'s invasion of Afghanistan. According to the Associated Press poll, 57 percent of Americans said the U-S move was wrong in the first place. 53 percent of the respondents also said the pace of U-S withdrawal from Afghanistan is too slow. The United States and its allies invaded Afghanistan in the wake of the nine-eleven attacks of 2001 in New York. At least three-thousand-four-hundred and four foreign troops have so far been killed in the country, nearly 23-hundred of them are American. Other polls have also shown in recent years that the war is one of the most unpopular US military expeditions abroad in American history.

Fasting is more than just refraining from eating and drinking; in fact, it\'s much more than just that! This Ramadhan, let\'s think above and beyond! It only takes a minute to see things differently... #OneMinuteWisdom

While it may seem at times as though we have it really hard, we have to remember that the Holy Prophet (S) and the first of those who accepted him as the Messenger had it far, far harder than we do today. They suffered hunger, thirst, poverty and ridicule but it was their fortitude, trust in Allah and their faith which helped to safeguard the message of Islam, which has reached us today due to their blessings. As a sidenote, it is imperative to recognise that many of those in other parts of the world, like Yemen, are suffering similarly to the initial Muslims! What are we doing to help them? Let’s take a minute to ponder…

Are you thinking negatively or positively? If the latter is correct, then you should know that your perception of all existence, life, the universe and everything reflects your inner feelings about Allah. #IslamicTeachings #Forgiveness #Mercy #Love #Compassion #Allah #Islamic #Pulse #IslamicPulse #Islam #Youth #Youths #Heaven #Hell #God #Quran #Despair #Hate #Love

This Holy Month of Ramadhan, while we perform all the good actions we perform, from charity, to reading the Quran and reciting duas, we ought to take a moment and think: how much of what we do is purely for the sake of Allah? #Ramadhan #RamadhanKareem #RamadhanMubarak #Ramadan #RamadanKareem #RamadanMubarak

One minute to contemplate on just how quickly the blessed month of Ramadhan has passed us by and to think about whether or not this opportunity was well used by us or not! #Ramdhan #OneMinuteWisdom

Sayyid Haydar Hasanayn eloquently debunks the age-old fallacy that religion and reason are two opposite things. In fact, the religion of Islam is a religion which commands its adherents to think, to reason, to ponder and reflect BEFORE believing in anything! The Holy Quran is continuously rebuking human beings for failing to use their God-given intellect! It’s time for us to truly use our intellect and reason in order to pin down in our minds and hearts those things which are absolutely true and those things which are not… as Imam Khamenei explains in the extraordinary book, “An Outline of Islamic Thought In the Quran”. #Unplugged #Islam #Quran #Ahlulbayt #ImamKhamenei #KhameneiTheGreat

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities. The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue. The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran. AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran. Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more. Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president. AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic. Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur. JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs. We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region. AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place. A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another. But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number. So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free. JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that? AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now. PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed. AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it. Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that. But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy. AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see. Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here. I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end. It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward. I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie. AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran. Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is. JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion. Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad. But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue. AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad. ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president President Ahmadinejad was interviewed recently in New York by Democracy Now

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities. The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue. The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran. AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran. Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more. Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president. AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic. Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur. JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs. We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region. AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place. A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another. But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number. So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free. JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that? AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now. PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed. AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it. Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that. But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy. AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see. Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here. I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end. It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward. I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie. AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran. Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is. JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion. Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad. But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue. AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad. ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities. The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue. The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran. AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran. Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more. Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president. AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic. Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur. JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs. We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region. AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place. A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another. But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number. So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free. JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that? AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now. PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed. AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it. Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that. But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy. AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see. Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here. I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end. It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward. I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie. AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran. Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is. JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion. Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad. But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue. AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad. ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president

Supreme Leader Meets with Students on National Day of Fighting Against Global Arrogance The following is the full text of the speech delivered on November 3, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with high school and university students. The meeting was held on the occasion of the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"National Day of Fighting Against Global Arrogance\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech in Meeting with Students on \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"National Day of Fighting Against Global ArroganToday, the warm presence of you dear youth in this hussainyyah is a reminder and a manifestation of the epic and enthusiasm which has been the supporter and guarantee of the revolutionary movement of the Iranian nation over the course of many years- from the beginning of the Revolution until today. The great blessing of God on our country and on the Islamic Republic is the existence of youth with their clear, strong and reasonable motives, with their pure hearts and with their sincere intentions. Our meeting today has been scheduled on the anniversary of the events of the 13th of Aban which occurred over the course of different years - before and after the victory of the Revolution in the country. There are three events: Imam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s exile in the year 1343, the ruthless slaughter of students in Tehran in the year 1357 and the courageous movement of students in capturing the Den of Espionage in the year 1358. Each of these three events was in some way related to the government of the United States of America. In the year 1343, Imam (may God bestow paradise on him) was exiled because of his opposition to \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"capitulation\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", which meant preserving the security of American agents in Iran and their judicial immunity. So this event was related to America. In the year 1357, the regime which was dependent on America killed students on the streets of Tehran and the asphalt of these streets was colored with the blood of our teenagers. This was done by America in order to defend the regime which was dependent on it. This event was also related to America. The event in the year 1358 was a counterattack. Our courageous and religious youth attacked the U.S. embassy and discovered the truth and identity of this embassy, which was the Den of Espionage, and presented this fact to people throughout the world. In those days, our youth called the U.S. embassy the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Den of Espionage\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Today, after the passage of 30-plus years since that day, the name of U.S. embassies in countries which have the closest relationship with America - that is to say, European countries - has become the den of espionage. This means that our youth are 30 years ahead of the rest of the world. This event was related to America as well. These three events were related, in different ways, to the government of the United States of America and its relations with Iran. Therefore, the 13th of Aban - which is tomorrow - was named \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Day of Fighting Against Arrogance\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". What does arrogance mean? Arrogance is a Quranic term. The word \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"arrogance\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" has been used in the Holy Quran. An arrogant individual, an arrogant government and an arrogant group of people means those individuals and those governments which intend to interfere in the affairs of other human beings and other nations. They interfere in all the affairs of other nations in order to preserve their own interests. They think they are free to do anything and they grant themselves the right to impose different things on other nations and to interfere in the affairs of other countries. And they do not answer to anyone. This is the meaning of arrogance. At the opposite end of the scale, there is a group of people who fight against arrogance. What does fighting against arrogance mean? Primarily, it means refusing to give in to this bullying. The meaning of fighting against arrogance is not convoluted and it is not complicated. Fighting against arrogance means the refusal of a nation to give in to the interference and imposition of an arrogant power, individual or government. This is the meaning of fighting against arrogance. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, when I have the opportunity in the future, I will have a detailed discussion about arrogance and fighting against arrogance with you youth and students. Now, there is no time. This is a brief definition of arrogance and fighting against arrogance. The people of Iran consider themselves to be fighters against arrogance because they have not given in to the imposition of the government of America. The government of America is an arrogant government. It grants itself the right to interfere in the affairs of other countries. It wages wars and it interferes in the affairs of other countries. Today, you see that this goes beyond the borders of Asian, African and Latin American countries. It has reached Europe. They interfere in their affairs as well. The Iranian nation stood against the arrogance that the government of the United States of America showed. It stood against the interference and bullying that it caused and it stood against the domination that it had achieved over our dear country in the course of many years. The taghuti and monarchical regime was a regime which was dependent on America without any domestic support. By relying on America, they did whatever they wanted in Iran. They oppressed the people, they usurped their rights, they practiced discrimination among them. They prevented the country from achieving growth and making progress - which was the natural and historical right of the people - in order to promote the interests of America in Iran. The Iranian nation stood firm and it carried out a revolution. Then, it cut out the roots of arrogant powers in the country. It was not like a number of other countries which confronted arrogance at first, but which left it unfinished. Of course, these countries have received a blow because of this. When I was present in a country - whose name I do not want to mention - which had fought against the English for many years, which had put an end to the oppression of the English by fighting against them and which had achieved independence, I saw that they had put up the statue of an English commander in an important recreational center. I said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"What is this?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" And this center was named after this arrogant and colonialist commander who had committed thousands of crimes in that country. Of course, they did not gain any benefit from this consideration and compromise. That is to say, this country was and still is under pressure. Compromising and showing leniency towards arrogant powers will bring no benefit for any country. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the great Revolution carried out by the people of Iran confronted American arrogance and it did not leave this task unfinished because it had felt the blow which the Americans had dealt, over many years, on its skin and flesh. It knew who and what these people are. The arrogant outlook which the Americans have adopted and which has continued since decades ago until today has made all nations in the world have a feeling of mistrust and hatred towards the government of America. This is not particular to our country. Any nation which trusted America received a blow, even those who were America\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s friends. In our county, Dr. Mosaddeq trusted and relied on the Americans so that he could free himself from the pressure of the English. Instead of helping Dr. Mosaddeq who had trusted them, the Americans allied themselves with the English. They dispatched their agents to our country and they launched the coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état of the 28th of Mordad. Mosaddeq trusted them and he received a blow for that. Even those who were on friendly terms with America and who had trusted this country received a blow. The taghuti regime had a very close relationship with America. However, the greed of America exhausted them as well. As I said, they imposed \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"capitulation\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" - the judicial immunity of American agents - on this regime and they had to accept this because they had no other source of support except for America. The meaning of capitulation is that if an American sergeant slaps a high-ranking Iranian officer across the face, no one has the right to sue him. If an American agent of low rank shows transgression towards a honorable Iranian man or woman, no one has the right to sue him. The Americans say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"You do not have the right to do this. We ourselves will resolve the issue\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". A people cannot be humiliated more than this. They imposed this on Iran which was their friend. They did not even show mercy to their friend. They threw Mohammad Reza out of their country after he fled from Iran and spent a short time in America. They did not let him stay. They did not show even this bit of loyalty to him. They are such people. Nations and even governments do not trust America because of this behavior and this attitude which can be seen in its policies. Anyone who trusted America received a blow. Therefore, today, America is the most hated global power among nations. If a fair and healthy public opinion poll is carried out among all nations in the world, I do not think that the negative scores of any nation equal the negative scores of the government of America. Today, this is the condition of America throughout the world. You have heard the statements that the Europeans make against the Americans. Therefore, the issue of fighting against arrogance and \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The National Day of Fighting against Arrogance\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is a fundamental issue, one that is based on correct analyses and statements. And you dear youth and the millions of youth throughout the country, who are students like you, should have a correct analysis of these events. Well, the youth of the early years of the Revolution did not need analyses. Everything was clear to them because they had witnessed everything with their own eyes. They had witnessed the presence of the Americans and SAVAK, which had been taught by the Americans themselves. But today, you should think, analyze and be careful. This should not be only in words. It should be clear why the people of Iran are opposed to arrogance, why they are opposed to the positions of the United States of America and what their hatred results from. Today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s youth should understand this correctly by carrying out research. Well, I would like to raise a few points about our current issues with America, which is a source of discussions these days. There are certain questions in the minds of the people. First, I want to offer an important and necessary piece of advice: no one should think that the negotiating team of our country have compromised with the other party which includes America - the six governments which are known as the P5+1. This is wrong. They are the agents of the Islamic Republic of Iran. They are our own children and they are the children of the Revolution. They are carrying out a mission and the responsibility which they have undertaken is difficult. They are carrying out this responsibility, which falls on their shoulders, with many efforts. Therefore, one should not weaken and insult them and use certain terms - which we sometimes hear such as the notion that they have compromised with the enemy and other such things - against an agent who is carrying out a task and who is in charge of an affair. The things that are said against them are not true. You should pay attention to the fact that the current negotiations with these six countries - including America - are only about the nuclear issue and nothing else. In the beginning of this year, I said in Holy Mashhad that there is nothing wrong with negotiations on particular issues. But I said that I do not trust these negotiations and I am not optimistic about them. However, if they want to negotiate, they can do it and, by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, we will not suffer a loss in these negotiations. The Iranian nation benefits from a certain experience which I will refer to in brief. This experience will increase the intellectual capability of our nation, like the experience that we gained in the year 1382 and 1383 in the area of suspending our enrichment activities. At that time, during negotiations with the Europeans, the Islamic Republic agreed to suspend its enrichment activities for a while. But this turned out to be to our benefit. Why? It is because we found out there is no hope at all that our western partners will cooperate with us if we suspend our enrichment activities. If we had not accepted that optional suspension - of course, it was imposed in a way, but we and our officials accepted it anyway - some people would have said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If you had retreated a little bit, all problems would have been solved and Iran\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s nuclear file would have become normal\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". That act of suspending our enrichment activities brought us this advantage: it became clear that problems will not be solved by retreating, suspending enrichment activities, postponing our work and cancelling many of our plans and programs. It became clear that the other side is after something else. We noticed this and therefore we started our enrichment activities again. Today, the condition of the Islamic Republic has dramatically changed compared to its condition in the year 1382. In those days, we used to bargain for two, three centrifuges, but today several thousand centrifuges are working. Our youth, our scientists, our researchers and our officials made great efforts and moved things forward. Therefore, we will not suffer a loss as a result of today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s ongoing negotiations. Of course, as I said, I am not optimistic and I do not think that these negotiations will produce the results which the Iranian nation expects. However, it is an experience. This will broaden and strengthen the experience of the Iranian nation. It is alright to hold these negotiations, but it is necessary for the Iranian nation to be vigilant. We strongly support our officials, who are active in the camp of diplomacy, but our people should be vigilant. They should know what is happening so that some mercenary promoters of the enemy and some promoters who receive no rewards and who further the goals of the enemy out of naivety cannot mislead public opinion. They want to instill the idea into the minds of the people that if we surrender to the other side on the nuclear issue, all economic, financial and other such problems will be solved. This is one of the methods which they use and one of the lies which they spread. They are promoting this idea. Of course, foreign promoters promote such ideas with very efficient methods. Inside the country too, some people promote the idea that if we back down and surrender to the other side on this issue, all economic and other such problems will be solved. Some of these people do it out of naivety without any bad intention and some people promote this idea intentionally. However, this idea is wrong. Why is it wrong? There are a few reasons why it is wrong. I would like you - including the people who are present in this meeting, our wise, well-informed and highly motivated youth and our university and school students throughout the country - to think about such issues. As I once said, you are the officers of the soft war. One reason is that the enmity of America towards the Iranian nation and the Islamic Republic is not at all about the nuclear issue. It is wrong to think that America\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s hostility towards us is based on the nuclear issue. This is not the case. The nuclear issue is an excuse. Even long before the nuclear issue - that is to say, since the beginning of the Revolution - these hostilities and oppositions existed. Even if one day the nuclear issue is resolved - imagine that the Islamic Republic retreats, which is the thing they want - you should not think that these hostilities will be over. No, they will gradually make tens of other excuses. For example, they will say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why do you have missiles?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why do you have drones?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why are you on unfriendly terms with the Zionist regime?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why do you not officially recognize the Zionist regime?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why do you support resistance groups?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" in, as they call it, the Middle East region and why and why and why... The issue is not that they have disagreements with the Islamic Republic about its nuclear program. This is not the case. America\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s sanctions began since the beginning of the Revolution and these sanctions increased on a daily basis so much so that today, it has reached a high level. They showed other kinds of hostility as well. They brought down a plane which belonged to the Islamic Republic and they killed 290 humans. During the early years of the Revolution, when the people were still enthusiastic about the victory of the Revolution, they launched the coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état based in Shahid Nojeh military base. They launched a coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état against the Revolution and they supported anti-revolutionary elements in different corners of the country. They gave weapons and other such things to the anti-revolutionary camp. This is the same thing that they did in other countries later on. Their enmity is not based on the nuclear issue. The issue is something else. The Iranian nation said no to the requests of America. The Iranian nation said that America cannot do a damn thing against us. The Americans are opposed to the identity of the Islamic Republic. They are opposed to the influence and power of the Islamic Republic. Recently, one of the American politicians and intellectuals said - his speech was broadcast and this is not a confidential issue - that Iran is dangerous, no matter if it is atomic or non-atomic. This person openly said that the influence and power of Iran - as they say, the hegemony of Iran - is dangerous in the region. This is the kind of Iran which enjoys dignity, respect and power today. They are opposed to this kind of Iran. They will be satisfied when Iran becomes a weak, abandoned, isolated, untrustworthy and humiliated nation. Their enmity is not based on the nuclear issue. This is one point. Another point is that in order to solve the economic issues of the country, all our efforts should be focused on domestic issues. The kind of progress and the kind of solution is valuable which is reliant on the domestic power of a nation. If a people rely on their own power and capabilities, they will no more descend into chaos when another country frowns at and imposes sanctions on them. We should solve this. All that we want to say to officials - whether past or present officials - is that they should look at domestic capabilities in order to resolve the issues and the problems of the country including economic problems. We have certain capacities in the country. These capacities - which include human, natural and geographical resources and regional location - should be utilized. Of course, we support diplomatic dynamism. When we say problems should be solved from the inside, this does not mean that we should close our eyes, that we should not benefit from diplomatic dynamism and that we should not interact with the world. Diplomatic dynamism and diplomatic presence are very necessary. The officials who do these things are part of the work, but we should rely on domestic issues. In diplomatic arenas, that country can be successful which relies on its innate power. That government which relies on its innate power and innate capacities can make others accept what it says at the negotiating table and achieve the desired results. Such governments are taken into consideration. An important point which should receive attention in this regard is that we have never become desperate in the face of our enemies during these years and we will never become desperate in the future. During the first decade after the Revolution, particularly during the first years, we did not have access to many material resources. We did not have money, we did not have weapons, we did not have experience, we did not have organization, we did not have competent armed forces and we did not have military equipment. This was while our enemy was at the peak of his power and capability, whether the enemy which fought against us in the arena of war or the enemy which stood behind him - that is to say, the Ba\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'ath regime of Saddam and America, NATO and the Soviet Union of those days. At that time, the Reagan administration was one of the strongest and most powerful governments throughout the world in political and military arenas. This was while we lived in poverty and with difficult conditions, but they could not do anything to us. Today, the situation has changed. Today, the Islamic Republic has weapons. Today, it has money, it has science, it has technology, it has the power to produce, it has international dignity, it has millions of youth who are ready to work and it has millions of talents. Today, we have such a condition. Today, our condition cannot at all be compared with 30 years ago. This is while the situation is the exact opposite of this for the opposing camp. In those days, the Americans were at the peak of their power, but today they are not. Recently, one of the current American government officials, who is a well-known personality, said that today America has reached a point where its friends do not respect it and its enemies do not fear it. It was he who said this, not us. They themselves mention such things. Recently, they have had some political problems. You have seen the disagreement of American politicians about the government\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s budget which shut down the government for 16, 17 days. They sent 800,000 employees on involuntary leave. This is a weakness. This is inefficiency. They have the biggest economic and financial problems. Our problems are nothing compared to their problems. And I will tell you that in the year 2001 or 2002 of the Christian calendar - that is to say, 10, 11 years ago - the financial officials of America made a certain prediction. They predicted that in the year 2011 or 2012, they would have a surplus of 14 trillion dollars. Pay careful attention to this. In 2001, their prediction for 2011 and 2012 was this: they said that in 2011 and 2012 they would have a surplus of 14 trillion dollars. Now, it is 2013, but they have a deficit of around 17 trillion dollars and they do not have any surplus. That is to say, they miscalculated this figure up to 30 trillion dollars. This is their economic condition. This is the way they calculate. This is the condition in the opposing camp. Moreover, as you can see, they have many disagreements. It is mutual interests which have connected them - the Americans and the Europeans - to one another. Otherwise, deep inside, they are on unfriendly terms. The French nation hates the Americans. In different events such as the issue of Syria, the Americans could not establish a partnership with a government which has the closest relationship with them. That is to say, even the English said that we would not take part in this issue. This is while about 40 governments cooperated with them when they attacked Iraq. When they attacked Afghanistan, about 30 governments cooperated with them. The Americans have such a condition in the present time. We have a very good condition. We have made progress, we have become powerful and our people have become a well-informed people. Of course, they exert pressures on us. We should endure and pass through these pressures by relying on our domestic capabilities. This is a wise thing to do and it is being done. Of course, as I said earlier - and I would like to repeat this - we approve of the efforts that the honorable administration and the officials of the country are making. This is an important task and experience and it is most probably a valuable course of action. They can do this. If they achieve results, then so much the better. But if they do not achieve results, this should mean that the county must stand on its own feet in order to solve its problems. I would like to repeat my previous advice: you should not trust the enemy which smiles at you. We would like to offer this advice to our officials, who are our children. Those officials who are working in the arena of diplomacy are our own children and our own youth. This is our advice to them: you should take care not to be misled by a deceptive smile. You should see the subtleties of the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plans. Today, the Americans have the most troubles with the deviated Zionist regime- more than any other regime. They have the most consideration for Zionist lobbies. They show consideration for them and we see the situation. The claws of wealthy and powerful Zionist individuals and companies have such domination over the U.S. government and the U.S. Congress that they have to show consideration for them. We do not have to show consideration for the Zionists. Since the first day we said - and we say it today and we will say it in the future - that we consider the Zionist regime to be an illegal and bastard regime. It is a regime which has come into being with conspiracy and it is being preserved and guarded with conspiracy and conspiratorial policies. The Americans show consideration for this regime. The reason why they do this requires another detailed discussion. The money, power and capital of the Zionists is doing a good job and it is influencing these poor Americans. Therefore, the Americans have to show some consideration for them. It is not only the Americans who have such a condition. Many other western politicians, these poor creatures, have the same problem. They too have the same problem. Therefore, our officials should pay attention and they should look at their statements. On the one hand, they smile and they show interest in negotiations and on the other hand, they immediately say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"All options are on the table\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". So what? What move can they make against the Islamic Republic? If they are serious about these negotiations, they should control themselves. They should stop those people who open their mouth to talk nonsense. A certain wealthy American politician had the audacity to say that they should drop an atomic bomb in such and such a desert in Iran and that they should issue such and such threats. Well, they should smash this person\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mouth! A government which suffers from the delusion that it has a responsibility towards all the issues in the world and a government which considers itself responsible for dealing with the nuclear issue of such and such a country should not dare to issue nuclear threats - particularly in such a time - against a country with such a good condition. They should stop those people who talk nonsense. Anyway, our people are, thankfully, a vigilant people and our officials are the officials of these people. They too are vigilant and they pay full attention. We support whatever action which is to the benefit of the country and we support, help and pray for those officials who carry out such actions. But we also advise both the people and officials - particularly you dear youth - to open your eyes and ears. Any nation can achieve its lofty goals with wisdom, vigilance and watchfulness. And I hope that, by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, the prayers of the Imam of the Age (may our souls be sacrificed for his sake) will be a source of support for you and I hope that the immaculate soul of Imam and the pure souls of our martyrs pray for you. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, you youth will take the country in your own hands with your enthusiastic spirits and I hope that it will be your turn to reach the peaks with your innovation. Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings Source: http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1837&Itemid=4

The following is the full text of the speech delivered on November 3, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with high school and university students. The meeting was held on the occasion of the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"National Day of Fighting Against Global Arrogance\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech in Meeting with Students on \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"National Day of Fighting Against Global ArroganToday, the warm presence of you dear youth in this hussainyyah is a reminder and a manifestation of the epic and enthusiasm which has been the supporter and guarantee of the revolutionary movement of the Iranian nation over the course of many years- from the beginning of the Revolution until today. The great blessing of God on our country and on the Islamic Republic is the existence of youth with their clear, strong and reasonable motives, with their pure hearts and with their sincere intentions. Our meeting today has been scheduled on the anniversary of the events of the 13th of Aban which occurred over the course of different years - before and after the victory of the Revolution in the country. There are three events: Imam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s exile in the year 1343, the ruthless slaughter of students in Tehran in the year 1357 and the courageous movement of students in capturing the Den of Espionage in the year 1358. Each of these three events was in some way related to the government of the United States of America. In the year 1343, Imam (may God bestow paradise on him) was exiled because of his opposition to \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"capitulation\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", which meant preserving the security of American agents in Iran and their judicial immunity. So this event was related to America. In the year 1357, the regime which was dependent on America killed students on the streets of Tehran and the asphalt of these streets was colored with the blood of our teenagers. This was done by America in order to defend the regime which was dependent on it. This event was also related to America. The event in the year 1358 was a counterattack. Our courageous and religious youth attacked the U.S. embassy and discovered the truth and identity of this embassy, which was the Den of Espionage, and presented this fact to people throughout the world. In those days, our youth called the U.S. embassy the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Den of Espionage\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Today, after the passage of 30-plus years since that day, the name of U.S. embassies in countries which have the closest relationship with America - that is to say, European countries - has become the den of espionage. This means that our youth are 30 years ahead of the rest of the world. This event was related to America as well. These three events were related, in different ways, to the government of the United States of America and its relations with Iran. Therefore, the 13th of Aban - which is tomorrow - was named \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Day of Fighting Against Arrogance\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". What does arrogance mean? Arrogance is a Quranic term. The word \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"arrogance\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" has been used in the Holy Quran. An arrogant individual, an arrogant government and an arrogant group of people means those individuals and those governments which intend to interfere in the affairs of other human beings and other nations. They interfere in all the affairs of other nations in order to preserve their own interests. They think they are free to do anything and they grant themselves the right to impose different things on other nations and to interfere in the affairs of other countries. And they do not answer to anyone. This is the meaning of arrogance. At the opposite end of the scale, there is a group of people who fight against arrogance. What does fighting against arrogance mean? Primarily, it means refusing to give in to this bullying. The meaning of fighting against arrogance is not convoluted and it is not complicated. Fighting against arrogance means the refusal of a nation to give in to the interference and imposition of an arrogant power, individual or government. This is the meaning of fighting against arrogance. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, when I have the opportunity in the future, I will have a detailed discussion about arrogance and fighting against arrogance with you youth and students. Now, there is no time. This is a brief definition of arrogance and fighting against arrogance. The people of Iran consider themselves to be fighters against arrogance because they have not given in to the imposition of the government of America. The government of America is an arrogant government. It grants itself the right to interfere in the affairs of other countries. It wages wars and it interferes in the affairs of other countries. Today, you see that this goes beyond the borders of Asian, African and Latin American countries. It has reached Europe. They interfere in their affairs as well. The Iranian nation stood against the arrogance that the government of the United States of America showed. It stood against the interference and bullying that it caused and it stood against the domination that it had achieved over our dear country in the course of many years. The taghuti and monarchical regime was a regime which was dependent on America without any domestic support. By relying on America, they did whatever they wanted in Iran. They oppressed the people, they usurped their rights, they practiced discrimination among them. They prevented the country from achieving growth and making progress - which was the natural and historical right of the people - in order to promote the interests of America in Iran. The Iranian nation stood firm and it carried out a revolution. Then, it cut out the roots of arrogant powers in the country. It was not like a number of other countries which confronted arrogance at first, but which left it unfinished. Of course, these countries have received a blow because of this. When I was present in a country - whose name I do not want to mention - which had fought against the English for many years, which had put an end to the oppression of the English by fighting against them and which had achieved independence, I saw that they had put up the statue of an English commander in an important recreational center. I said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"What is this?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" And this center was named after this arrogant and colonialist commander who had committed thousands of crimes in that country. Of course, they did not gain any benefit from this consideration and compromise. That is to say, this country was and still is under pressure. Compromising and showing leniency towards arrogant powers will bring no benefit for any country. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the great Revolution carried out by the people of Iran confronted American arrogance and it did not leave this task unfinished because it had felt the blow which the Americans had dealt, over many years, on its skin and flesh. It knew who and what these people are. The arrogant outlook which the Americans have adopted and which has continued since decades ago until today has made all nations in the world have a feeling of mistrust and hatred towards the government of America. This is not particular to our country. Any nation which trusted America received a blow, even those who were America\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s friends. In our county, Dr. Mosaddeq trusted and relied on the Americans so that he could free himself from the pressure of the English. Instead of helping Dr. Mosaddeq who had trusted them, the Americans allied themselves with the English. They dispatched their agents to our country and they launched the coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état of the 28th of Mordad. Mosaddeq trusted them and he received a blow for that. Even those who were on friendly terms with America and who had trusted this country received a blow. The taghuti regime had a very close relationship with America. However, the greed of America exhausted them as well. As I said, they imposed \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"capitulation\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" - the judicial immunity of American agents - on this regime and they had to accept this because they had no other source of support except for America. The meaning of capitulation is that if an American sergeant slaps a high-ranking Iranian officer across the face, no one has the right to sue him. If an American agent of low rank shows transgression towards a honorable Iranian man or woman, no one has the right to sue him. The Americans say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"You do not have the right to do this. We ourselves will resolve the issue\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". A people cannot be humiliated more than this. They imposed this on Iran which was their friend. They did not even show mercy to their friend. They threw Mohammad Reza out of their country after he fled from Iran and spent a short time in America. They did not let him stay. They did not show even this bit of loyalty to him. They are such people. Nations and even governments do not trust America because of this behavior and this attitude which can be seen in its policies. Anyone who trusted America received a blow. Therefore, today, America is the most hated global power among nations. If a fair and healthy public opinion poll is carried out among all nations in the world, I do not think that the negative scores of any nation equal the negative scores of the government of America. Today, this is the condition of America throughout the world. You have heard the statements that the Europeans make against the Americans. Therefore, the issue of fighting against arrogance and \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The National Day of Fighting against Arrogance\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is a fundamental issue, one that is based on correct analyses and statements. And you dear youth and the millions of youth throughout the country, who are students like you, should have a correct analysis of these events. Well, the youth of the early years of the Revolution did not need analyses. Everything was clear to them because they had witnessed everything with their own eyes. They had witnessed the presence of the Americans and SAVAK, which had been taught by the Americans themselves. But today, you should think, analyze and be careful. This should not be only in words. It should be clear why the people of Iran are opposed to arrogance, why they are opposed to the positions of the United States of America and what their hatred results from. Today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s youth should understand this correctly by carrying out research. Well, I would like to raise a few points about our current issues with America, which is a source of discussions these days. There are certain questions in the minds of the people. First, I want to offer an important and necessary piece of advice: no one should think that the negotiating team of our country have compromised with the other party which includes America - the six governments which are known as the P5+1. This is wrong. They are the agents of the Islamic Republic of Iran. They are our own children and they are the children of the Revolution. They are carrying out a mission and the responsibility which they have undertaken is difficult. They are carrying out this responsibility, which falls on their shoulders, with many efforts. Therefore, one should not weaken and insult them and use certain terms - which we sometimes hear such as the notion that they have compromised with the enemy and other such things - against an agent who is carrying out a task and who is in charge of an affair. The things that are said against them are not true. You should pay attention to the fact that the current negotiations with these six countries - including America - are only about the nuclear issue and nothing else. In the beginning of this year, I said in Holy Mashhad that there is nothing wrong with negotiations on particular issues. But I said that I do not trust these negotiations and I am not optimistic about them. However, if they want to negotiate, they can do it and, by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, we will not suffer a loss in these negotiations. The Iranian nation benefits from a certain experience which I will refer to in brief. This experience will increase the intellectual capability of our nation, like the experience that we gained in the year 1382 and 1383 in the area of suspending our enrichment activities. At that time, during negotiations with the Europeans, the Islamic Republic agreed to suspend its enrichment activities for a while. But this turned out to be to our benefit. Why? It is because we found out there is no hope at all that our western partners will cooperate with us if we suspend our enrichment activities. If we had not accepted that optional suspension - of course, it was imposed in a way, but we and our officials accepted it anyway - some people would have said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If you had retreated a little bit, all problems would have been solved and Iran\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s nuclear file would have become normal\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". That act of suspending our enrichment activities brought us this advantage: it became clear that problems will not be solved by retreating, suspending enrichment activities, postponing our work and cancelling many of our plans and programs. It became clear that the other side is after something else. We noticed this and therefore we started our enrichment activities again. Today, the condition of the Islamic Republic has dramatically changed compared to its condition in the year 1382. In those days, we used to bargain for two, three centrifuges, but today several thousand centrifuges are working. Our youth, our scientists, our researchers and our officials made great efforts and moved things forward. Therefore, we will not suffer a loss as a result of today\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s ongoing negotiations. Of course, as I said, I am not optimistic and I do not think that these negotiations will produce the results which the Iranian nation expects. However, it is an experience. This will broaden and strengthen the experience of the Iranian nation. It is alright to hold these negotiations, but it is necessary for the Iranian nation to be vigilant. We strongly support our officials, who are active in the camp of diplomacy, but our people should be vigilant. They should know what is happening so that some mercenary promoters of the enemy and some promoters who receive no rewards and who further the goals of the enemy out of naivety cannot mislead public opinion. They want to instill the idea into the minds of the people that if we surrender to the other side on the nuclear issue, all economic, financial and other such problems will be solved. This is one of the methods which they use and one of the lies which they spread. They are promoting this idea. Of course, foreign promoters promote such ideas with very efficient methods. Inside the country too, some people promote the idea that if we back down and surrender to the other side on this issue, all economic and other such problems will be solved. Some of these people do it out of naivety without any bad intention and some people promote this idea intentionally. However, this idea is wrong. Why is it wrong? There are a few reasons why it is wrong. I would like you - including the people who are present in this meeting, our wise, well-informed and highly motivated youth and our university and school students throughout the country - to think about such issues. As I once said, you are the officers of the soft war. One reason is that the enmity of America towards the Iranian nation and the Islamic Republic is not at all about the nuclear issue. It is wrong to think that America\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s hostility towards us is based on the nuclear issue. This is not the case. The nuclear issue is an excuse. Even long before the nuclear issue - that is to say, since the beginning of the Revolution - these hostilities and oppositions existed. Even if one day the nuclear issue is resolved - imagine that the Islamic Republic retreats, which is the thing they want - you should not think that these hostilities will be over. No, they will gradually make tens of other excuses. For example, they will say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why do you have missiles?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why do you have drones?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why are you on unfriendly terms with the Zionist regime?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why do you not officially recognize the Zionist regime?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"why do you support resistance groups?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" in, as they call it, the Middle East region and why and why and why... The issue is not that they have disagreements with the Islamic Republic about its nuclear program. This is not the case. America\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s sanctions began since the beginning of the Revolution and these sanctions increased on a daily basis so much so that today, it has reached a high level. They showed other kinds of hostility as well. They brought down a plane which belonged to the Islamic Republic and they killed 290 humans. During the early years of the Revolution, when the people were still enthusiastic about the victory of the Revolution, they launched the coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état based in Shahid Nojeh military base. They launched a coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état against the Revolution and they supported anti-revolutionary elements in different corners of the country. They gave weapons and other such things to the anti-revolutionary camp. This is the same thing that they did in other countries later on. Their enmity is not based on the nuclear issue. The issue is something else. The Iranian nation said no to the requests of America. The Iranian nation said that America cannot do a damn thing against us. The Americans are opposed to the identity of the Islamic Republic. They are opposed to the influence and power of the Islamic Republic. Recently, one of the American politicians and intellectuals said - his speech was broadcast and this is not a confidential issue - that Iran is dangerous, no matter if it is atomic or non-atomic. This person openly said that the influence and power of Iran - as they say, the hegemony of Iran - is dangerous in the region. This is the kind of Iran which enjoys dignity, respect and power today. They are opposed to this kind of Iran. They will be satisfied when Iran becomes a weak, abandoned, isolated, untrustworthy and humiliated nation. Their enmity is not based on the nuclear issue. This is one point. Another point is that in order to solve the economic issues of the country, all our efforts should be focused on domestic issues. The kind of progress and the kind of solution is valuable which is reliant on the domestic power of a nation. If a people rely on their own power and capabilities, they will no more descend into chaos when another country frowns at and imposes sanctions on them. We should solve this. All that we want to say to officials - whether past or present officials - is that they should look at domestic capabilities in order to resolve the issues and the problems of the country including economic problems. We have certain capacities in the country. These capacities - which include human, natural and geographical resources and regional location - should be utilized. Of course, we support diplomatic dynamism. When we say problems should be solved from the inside, this does not mean that we should close our eyes, that we should not benefit from diplomatic dynamism and that we should not interact with the world. Diplomatic dynamism and diplomatic presence are very necessary. The officials who do these things are part of the work, but we should rely on domestic issues. In diplomatic arenas, that country can be successful which relies on its innate power. That government which relies on its innate power and innate capacities can make others accept what it says at the negotiating table and achieve the desired results. Such governments are taken into consideration. An important point which should receive attention in this regard is that we have never become desperate in the face of our enemies during these years and we will never become desperate in the future. During the first decade after the Revolution, particularly during the first years, we did not have access to many material resources. We did not have money, we did not have weapons, we did not have experience, we did not have organization, we did not have competent armed forces and we did not have military equipment. This was while our enemy was at the peak of his power and capability, whether the enemy which fought against us in the arena of war or the enemy which stood behind him - that is to say, the Ba\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'ath regime of Saddam and America, NATO and the Soviet Union of those days. At that time, the Reagan administration was one of the strongest and most powerful governments throughout the world in political and military arenas. This was while we lived in poverty and with difficult conditions, but they could not do anything to us. Today, the situation has changed. Today, the Islamic Republic has weapons. Today, it has money, it has science, it has technology, it has the power to produce, it has international dignity, it has millions of youth who are ready to work and it has millions of talents. Today, we have such a condition. Today, our condition cannot at all be compared with 30 years ago. This is while the situation is the exact opposite of this for the opposing camp. In those days, the Americans were at the peak of their power, but today they are not. Recently, one of the current American government officials, who is a well-known personality, said that today America has reached a point where its friends do not respect it and its enemies do not fear it. It was he who said this, not us. They themselves mention such things. Recently, they have had some political problems. You have seen the disagreement of American politicians about the government\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s budget which shut down the government for 16, 17 days. They sent 800,000 employees on involuntary leave. This is a weakness. This is inefficiency. They have the biggest economic and financial problems. Our problems are nothing compared to their problems. And I will tell you that in the year 2001 or 2002 of the Christian calendar - that is to say, 10, 11 years ago - the financial officials of America made a certain prediction. They predicted that in the year 2011 or 2012, they would have a surplus of 14 trillion dollars. Pay careful attention to this. In 2001, their prediction for 2011 and 2012 was this: they said that in 2011 and 2012 they would have a surplus of 14 trillion dollars. Now, it is 2013, but they have a deficit of around 17 trillion dollars and they do not have any surplus. That is to say, they miscalculated this figure up to 30 trillion dollars. This is their economic condition. This is the way they calculate. This is the condition in the opposing camp. Moreover, as you can see, they have many disagreements. It is mutual interests which have connected them - the Americans and the Europeans - to one another. Otherwise, deep inside, they are on unfriendly terms. The French nation hates the Americans. In different events such as the issue of Syria, the Americans could not establish a partnership with a government which has the closest relationship with them. That is to say, even the English said that we would not take part in this issue. This is while about 40 governments cooperated with them when they attacked Iraq. When they attacked Afghanistan, about 30 governments cooperated with them. The Americans have such a condition in the present time. We have a very good condition. We have made progress, we have become powerful and our people have become a well-informed people. Of course, they exert pressures on us. We should endure and pass through these pressures by relying on our domestic capabilities. This is a wise thing to do and it is being done. Of course, as I said earlier - and I would like to repeat this - we approve of the efforts that the honorable administration and the officials of the country are making. This is an important task and experience and it is most probably a valuable course of action. They can do this. If they achieve results, then so much the better. But if they do not achieve results, this should mean that the county must stand on its own feet in order to solve its problems. I would like to repeat my previous advice: you should not trust the enemy which smiles at you. We would like to offer this advice to our officials, who are our children. Those officials who are working in the arena of diplomacy are our own children and our own youth. This is our advice to them: you should take care not to be misled by a deceptive smile. You should see the subtleties of the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plans. Today, the Americans have the most troubles with the deviated Zionist regime- more than any other regime. They have the most consideration for Zionist lobbies. They show consideration for them and we see the situation. The claws of wealthy and powerful Zionist individuals and companies have such domination over the U.S. government and the U.S. Congress that they have to show consideration for them. We do not have to show consideration for the Zionists. Since the first day we said - and we say it today and we will say it in the future - that we consider the Zionist regime to be an illegal and bastard regime. It is a regime which has come into being with conspiracy and it is being preserved and guarded with conspiracy and conspiratorial policies. The Americans show consideration for this regime. The reason why they do this requires another detailed discussion. The money, power and capital of the Zionists is doing a good job and it is influencing these poor Americans. Therefore, the Americans have to show some consideration for them. It is not only the Americans who have such a condition. Many other western politicians, these poor creatures, have the same problem. They too have the same problem. Therefore, our officials should pay attention and they should look at their statements. On the one hand, they smile and they show interest in negotiations and on the other hand, they immediately say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"All options are on the table\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". So what? What move can they make against the Islamic Republic? If they are serious about these negotiations, they should control themselves. They should stop those people who open their mouth to talk nonsense. A certain wealthy American politician had the audacity to say that they should drop an atomic bomb in such and such a desert in Iran and that they should issue such and such threats. Well, they should smash this person\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mouth! A government which suffers from the delusion that it has a responsibility towards all the issues in the world and a government which considers itself responsible for dealing with the nuclear issue of such and such a country should not dare to issue nuclear threats - particularly in such a time - against a country with such a good condition. They should stop those people who talk nonsense. Anyway, our people are, thankfully, a vigilant people and our officials are the officials of these people. They too are vigilant and they pay full attention. We support whatever action which is to the benefit of the country and we support, help and pray for those officials who carry out such actions. But we also advise both the people and officials - particularly you dear youth - to open your eyes and ears. Any nation can achieve its lofty goals with wisdom, vigilance and watchfulness. And I hope that, by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, the prayers of the Imam of the Age (may our souls be sacrificed for his sake) will be a source of support for you and I hope that the immaculate soul of Imam and the pure souls of our martyrs pray for you. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, you youth will take the country in your own hands with your enthusiastic spirits and I hope that it will be your turn to reach the peaks with your innovation. Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings

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

The Bahraini regime forces backed by troops from Saudi Arabia have once again attacked protesters in the tiny Persian Gulf littoral state. Security forces on Friday fired teargas and sound grenades at the demonstrating crowds in several towns and villages around the Bahraini capital, Manama. Clashes then erupted between government forces and the pro-democracy protesters demanding the ouster of the Al Khalifa regime. Several people were injured during the demonstrations. The protesters also voiced their anger at the US government for its support of the Manama regime. Anti-American sentiments are high in Bahrain after Washington announced earlier this month that it would resume arms sales to Bahrain. However, Bahraini opposition groups and activists condemned the decision, saying it could encourage further human rights violations in the Persian Gulf country. Press TV has conducted an interview with Kamel Wazni, political analyst, to hear his opinion on this issue. The following is a rough transcription of the interview. Press TV: First of all we are hearing slogans on the streets in Bahrain against the United States now besides those slogans that were against the regime. People it seems are now very strongly and clearly saying that they want the United States to cut its support for the Manama regime, however we are seeing that support continue. Do you think that these slogans are going to be heard by Washington? Wazni: Obviously they will resonate in the White House and on the streets of America because this is the voice of the people and for very long time the Americans felt they are not mentioned on the streets and the Americans know sometimes this hostility that is taking place by the Bahrainis because they continue support of the Americans for the Bahraini regime and the approval of the Americans to sell weapons and arms to the Bahraini regime despite the crackdown that is taking place by the Bahraini regime against the civilian demonstrators of the country. I think there is voice on the streets saying anyone who sided with the criminals who are committing crimes against humanity should be condemned and today because the Bahraini authority, the Bahraini monarchy is committing crime and America being accomplice to this crime, then you see the people are voicing their sentiment and making their voice to be heard across the world. They are not intimidated, they are not afraid. They wanted democratic system and a country, that is the basic principle of human dignity to live free in his own or her own country where will be no discrimination, no crackdown, no torture. This is the basic principle of any human wanted to live in peace and prosperity and the Americans by siding with the Bahraini regime preventing the aspiration of the Bahraini people to make this happen so the Americans should not be shocked by what they are hearing. That is what they actually worked on by helping the Bahraini authority and if Obama is listening and Mrs. Clinton should listen to the human rights when they actually condemn the torture that is taking place by the Bahraini government. The systematic torture that is taking [place] day after day should be heard by the American administration. There are a lot of committees being established by the UN bodies, by even the King and they all indicated there is a huge torture and killing taking place on the streets of Bahrain. So is anybody listening? Press TV: What you referred there to the United Nations also other human rights groups we know for instance that the UN Human Rights Council recently in Geneva started to discuss the situation in Bahrain. We know groups like Amnesty International and other human rights organizations in and outside of Bahrain have been saying they have documents and proved that these violations are taking place but does that mean that they are going to give any support to the Bahraini revolutionaries and do you think without that support on the ground the Bahraini revolution can get anywhere? Wazni: Well obviously the public opinion on the international appeal is important but eventually the legwork has to be done by the people of Bahrain because the people of Bahrain made a pledge and they are determined to carry their own cause despite all the obstacles and all the atrocity that is committed by the Bahraini regime against the civilian in Bahrain. But having the public support of the international community from the UN, from other bodies is actually attested to the reality that is taking place. There is a crime taking place in Bahrain by the monarchy, by the royal family supported by the Americans and somebody has to listen but I do not think the Bahraini people are counting on the West or the Americans because they think the Americans are participant in what is taking place in Bahrain and despite all of that they have the will and the determination to carry their cause to the end. They know the sacrifice and they are willing to take that sacrifice and we hear the leadership of the Bahraini talking, when we hear Sheikh Ghasem say this is the will of the people and they will carry their duty to bring honorable justice to Bahrain despite all the killing and torture [that] is committed by the Bahraini with the help of the Saudis. The people will prevail in the end, will be costly process but you have to trust the people and the people will carry their duties.

Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech to People of East Azerbaijan 22/02/2013 The following is the full text of the speech delivered on February 16, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution in a meeting with the people of East Azerbaijan. The meeting was held on the anniversary of the uprising by the people of Tabriz on the 29th of Bahman of 1356. ‌ In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful I welcome all you dear brothers and sisters and the dear youth. In particular, I welcome the dear families of martyrs, religious scholars and government officials who have come here from distant places, brought a valuable gift of affection from the dear people of Azerbaijan on this occasion and delivered their message of resistance. I hope that Allah the Exalted bestows great blessings and infinite mercy on all of you. I would tell you dear brothers and sisters and all the people of Azerbaijan and Tabriz including religious men and women that the presence of the people of Azerbaijan and Tabriz has truly played a determining role in the movement of the Iranian nation throughout all the eras in our history - from 100, 150 years ago until today. And today nothing has changed. It is you who have managed to protect the dignity of our country and our nation against the enemies with your firm determination, your pride and your faith. And Azerbaijan has played an increasingly significant role in different arenas. Thirty-five years have passed since the 29th of Bahman of 1356. Today, in terms of faith, resistance and wisdom, Azerbaijan is even better than it was during those important and fateful times. There have been so many vicious plots to separate the people in different parts of the country. But these plots have backfired. It is you who have always managed to play a leading role. In fact, it is you who are the anchor of peace in this country. As you said in the poem you recited: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"You are the peace in the heart of Iran.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Audience shout in the Azeri language, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We are prepared to lay down our lives. We are Khamenei\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s soldiers.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"] One can clearly see that the dear people of Azerbaijan have a specific characteristic. This characteristic exists in other parts of the country, but in Azerbaijan it is more visible. This characteristic is that the political activities and the proud movement of the people of Azerbaijan in different eras - in the case of the Constitutional Movement, the military occupation of Azerbaijan and different other issues - were based on religion and religious faith. And they played a leading role in many of these issues. Despite the fact that the leftist intellectual movement and the movement which was dependent on the west were active in Azerbaijan since after the introduction of the unhealthy intellectual movement into our country and despite the fact that they were trying to separate the people from religion, the movement of the people was based on religion. If you take a look at the movements which were started in Azerbaijan - many of these movements were national movements, and the people of Azerbaijan were pioneers - you can see that despite the efforts of those leftist movements, the people and the leaders of these popular movements in Azerbaijan expressed their commitment to religious issues more openly than the people in other cities. In Tabriz, Sattar Khan used to say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The fatwa of the ulama of Najaf is in my pocket\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". That is to say, this great and brave man used to coordinate with the marja taqlids of Najaf. What he did was exactly the opposite of what eastern and western intellectual movements wanted to achieve at that time in the country. Today nothing has changed and nothing will change in the future either. The Iranian nation considers religious faith as the standard. I cited Azerbaijan as an example of this religious faith, but people throughout the country are, more or less, like this. The movement of the Iranian nation is one that is accompanied by pride, courage and a sense of responsibility. But it is based on religious teachings and religious faith. This is very valuable. That is why the dangers caused by global powers, which other nations are usually faced with and which make them waver, did not threaten the people of Iran and did not make them waver. When the enemies wanted to impose sanctions and exert pressures they said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We want to impose crippling sanctions on the people of Iran.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" And they did this. Two, three days before the 22nd of Bahman, they put a new round of sanctions into the equation. Besides, a few months ago, in Mordad of this year, they did the same thing. That is to say, they increased their so-called pressures on the people before the 22nd of Bahman of this year. What do they hope to achieve? They do these things in the hope of weakening the people. What was the response of the people? The people of Iran responded by participating in the rallies on the 22nd of Bahman more enthusiastically. All the people participated. People from different parts of the country participated. They participated with great spirit and with a smile on their faces. The people of Iran are such people. Each year on the 22nd of Bahman, the people of Iran deal a blow to the enemies. They strike the enemies and the opponents like an avalanche. This avalanche struck them this year too. I deem it necessary to express my gratitude again - even if one expresses his gratitude 100 times, one is not overdoing it - to the people of Iran for their glorious and impressive presence [in the rallies on the 22nd of Bahman]. One should bow before such insight. The people of Iran are such people. I would tell you that in these conditions, the enemies have taken a passive role. Despite the fact that they pretend to be active, they are not active. The enemy has taken a passive role in the face of the Iranian nation. Enjoying firm determination, wisdom and faith, our people know what they want and they know the way to achieve their goals. They endure the hardships with great courage. Different political, military and economic weapons do not work on our nation. Therefore, the enemy has taken a passive role and for this reason, they make irrational moves. I would tell you that American politicians are irrational people. They make irrational statements. They act in an irrational and thuggish way. They expect other countries to give in to their unreasonable demands and their bullying. Well, some people give in to their demands. Some governments and some political personalities in certain countries give in to their bullying. But the Iranian nation and the Islamic Republic will not give in. The Islamic Republic of Iran has many things to say. It has logical reasons. It has power and authority. For this reason, the Islamic Republic does not give in to irrational statements and actions. In what ways are they irrational? The sign of their irrationality is the contradictions between their words and actions. Their words are not in line with their actions. No other piece of evidence can show their irrationality more clearly. A reasonable person makes a convincing comment and then he sticks by it. These men, American politicians and their western followers, are not such people. They say a certain thing and make a certain claim, but they do exactly the opposite of what they have claimed or said. I would like to give a number of examples: They claim that they are committed to human rights. The Americans have raised the flag of human rights. They say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We are committed to human rights not only in our country, America, but also in the entire world.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Well, this is a claim. What have they done in practice? In practice, they inflict the most serious harm on human rights and they hurl the biggest insult at human rights in different countries. Their secret prisons throughout the world, such as their prisons in Guantanamo, in Iraq, in Abu Ghraib and their attack on civilians in Afghanistan, Pakistan and in different areas are examples of the Americans\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' claim to support human rights. Based on the news that is reported every day from Afghanistan and Pakistan, their drones both spy for them and pressure the people. Of course, as an American journal said a few days ago, these drones will be a source of trouble for them in the future. They say that they are committed to non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. Their pretext for attacking Iraq 11 years ago was that the regime of Saddam wanted to build nuclear weapons in Iraq. Of course, they went there and they did not find anything. It became clear that it was a lie. They say that they are committed to non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. This is while they support an evil government - the Zionist government - which has nuclear weapons and which threatens to use them. That is what they say and this is how they act. They say that they are committed to establishment of democracy in the world - I do not want to speak about the kind of democracy America itself has. Under this claim, they constantly confront the Islamic Republic which has the most genuine democracy in the region. This is while they shamelessly support countries in the region which do not know the first thing about democracy and in which the people have not seen ballot boxes even once. This is their commitment to democracy. Notice how different their words and actions are. They say that they want to resolve their issues with Iran. They have said this many times. Recently, they are speaking about it even more than before. They say that they want to negotiate and resolve their issues with Iran. This is what they say. But in practice, they resort to imposing sanctions and broadcasting negative propaganda. They publish inappropriate and false things about the Islamic Republic and the people of Iran. A few days ago the President of America delivered a speech about the nuclear issue of Iran. He spoke as if the conflict between Iran and America is over Iran\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s decision to build nuclear weapons. He said that they will do everything in their power to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons. If we wanted to build nuclear weapons, how would you stop us? If Iran had decided to build nuclear weapons, America would not be able to stop it in any way. We do not want to build nuclear weapons and this is not because this will upset America, rather it is because of our beliefs. We believe that building nuclear weapons is a crime against humanity and they should not be built. Besides, we believe that the existing nuclear weapons should be destroyed. This is our belief. It has nothing to do with you [Americans]. If we did not have this belief and if we decided to build nuclear weapons, no power could stop us, as they could not stop other countries. They could not do this in India, Pakistan and North Korea. The Americans were opposed to development of nuclear weapons in these countries, but they built nuclear weapons. The Americans claim, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We will not let Iran build nuclear weapons.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" This is deceptive talk. Is this an issue of nuclear weapons? Regarding Iran, the issue is not related to nuclear weapons. The issue is that you want to deny Iran its natural and inalienable right to enrich uranium and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes through using its domestic capacities. Of course, you cannot do this either and the Iranian nation will not renounce its right. American politicians make irrational statements. One cannot use logic when he speaks to an irrational person - after all, he is irrational. Irrational means thuggish. It means somebody who speaks nonsense. This is a fact which we have become aware of through our involvement in different global issues. We understand who our opposing side is and how he should be confronted. I have written down a few things to discuss with you dear brothers and sisters and the entire Iranian nation. Of course, these statements are addressed to the people of Iran. When they speak, when the American president speaks, when his companions and followers speak, they want to mislead public opinion -public opinion in the world, in the region or if they can, in our country. At the moment, I do not want to speak about public opinion in the world. The global media network, which is under the domination of the Zionists and the Americans, either does not reflect our statements or it reflects them in an incomplete or distorted way. Therefore, I speak to the people of Iran. The power of the Islamic Republic has nothing to do with public opinion in the world. The Islamic Republic has not gained its power and it has not achieved dignity and glory with the help of public opinion in the world. It has achieved these things with the help of the people of Iran. The firm and solid foundation which the Iranian nation has built and the news of which is quickly spreading throughout the world is based on the Iranian nation itself. I speak to the people of Iran. I will not address other nations, but they can listen if they want to. They can reflect on my statements or not reflect on them. But the people of Iran should know about these things. Therefore, the first point is that they are unreasonable. They speak without believing in what they say and their words and actions are different. The second point is that they have raised the issue of negotiations. They say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Iranian officials should come to us so that we can sit and negotiate.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" The same unreasonable behavior can be seen in their offer of negotiations. Their purpose is not to solve the problems and resolves the issues - I will explain this later. Their purpose is creating hype. They want to say to Muslim nations, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"This was the Islamic Republic with all that intense determination and resistance. But finally, it had to negotiate with us. Even the Iranian nation ended up like this. What can you do?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" They need negotiations in order to suppress countries which have just gained power, in which the breeze of Islamic Awakening has blown, countries which feel they have dignity because of Islam. They want to make these countries hopeless. Since the beginning of the Revolution, this was one of their goals. Since the beginning of the Revolution, one of their goals was to drag Iran to the negotiating table and make it deal with it. One of their goals was to gain the opportunity to say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Did you see that finally Iran - which claimed to be independent and courageous and which claimed that it has stood up against us - was forced to come and sit at the negotiating table?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Today, they pursue the same goal. This is an important issue. When the purpose of negotiations is not resolving the main issues and when the purpose of negotiations is creating hype, it is clear that the opposing side, the Islamic Republic, is not naïve and it has not closed its eyes. It understands what your goal is. Therefore, it responds on the basis of your intentions. The third point is that in the eyes of the Americans and powers which seek domination, the true meaning of negotiations is accepting what they say at the negotiating table. This is their goal of negotiations. They say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Let us sit and talk so that you come to the conclusion that you should accept what you would not accept before.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" They say in their propaganda about negotiations - you may have heard about it - that they should directly negotiate with Iran and they cause a stir and create hype about it. Even the statements they made today clearly conveyed the message that they want to convince Iran to stop enriching uranium and producing nuclear energy. This is their goal. They do not say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Let us sit and negotiate so that Iran can give its own reasons and so that we stop pressuring them, imposing sanctions on them and interfering in political and security issues.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Rather, they say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We should negotiate so that Iran accepts what we say.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" This kind of negotiation does not serve any purpose. It will not reach any results. Even if Iran accepts to negotiate and even if our officials sit and negotiate with the Americans, what kind of negotiations is it when their goal is this [making Iran surrender]? It is obvious that Iran will not give up its rights. During negotiations, whenever they see that the opposing side speaks reasonably and they have nothing to say against Iran, they break off negotiations. Then, they say that Iran does not want to negotiate. Political networks as well as news networks are under their control and they broadcast propaganda. We have experienced this. During the past 15 years, two or three times the Americans sent a message about a specific issue. They insisted that there is a very important and a very critical issue and that we should sit and talk with them. Well, executive officials - usually one or two people - went to a certain place and spoke to them. As soon as these officials made their rational statements and the Americans found out that they have no response, the negotiations were broken off unilaterally. Of course, they achieved their propaganda purposes. This is our experience. Well, it is wrong to test something which has been already tested. The fourth point is that they pretend in their propaganda that if Iran sits at the negotiating table and negotiates with America, sanctions will be lifted. This is a lie too. Their goal is to make the people of Iran become eager to negotiate with America by promising to lift sanctions. They think that the people of Iran are exhausted by the sanctions and are frustrated. They think that everything is in a mess and that they can tell us, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Well, come and negotiate with us so that we lift the sanctions.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" They think this will cause the entire Iranian nation to ask them to negotiate. This is also one of their irrational and deceptive statements and it is a tool for bullying. First, as I said, when they ask us to negotiate with them, they do not really mean fair and rational negotiations. Negotiations mean that we should accept what they say and surrender so that they lift the sanctions. If the Iranian nation wanted to surrender, they would not have carried out a revolution. America was dominant over the issues of Iran and it did what it liked. The Iranian people carried out a revolution in order to free themselves from the yoke of America. Now should they surrender to you again? This is the first problem with their offer of negotiations. Another problem is that the sanctions will not be lifted with negotiations. I would tell you that the purpose of sanctions is something else. The purpose of sanctions is exhausting the people of Iran and separating them from the Islamic Republic. Even if negotiations are conducted but our people stay present on the scene and stand up for their rights, sanctions will continue. What will the Iranian nation do to counter this wrong idea that the enemies have? There is an idea in the minds of the opposing sides. Let us elaborate and analyze this idea. They say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The Islamic Republic relies on the people. If we manage to separate the people from the Islamic Republic, the power to resist will be taken away from the Islamic Republic.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" This is how the opposing side thinks. Well, this idea has two parts. The first part, that the Islamic Republic relies on the people, is accurate. There is no source of support for the Islamic Republic except the people. The people are the fortifications that protect the country and the Islamic Revolution. The second part, that they thought they can bring the people to their knees by imposing sanctions and bullying them on international, commercial and other such issues, is false. If they think that they can take away this source of support from the Islamic Republic, they are wrong. The Iranian nation will think of some ways to counter what the enemy wants to do. The Iranian nation is looking for economic blossoming, economic progress and complete prosperity. But it does not want to achieve this goal by being humiliated before the enemy. It wants to achieve this goal with its own capabilities, courage, advancements and with the capabilities of the youth. It does not want to achieve this with anything else. There is no doubt that sanctions exert pressures on the people and bother them. But there are two ways to approach these pressures. Weak nations surrender to the enemy when he exerts pressures and they bow and show regret before him. But a brave nation, like the Iranian nation, tries to use its own capabilities as soon as it sees that the enemy is exerting pressures and it tries to pass through the danger zone. And our nation will definitely do this. We have 30 years of experience in this regard. There are certain countries in the region which have been under the domination of America for more than 30 years. The governments in these countries have been servants of America. They have been obedient to America and they have been taking orders from it. What is their position? The Iranian nation has been putting up a resistance against America for more than 30 years. What is the position of the Iranian nation? In the face of 30 years of pressures by America, the Iranian nation has reached such a position - in terms of scientific, economic and cultural progress and in terms of international dignity, political influence and political power - that the people and government officials during the time of Pahlavi and Qajar regimes could not even dream of. We have experienced this. We have tested this. We have stood up against the pressures of America for 30 years. We have such a position. But there are nations which have been under the domination of America for 30 years and they are behind other countries to a great extent. We did not suffer a loss as a result of resisting. Resistance revives the inner strength of a nation. It makes it active. The sanctions which they impose will be helpful to the Iranian nation. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor and grace, sanctions will help the Iranian nation achieve growth and blossoming. This is an important point. Well, you saw what the people did in the rallies. We cannot say that the people have no complaints about the high prices and the existing problems. Prices are high and there are certain economic problems and the people, particularly underprivileged people, feel them. But this did not make the people separate themselves from the Islamic Republic. The people know that the Islamic Republic, dear and powerful Islam and the officials who are committed to Islam, are the powerful hands which can solve the problems. They can solve the problems. Surrendering to the enemies will not solve any problems. The last point is that unlike American politicians, we are reasonable. Our officials are reasonable. Our people are reasonable. We accept rational statements and rational actions. If the Americans show that they will not bully us any more, if they show that they will not commit evil deeds, if they show that they will not say and do irrational things, if they show that they will respect the rights of the Iranian nation, if they show that they will not fuel the fire of discord in the country, if they show that they will not interfere in the internal affairs of Iran - like the interference by supporting those who started the fitna in 1388 - then they will see that the Islamic Republic is benevolent and the people are reasonable. In the fitna of the year 1388, they supported those who started the fitna and they put social networks at the service of these people. In those days, a social network wanted to close down in order to fix some technical problems. They asked the network not to close down so that they could exert influence over the fitna. If they stop doing these things, then they will see that the Islamic Republic is well-wishing. The only way to establish relations with the Islamic Republic is this and there is no other way. They can establish relations with the Islamic Republic in such a way. The Americans should prove that they have good will. They should prove that they are not after bullying. If they prove this, then they will see that the Iranian nation will make an appropriate response. If they do not commit evil deeds, if they do not interfere, if they do not bully and if they acknowledge the rights of the Iranian nation, then an appropriate response will be given by the Iranian nation. I would like to say a few things about the internal issues of our country. This is an important issue. An event took place in the Majlis. It was a bad and inappropriate event. It made both the people and our elites unhappy. I became upset for two reasons. The first is the fact that the event itself happened and the second is the fact that the people are unhappy about this issue. In this event, the head of a certain branch made an accusation against the other two branches on the basis of an unproven allegation which had not even been considered by a court of law. This course of action was bad and inappropriate. These acts are against sharia and the law and they are immoral. They violate the basic rights of the people. One of the basic rights of the people is living in peace and in psychological and moral security. If a person is accused of corruption, one cannot accuse other people on the basis of this accusation. Even if he is found guilty - let alone the current case in which the accused has not been found guilty, he has not been summoned by the court and he has not come to trial - one should not accuse others. Accusing other people, the Majlis and the judiciary branch on the basis of an accusation that has been leveled against another person is an appropriate course of action. It is a wrong course of action. For the time being, I offer a piece of advice. This behavior is not appropriate for the Islamic Republic. On the other hand, the questioning [of the minister] in the Majlis was a wrong course of action. Questioning should serve a certain purpose. What is the purpose of questioning a minister - a few months before the end of this administration\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s term - over an issue which is not related to the minister? Why did they do this? I have heard that inside the Majlis, a number of people said inappropriate things. This course of action was also wrong. All these events are inappropriate for the Islamic Republic. Neither that accusation, nor that behavior, nor that questioning was appropriate. The things which the honorable Speaker of the Majlis said in his own defense were excessive. It was not necessary to do that. We are all brothers. When there is a common enemy in front of us and when we see plots, what should we do? Until today, the officials have always stayed by one another\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s side. Now, too, they should act like this. They should always act like this. I have always supported the officials of the three branches and the officials of the country. I will continue to support each person who has a responsibility. I will help him. But I do not like these acts. This kind of behavior is not in line with the oaths they take and with the promises they make. Take a look at the greatness of the people. These people deserve to be treated in a different way. Today, the officials should focus all their efforts on solving economic problems. Three or four years ago, during a speech which I delivered in the beginning of the year, I explicitly said to the people and the officials that the plot of the enemies of the Iranian nation would be to focus - more than everything else - on our economic issues. Well, you see that the enemies did this. Both the executive branch and the Majlis should focus all their efforts and all their attention on pursuing accurate economic policies. A few years ago, I wrote a letter to the heads of the three branches of government about combating economic corruption. You should combat economic corruption. This problem is not solved by speaking about it. You should combat economic corruption in practice. You repeatedly speak about economic corruption. When did you combat economic corruption? What was done in practice? What did you do in practice? These issues make one distressed. Now that the enemies have increased their hostility, I expect the officials to strengthen their friendship. Piety, piety, piety! We expect the officials to focus all their efforts on solving the problems of the people by exercising patience, by suppressing unrestrained emotions and by taking the issues of the country into consideration. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, this benevolent piece of advice will draw the attention of the officials, particularly high-ranking officials. They should be committed to this issue. I should add another point. The things that I said today and the complaints I made against a number of officials should not make some people shout slogans against such and such people. I am against this course of action. Some people label a certain person as anti-wilayat, anti-insight and anti-whatever. Then they shout slogans against him and create disruption in the Majlis. I am against these moves. I would like to speak openly about these issues. I am against the kind of events which happened in Qom. I am against the kind of events which happened at Imam Khomeini\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) holy shrine. I asked the officials many times to prevent these things. Those who do such things - if they are really hezbollahi and religious - should stop doing them. You can see that we consider these moves as harmful to the country. We do not benefit from them. It is not helpful to set out to shout slogans against such and such people by releasing emotions. These slogans will not solve any problems. Keep this anger and these emotions for the time when it is necessary to express them. During the Sacred Defense Era, if basijis had decided to act at will, then the country would have been destroyed. Discipline and social order are necessary and it is necessary to take certain things into consideration. If these people do not pay any attention to these principles, then they should be treated in a different way. But those who pay attention to these principles and who believe they should not move against sharia, should take care not to make such moves. Thankfully the people of Iran have insight. I would tell you dear youth that the day when we are gone and you are in charge, the situation of the Iranian nation will be much better in terms of material and spiritual prosperity. The Iranian nation is moving towards light. There are bright prospects for us. We should watch our behavior. We should ask Allah the Exalted to help us. We should ask the immaculate souls of our martyrs and the immaculate soul of our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) to help us. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, you and I will benefit from the prayers of the Imam of the Age (may our souls be sacrificed for his sake). Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings. http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1744&Itemid=4

The following is the full text of the speech delivered on September 5, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with the chairman and members of the Assembly of Experts.The meeting was held on the occasion of the 14th Congress of the Assembly of Experts which was held on the 12th and 13th of Shahrivar. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful I would like to welcome the honorable gentlemen and the ulama and seminary scholars who are outstanding personalities from throughout the country and who have thankfully gathered in this meeting. Although the responsibilities of the Assembly of Experts have been defined in the Constitution, the arrangement of this meeting has resulted in the generation of different discussions about different arenas of the country and the expression of different opinions by the gentlemen. Well, executive officials are also present in this meeting. Fortunately, the esteemed President and a number of other honorable officials are also members of this assembly and this has boosted the hope that the opinions of the gentlemen in this meeting will receive more attention. I hope that this will be done and we too will help, within the scope of our capabilities and responsibilities, for the gentlemen to achieve the stated matters. I deem it necessary to point out that your participation in the funeral procession of the [unknown war] martyrs - which was held in the beginning of this congress - was very valuable and constructive. When the people see that honorable and great personalities, such as the esteemed chairman of the Assembly of Experts and other personalities, pay their respects to the bodies and graves of martyrs - whom they do not know - and participate in their funeral procession because of the fact that they are the martyrs of the path of the Revolution and the path of righteousness, this will be a lesson for our society. And I will say that our country and our society will be in need of keeping the memory of the martyrs alive and preserving their path for a very long time. The point that I would like to make is that on different levels of decision- making for the Islamic Republic, it is our responsibility to adopt a comprehensive outlook towards the issues of the country. It is obvious that different events - on regional, international and domestic levels - occur which are beyond our power to prevent. The Islamic Republic, the officials, the people and those who protect the foundations of the Islamic Republic have certain responsibilities. These responsibilities cannot be defined on the basis of the events which occur. That is to say, when something happens, we cannot make a certain move and adopt a certain position in an inactive way. This should not be done. This means that the Islamic Republic is being dragged into different events. It is necessary to preserve our comprehensive outlook towards the issues of the country and we should adopt positions and identify events with this comprehensive outlook. Thankfully, this comprehensive outlook has dominated the country until today. It is not the case that officials have ignored this issue since the beginning of the Revolution until today. The Islamic Republic was formed amid a whirlwind of events. This has been repeatedly mentioned, but we should not forget that the heart of this statement is the preservation of God\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s religion in people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s lives, in society and in our country. The heart of this statement is the formation of our social lives on the basis of sharia, the divine religion and the divine values and rules. The formation of such a government in a world which was quickly moving towards materialism was like a miracle and this miracle happened. When the Islamic Republic was formed, there was an opposition to the issue of reliance on Islam. We should not say that their opposition and enmity was because of our independence or because our policy of fighting against global arrogance. Of course, this is true and this is one reason for their enmity, but fighting against global arrogance grew out of the heart of Islam. Our democracy grew out of the heart of Islam as well. It has been said many times that when we speak about religious democracy, this does not mean an unusual combination between democracy and religion. This is not the case. Our democracy has originated from religion and Islam has shown us this path. We managed to form the Islamic Republic with the guidance of Islam. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, it will be the same in the future. As a result of this belief in Islam, the enemies have focused their attention on Islam. If they can take Islam away from the Islamic Republic, the products of Islam will naturally be destroyed and undermined. Issues should be analyzed by adopting this outlook. There are certain deployments in the world and we are always one side of things in many of these deployments. We should see who and what our opposing side is. We should see why it shows hostility towards us and why we put up a resistance against it. We should take a look at these things with a comprehensive outlook. Allah the Exalted says, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Is then one who walks headlong, with his face groveling, better guided- or one who walks evenly on a straight path?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 67: 22] The meaning of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"walks evenly on a straight path\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is that we should see - with open eyes, with wisdom and foresight and by considering all aspects - what the goal is, how we should achieve it and what the existing realities are. We should make a decision and move forward by paying attention to these things. Today, you can see that different events are happening in our region. For several years up until today, global arrogance has chosen West Asia as a place where it can launch its attacks. But despite the presence of arrogant powers in the region and despite their activities, Islamic Awakening has emerged. And I will tell you that Islamic Awakening has not come to an end. It is not the case that we can think Islamic Awakening has been destroyed by the events which have taken place in a number of countries. Islamic Awakening is not like a mere political event or a coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état. It is not like a process in which power is transferred from one individual to another. Islamic Awakening means the emergence of a kind of awareness and self-confidence which is based on Islam. Under certain circumstances, this Islamic Awakening created certain events in North Africa, Egypt, Tunisia and, before these countries, in Sudan. In other countries too, there is an enormous potential for such events. We should not think that Islamic Awakening has been destroyed. Islamic Awakening is a reality which is hidden beneath the outer layers of Islamic societies. This is why the people in any country which claims to be oriented towards Islam vote for an Islamic government. This is a sign of people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s orientation towards and attention to Islam. Therefore, Islamic Awakening is a very great event and despite the efforts of global arrogance, this event has taken place. It was not what global arrogance wanted. Therefore, it is natural for the opposing side to react to it. Today, we are witnessing the reactions of the camp of the enemies. These reactions and responses can be seen in East Asia - that is to say, in Pakistan and Afghanistan - and the farthest corners of West Asia such as Syria and Lebanon. Arrogant powers - the government of the United States of America being the outstanding power among these arrogant powers - have defined certain interests for themselves based on their colonial outlook. This outlook is the same as the colonial outlook which they adopted in the 19th century, but it has a different form. And they are trying to solve all the regional issues by promoting the interests which they have defined for themselves. They are doing the same thing in Syria and Bahrain. The presence of global arrogance in the region is one which is based on transgression, oppression and greed and which wants to destroy every resistance which is put up against arrogant powers. Of course, thankfully, they have not managed and will not manage to do this. This region has enormous wealth and it has a very important geographical and natural location. Therefore, it is natural for them to pay attention to this region. If one takes a look at what they say and what they have already done, he will see that their goal is to possess and establish their domination over the region by making the Zionist regime play a pivotal role. They are after achieving this goal. As you can see, on the issue of the latest events in Syria, the excuse which they have recently made for their interference is the use of chemical weapons in this country. Of course, with sophistry and clever use of reasons, they are trying to pretend that they want to interfere on humanitarian grounds. Who in the world does not know that this is a false claim? Undoubtedly, what is not important at all for American politicians is humanitarian needs. These are the people who kept, for many years, thousands of prisoners in Guantanamo prisons and, before that, in Abu Ghraib in Iraq while there were not any trials for these prisoners. They were imprisoned just because of certain allegations. A number of them are still in prison. Well, is this humanitarian? These are the people who saw the heavy bombardment [with chemical weapons] of the region - whether what happened in Iraq\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Halabja or what happened in our cities such as Sardasht and other cities - which was conducted by Saddam, but who did not at all react. Not only did they not react, but they also helped Saddam. Given that the Americans did not help Saddam by giving him chemical weapons - of course, westerners gave him chemical weapons and there is no doubt about this because we have the information which is related to this issue - they at least saw what happened. They became aware of this, but they did not express any opposition. This is the way they show their humanitarian support. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, they fire a volley of bullets at wedding caravans and kill many people. In Iraq, they killed hundreds of thousands of people with oppressive measures. Today too, their agents are still doing the same things, but they behave in an indifferent way. No one in the world believes that the Americans care about humanitarian issues. Of course, they use sophistry and give clever reasons, but they say such things to justify their own moves. We believe that they are doing is a mistake. On this issue, they will receive a serious blow and they will feel it. They will definitely suffer a loss in this regard and there is no doubt about this. Well, this is the condition of the region. The Islamic Republic was formed amid a whirlwind of events. At that time, it stood up against different hostile groups for many years. Not only was the Islamic Republic and its slogans not weakened and undermined, but it also became stronger, in the real sense of the word, on a daily basis. Today, the Islamic Republic is completely different - in terms of power, influence and domestic capabilities - from the Islamic Republic which existed 25, 30 years ago and today, its slogans are firm. Therefore, it should know what it wants to do by taking a look at its miraculous background and paying attention to the plots of the enemy in the region. Our responsibility, the responsibility of all the officials of the country and the responsibility of the Islamic Republic\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s government is to pay attention to three great criteria for all decisions and actions: The first criterion is the ideals and goals of the Islamic Republic. These ideals and goals should never be ignored. We can refer to one of the most important ideals of the Islamic Republic in a short phrase: ‘Creating an Islamic civilization\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'. Islamic civilization means an environment in which we can achieve growth in spiritual and material areas and in which we can attain the ultimate goal for which Allah the Exalted has created us. It means living a good and dignified life. Islamic civilization means building a dignified, powerful, confident and innovative individual who can improve the natural world. This is the goal and ideal of the Islamic Republic. The second criterion is the methods and guidelines which help us achieve these goals. These are general guidelines and they should be identified. These guidelines are relying on Islam and taking care not to become the oppressor or the oppressed in different interactions. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Be an enemy of tyrants and oppressors and be a friend and helper of those who are oppressed and tyrannized.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Nahjul Balaghah, Letter 47] This is a responsibility. This is a general guideline. Reliance on the votes of the people and reliance on what helps us establish democracy and other such things constitute the main policies and the major guidelines of the Islamic Republic for achieving ideals. Other guidelines are communal work, communal effort, communal innovation, national unity and other such things. And the third criterion is taking realities into consideration. We should see realities. In a meeting which was held in the auspicious month of Ramadan, I said to officials of the Islamic Republic that what we need is a kind of idealism which takes realities into consideration. We should gain a proper understanding of realities. We should take a look at realities and see what our weak and strong points are and we should know what prevents us from moving forward. We should gain a proper understanding of realities. In that meeting, I referred to a number of sweet realities which exist in our country. We should not always take a look at our weak points and shortcomings. The emergence of outstanding ideas and thoughts, the existence of active and innovative elements, the promotion of religious teachings and spiritual concepts among many youth, the preservation of religious and Islamic slogans, and the increasing influence of the Islamic Republic in the region and in the entire world constitute a number of the existing realities. These realities should be seen. Of course, besides these sweet realities, there are a number of bitter realities. This is similar to our [personal] lives which is a combination of sweetness and bitterness. By relying on and strengthening sweet realities, we should try to decrease bitter realities or make them fade away. These three elements should receive attention. Ideals and the guidelines which are necessary to achieve these ideals should not be ignored. Of course, realities should be taken into consideration as well. If we do not take realities into consideration, we will not tread our path in the right way. However, realities should not prevent us from treading our path. If the existence of a rock makes us turn back from our path, we have made a mistake. Also, if the existence of this rock is ignored and if we tread the path in a careless way, we have made another mistake. But if we take a look and see what ways we can find around this rock or how we can take the rock away from our path, make a hole in it or find an alternative path, then we have adopted the right outlook on realities. This is what our magnanimous Imam did in the first chapter of the Revolution - that is to say during the first 10 years of the Revolution which were very fateful and sensitive years. Our magnanimous Imam did not close his eyes to realities, but he did not back down and did not forget about the guidelines either. You should take a look at Imam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s life and slogans. Our magnanimous Imam was a person who was not afraid of anyone on the issue of the Zionist regime. The idea that the Zionist regime is a cancer and should be destroyed was expressed by Imam. He was not afraid of anyone on the issue of the evil, arrogant and meddling moves of America. It was Imam who said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"America is the Great Satan.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" It was Imam who said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The attack of Muslim youth and Muslim students on the U.S. embassy and taking their documents and tools - which were used for spying - is like conducting a second revolution and is perhaps better and more important than the first revolution\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". These are the methods of Imam. One the issue of the war, he said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We fight until we end the fitna.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" This is what Imam said. Other people used to say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We should continue fighting until we can achieve victory.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" But Imam said that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We fight until we end the fitna.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" It was such resistance which strengthened the foundations of the Islamic Republic. You can see what happened to those people who did not know this path, who acted in a different way in their own countries and who compromised their principles and forgot about their main slogans in order to please arrogant powers. If the slogan of fighting against Israel had been advocated in Egypt and if they had not accepted the false promises of America and its agents, the situation would definitely not have been like this. Today, the dictator of the Egyptian people, who destroyed their dignity for 30 years, has been released from prison and those who had been elected with the votes of the people may be sentenced to death. If they had not done these things, such a situation would never have been brought about. If the elected officials had adopted proper positions, those who gathered around Tahrir Square and chanted slogans against the elected officials- half or more than half of them would have started to support these elected officials. That is to say, they were not the kind of people to confront and oppose the elected government, but when one stops adopting correct and appropriate positions, such things happen. These are things which should receive attention. What we feel we should do to solve problems is that we should strengthen the Islamic Republic from inside the country. It is not only in this era that problems exist. Problems have always existed. Problems exist in all countries. If anyone thinks that there are no problems in such and such an advanced country, or in such and such a wealthy European or western country which is densely or sparsely populated, then they are wrong. Problems exist everywhere. Naturally, each nation faces certain problems when it wants to do something. The officials in such a country should solve the problems and move forward. Now, some people may want to solve problems by asking for help, by relying on others, by bribing other people and by suffering humiliation. And a number of people may want to solve problems with their own power and with the capabilities which exist in their own country. We believe that we should strengthen the Islamic Republic from inside the country. This is the essence of our work. We should strengthen ourselves from the inside. It is possible to strengthen ourselves from inside the country by thinking rationally and adopting a wise outlook. It can be done by making scientific progress and by building economic infrastructures and managing economic issues in the right way. In my opinion, these are things which are possible. Today, you can see that when they exert pressures on our oil industry, we will face certain problems. What is the reason for this? This is because since the war ended until today, we have not managed to reduce our dependence on oil. If we had reduced our dependence on oil, such pressures would not have brought about this situation. Therefore, we should take a look at ourselves and we should want to solve problems with our willpower. Thankfully, there is a new administration in our country today. One of the advantages of the current condition is that a fresh administration has entered the arena. With new ideas and thoughts, with new innovations and with a competent group of people, it wants to carry out its responsibilities and move things forward. It wants to move towards the goals which it has highlighted. The honorable President is a cleric who is active and experienced in different revolutionary arenas. This is also one of the advantages which we enjoy today. Naturally, all of us should help the administration. I think it is my responsibility to help. As we helped and supported all administrations, we will definitely help and support this administration as well. And officials will do this too. Of course, my support for different administrations does not mean that I agree with all the things that they do. In different eras, there were different administrations. We both supported and criticized all these administrations. But, such criticisms should not make us think that the administration is an outsider and it should not make us withdraw the support that we should provide to all administrations. It is necessary to provide such support and help. It is also necessary to pray for all administrations and offer our advice to them. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Advice is necessary for all believers\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [speaking in Arabic]. A friendly piece of advice may sometimes be offered in a harsh and severe way. I believe that if the officials who receive such a harsh and severe piece of advice think carefully, they will be happy to have received such advice. Even this harsh and severe piece of advice is to their advantage. Anyway, when I take a look at the current conditions in the country, I see that the future is very promising despite the problems which were referred to by the friends in this meeting - of course, they did not refer to many of the existing problems. I see that we have a clear path ahead of us and we have clear and definite ideals. We know what we want to do. Also, the path to achieving these ideals is clear and well-defined and there is no ambiguity and confusion in our guidelines and it is clear what should be done. During the recent years, it has become clear where alignments - on a regional and international level - lie. Of course, flexibility and clever maneuvers in all political arenas are good and acceptable, but such maneuvers should not make us cross certain red lines, stop pursuing the main guidelines and ignore ideals. These things should be observed. Of course, each administration and each individual uses specific methods and implements specific ideas and they move things forward with these ideas. I am completely optimistic and I believe that all the existing problems - including economic, political and security problems and cultural problems which are deeper and more important than economic problems although a number of economic problems have a higher priority - can be solved and the path to achieving this goal can be taken. I ask Allah the Exalted to help us do this. There is a certain point that I have written down to discuss. You should pay attention to the fact that one of the main methods used by the enemies of Islam, particularly the enemies of the Islamic Republic in the region, is to create sectarian and denominational discord between Shia and Sunni Muslims. You should pay attention to this issue. There are two groups of people who have turned into the agents and mercenaries of the enemy. The first group is made up of a number of Sunni Muslims and the second group is made of a number of Shia Muslims. The first group engages in takfirism and has deviated from the essence of religion and the second group is made up of people who work for the enemy. In the name of Shia, these people provoke the feelings of other Muslims, justify their enmity and fuel the fire of fitna. Each group, each institution and each government which is deceived by this great plot, which involves itself in this issue and which makes a mistake in this regard will certainly harm the Islamic movement and the Islamic government. Our country in particular will be harmed if this happens. I insist that outstanding ulama - whether Shia or Sunni ulama and whether those who live in Iran or those who live in other countries - should pay attention to the fact that differences between Islamic denominations should not make us create a new camp against ourselves. Such differences should not make us ignore the main enemy which is the enemy of the essence of Islam and the enemy of the independence and welfare of the people of the region. I hope that Allah the Exalted will help all of us and I hope that all of you and us benefit from the blessings and prayers of the Imam of the Age (may our souls be sacrificed for his sake). Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings

Inside Chernobyl (Alt. title "Return to Chernobyl"). A 2006 news report by Australian Nine Network's program "60 minutes" with television journalist Richard Carlton. On 7 May 2006, Richard Carleton suffered a massive heart attack during a press conference. Carleton died in the ambulance on the way to hospital. He's death has absolutt nothing to do with he's recent visit to Chernobyl. This video has been widely criticised on forums of being too overdramatic. Here's an example: "I'd be somewhat skeptical of what Richard Carlton was saying, mainly because I think the story was another classic 60 minutes beat up. Why? Well, when Richard was wearing the "bunny suit", he wasn't wearing a face mask. Why would he have been wearing a bunny suit? Was it: (a) to stop radioactive dust from falling onto his skin. (b) or to stop radiation, which is probably unlikely anyway, because the suit would probably have to be lead lined. The question is, if he needed to be that safe from radioactive dust, or radiation, why wasn't his face covered? Once you think about that, you then realise that the bunny suit was probably for dramatic effect rather than actually being required, which I think indicates that the areas he was in were much safer than 60 minutes was presenting. Once you can't believe that the safety measures portrayed were necessary, if the whole story is about the safety of the Chernobyl site, then I think you have to question the complete basis for the story."

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.

Supreme Leader’s Speech to Hajj Officials Print 22/08/2015 The following is the full text of a speech delivered on August 22, 2015 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with hajj officials. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful Dear brothers and sisters, welcome. You hajj officials are in charge of one of the most beautiful and glorious responsibilities, namely making preparations for our faithful people to attend hajj, which is a unique Islamic obligation. I would also like to express my gratitude to the brothers and sisters in charge of hajj affairs, who – as Mr. Qazi Askar and the esteemed head of the Hajj and Pilgrimage Organization pointed out – have made certain arrangements for the betterment of hajj pilgrimage for Iranian believers. And this is exactly what needs to be done. It is necessary to improve on a daily basis and facilitate the achievement of the noble goals of hajj. It is necessary to work hard. Each one of you dear brothers and sisters has a responsibility to fulfill. Each one of you has a role to play. You should try to play your role in the best possible way, with motivation, patience and enthusiasm. The efforts that you make will produce a great outcome: that is to say, the people will be able to perform hajj appropriately. My advice is that hajj does not exclusively belong to Iranians. Hajj belongs to Islam and to the Islamic Ummah and it guarantees the prevailing of Islam. God’s respect for the months in which hajj pilgrimages take place shows how great and significant hajj ceremonies are. It shows that this Islamic obligation enjoys a quality that other Islamic obligations do not enjoy. It is necessary to pay attention to this point. The interesting point is that hajj has two complementary aspects: an individual aspect and a social aspect. It is necessary to pay attention to both aspects. The individual aspect of hajj belongs to individual hajj pilgrims. Each hajj pilgrim should establish a relationship with Allah the Exalted during his pilgrimage and he should repent and take spiritual provisions for himself. In a holy ayah relating to hajj, piety has been advised. “Surely the provision is the guarding of oneself, and be careful (of your duty) to Me, O men of understanding” [The Holy Quran, 2: 197]. Each and every one of the honorable pilgrims who are blessed with this great opportunity should think of how to make the best of this provision. “And you that ask forgiveness of your Lord, then turn to Him” [The Holy Quran, 11: 3]. Hajj pilgrims should repent. They should pray. They should ask Allah the Exalted for whatever they need. They should make a covenant with Allah the Exalted to remain committed to their future, their lives and their activities. This is the individual aspect of hajj. As far as this individual aspect of hajj is concerned, every hajj pilgrim should try to move closer to Allah the Exalted on his pilgrimage. He should cleanse his heart. He should take provisions for the rest of his life. Spiritual blessings for individual pilgrims originate from this pilgrimage, from these rituals, from these days. Hajj pilgrims should appreciate the value of this opportunity. There are certain things that an individual can achieve only during hajj pilgrimage. Seeing Ka’bah is worship. Tawaf around Ka’bah is worship. Praying in Masjid ul-Haraam is worship. Visiting the shrine of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.) is worship. Arafat is an arena for speaking to God. Mash’ar is an arena for attention to God. The same is true of Mina. Pilgrims should make use of each and every one of these elements to cleanse their hearts, to improve their spiritual status and to take provisions for the rest of their lives. This is the individual aspect of hajj. The other aspect of hajj is the social aspect. Hajj is the manifestation of Islamic unity. People with different skin colors, people from different nationalities, people with different identities, people from different Islamic denominations, people with different tendencies – all of them gather in one place as equals. They all perform Tawaf together. They all work together. They all stay in Arafat and Mash’ar. This unity is very important. Islamic solidarity is the true manifestation of harmony and unanimity during hajj, not just for the people of Iran, but also for all Muslims throughout the world, for the Islamic Ummah. God’s curse be upon those who sideline the truth of the Islamic Ummah, those who divert attention away from the importance of the Islamic Ummah, those who divide Muslims into different groups with different goals, those who magnify nationalities against the glory of the Islamic Ummah and those who create division within the Iranian nation. The Islamic Ummah is important. Glory belongs to the Islamic Ummah. Allah the Exalted will bestow His mercy and blessings on the Islamic Ummah. Hajj is a manifestation of the Islamic Ummah: it is the Islamic Ummah in microcosm. “Coming from every remote path” [The Holy Quran, 22: 27]. Muslims come together from different parts of the world and from remote places. And what a great opportunity for communicating with each other, for unity with one another, for listening to each other’s sufferings, for expressing sympathy. Apart from hajj, when do Muslims get such an opportunity? The issue of unity is one of the social dimensions of hajj. Showing the greatness of the Islamic Ummah is another social dimension of hajj. The fact that several million Muslims gather in one place to attend a particular ceremony shows the greatness of the Islamic Ummah. From a country whose population is seventy, eighty million, around fifty, sixty, seventy thousand people come together and form a glorious gathering. This shows the greatness of the Islamic Ummah. Another dimension is the sharing of experiences among hajj pilgrims. Many Islamic countries have certain experiences. For example, the Iranian nation has certain experiences in confronting the enemy, in identifying the enemy, in refusing to trust the enemy, in distinguishing friends from enemies. We have experience in these areas. We did not make a mistake in distinguishing friends from enemies. From the beginning of the Revolution to this day, we have been aware that the real enemy, the aggressive, stubborn and persistent enemy is the world of global arrogance and Zionism. We have been aware of this. Sometimes this archenemy has spoken through other people. We must not make a mistake and think that those who are speaking for the enemy are the real enemy. No, as I stressed earlier, the real enemy is the arrogant powers. Take a look at the slogans that the people of Iran chant on the 22nd of Bahman, on Quds Day and in different other rallies. Their slogans are against the arrogant powers, against America, against the Zionists, against the usurping Zionist regime. They chant slogans against these elements. This is while these enemies sometimes use certain Islamic countries to say and do what they want. But we never chanted slogans against those Islamic countries. Our people have not chanted slogans against those Islamic countries. Why? The reason is that they know who the real enemy is. They know that those Islamic countries have been deceived and used as a tool. This shows insight in identifying the real enemy. This is our experience. Certain Islamic groups that were provided with great opportunities in certain Islamic countries, did not have this experience and they made a mistake as a result. They made peace with the real enemy and worked against their friends. And they paid the price for this. Allah the Exalted had provided them with a blessing and they failed to appreciate its value. Creating unity is another experience of the Iranian nation. There are many differences of opinion in our country. There are many differences and disagreements in political, intellectual and ideological areas, but our people have managed to preserve their unity despite these disagreements. Certain parts of our country are populated by particular ethnic groups, but those ethnic groups take part in the rallies on the 22nd of Bahman and Quds Day as well as in different other demonstrations that are rooted in the Islamic Revolution, just like other people throughout the country. We have Kurdish, Baluchi, Arab and Azeri regions in the country. In certain cases, their actions in support of the Revolution and the Islamic Republic are more outstanding than other regions in the country. We have seen examples of such actions. This is Islamic unity and the Iranian nation has experienced it. For thirty-five, thirty-six years, we have experienced the importance of unity among the people and we have made great achievements thanks to this unity. Certain other countries never realized the importance of this unity and they are still unaware of it. Because of a small disagreement – which is rooted in religious, ethnic or political differences – they turn against each other and attack each other as if they were enemies. As a result, Allah the Exalted takes His blessing away from them. “Have you not seen those who have changed Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor for ungratefulness and made their people to alight into the abode of perdition (even into) hell? They shall enter into it and an evil place it is to settle in” [The Holy Quran, 14: 28-29]. When we fail to appreciate the value of a divine blessing, when we show ingratitude, Allah the Exalted changes the way He treats us. “This is because Allah has never changed a favor which He has conferred upon a people until they change their own condition” [The Holy Quran, 8: 53]. As long as we move ahead on the right path, as long as we submit to the will of God to the extent that our limited capacities allow us, Allah the Exalted will continue His blessings, but when we work against ourselves, when we sow discord, when we hatch plots against each other, when we start fighting each other, Allah the Exalted will take away His blessings. God does not discriminate in favor of anybody. “This is because Allah has never changed a favor which He has conferred upon a people until they change their own condition”. Allah the Exalted does not take away a blessing that He has bestowed on you unless you prepare the ground for that. Once you have prepared the ground for yourself to be deprived of a blessing, Allah the Exalted will take away that blessing. The Iranian people have the experience of preserving divine blessings for themselves. These experiences should be shared. Today Islamic countries are faced with conspiracy. Do we understand this or not? Today there is conspiracy against Islam, not against Shia or Sunni Islam or against any other Islamic denomination. The Holy Quran belongs to Islam. Shia Islam is not the center that clearly promotes “Allah will by no means give the unbelievers a way against the believers” [The Holy Quran, 4: 141]. It is the Holy Quran! It is Islam! For this reason, the enemies are opposed to Islam. They are opposed to any center and any voice that awakens peoples. They are opposed to any hand that fights the arrogant powers and that hand is the hand of Islam. That voice is the voice of Islam. Therefore, they are opposed to Islam. There are different methods to confront and oppose Islam. There are different types of methods. They sit down together and think. They try to find ways to infiltrate and to harm. During the early years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, we were informed that the Zionist regime had funded a group of people to come together and think about Islam and the Shia denomination, to study and to investigate. What was the purpose? Their studies and investigations were aimed at finding ways of countering this great element, this awakening and this Islamic vigilance. The purpose of those investigations was to find a way to harm Muslim peoples who had awakened and realized that they had the power to take action. They spent a lot of money on the plan. This was only one of the things that they did. Tens of centers – we know about some them and we can infer the existence of several others – were established in Europe, America, occupied Palestinian lands and certain dependent countries that are controlled by the arrogant powers and the purpose was to find ways of countering Islam. For this reason, they believe it is necessary to foment discord, to give rise to violence, to tarnish the name of Islam, to dismember Islamic countries, to turn Muslim nations against each other and to pit members of a nation against each other. One day the means of doing so is Blackwater from America and another day the means is DAESH from Iraq, Syria and other places. They look for the means to create discord. These are our experiences. These are the things that the people of Iran have experienced and seen up close. When we stress the issue of unity among different Islamic denominations, between Shia and Sunni Islam and between different Muslim nations, we are not just paying lip service to Muslim unity. We have identified the malady. We care about the Islamic Ummah and this is why we pursue Muslim unity. As far as the people of Iran are concerned, the importance of unity has been established, but many other nations have not realized the importance of this unity. Hajj is an opportunity to convey this understanding to other nations and spread the message. Of course, there are certain people who are opposed to this. Those who want these disagreements to prevail do not want these interactions, these relationships, these friendships and this sharing of experiences to take place among Muslims. It is necessary to find the appropriate ways. One of the important things that should be done during hajj is to take care of the individual and social aspects of hajj. When we stress the social aspect of hajj, this should not encourage us to ignore the individual aspect, namely solemn praying, humility before God and dua. Hajj is a good opportunity. There is no place like Masjid ul-Haraam. There is no place like Masjid un-Nabi. This opportunity has been provided for you and for hajj pilgrims. It would be a pity to deprive oneself of this blessing and roam around in the bazaar and visit this and that store. It was announced that there have been efforts to prevent hajj pilgrims from roaming the bazaars. However, I have received reports that unfortunately some of our hajj pilgrims are suffering from this problem. They visit different shops and meet different local businessmen and they buy junk at twice the normal price and fly back to Tehran or other cities. This is wrong, absolutely wrong. Our people should pay attention to the fact that this is wrong. Shopping is something that can be done anywhere. One can roam the marketplace anywhere in the world. One can buy stuff anywhere. One can waste money like that anywhere. After all, what is done is basically throwing away money and one can throw away money anywhere. During hajj, it is necessary to go after the kind of things that cannot be done somewhere else. Those things include looking at Ka’bah, praying in Masjid ul-Haraam and kissing the footprint of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.). The Holy Prophet (s.w.a.) used to walk around in that city. He used to speak in that city. The atmosphere of that city reverberates with the voice of the Holy Prophet (s.w.a.). It would be a pity if one failed to immerse oneself in this atmosphere. This is not something that can be found somewhere else in the world. Our hajj pilgrims should appreciate these things, otherwise it is possible to roam the bazaars, go sightseeing and do other such things in any other part of the world as well. One can do the same things in Tehran, in Isfahan, in Tabriz or in Mashhad. It is possible to do these things anywhere in the world. Go after the kind of things that cannot be done in other places, the kind of things that can only be done during hajj. These are my recommendations. I hope Allah the Exalted provides all of you with the opportunity to perform a pilgrimage that is acceptable to Him. And we ask you pray for us. Greetings be upon you and Allah’s mercy and blessings

Friends, let this not come as a surprise to you. This is the reality we are living in where it is ‘estimated that one billion people in the world suffer from hunger and malnutrition. That’s roughly 100 times as many as those who actually die from these causes each year. About 24,000 people die every day from hunger or hunger related causes… Three-fourths of the deaths are children under the age of five.’ --HOW YOU CAN HELP -- Don’t waste natural resources. Be thankful to God for His gifts and blessings. Be mindful of your responsibility toward other human beings. Think about what the Prophet (saws) would do. Have mercy and compassion toward all humankind. Next time you spend money on those unnecessary luxuries of your life, think for a moment about the plight of the poor and oppressed around the world. Be aware of the materialistic forces and the contradictions of the dominant economic systems that are at the roots of global inequality. Don’t become a part of this system. Don’t become a slave of consumerism and endless materialistic competition. Understand that it is not enough to just keep yourself from engaging in consumerism. It's not always easy to protect yourself and your family against the multi-billion dollar industry of marketing. Join forces with other like-minded people. Strengthen your communities that can serve as a buffer against corporations. Engage in collective action. Transform people's consciousness and hyper-consumeristic lifestyles. Among other things, join a local organization that is working against subtle forms of oppression, like hunger, poverty, illiteracy, domestic violence, anorexia and bulimia, perfect body images, and endless materialistic competition. If there isn’t any, start one today! For ideas, you can look into doing online activism. Check out moveon.org’s work. Some online organizations also invite web surfers to click on their sites regularly. They say every click earns them revenue to support their causes. The Hunger Site is an example. Some may also invite you to buy their T-shirts and other souvenirs. I guess, you can buy these items if you think they can help spread the word and encourage people to join a good cause. But, in general, more shopping and more consumption cannot be a solution to human suffering. Selling consumers to products through clicks or ads is exactly what we need to shun. Because that feeds into the same loop of consumerism. My suggestion: Donate directly! And, encourage others to do the same! Lastly, remember the advice Imam Ali gave in his Last Will: “My advice to you is to be conscious of Allah and steadfast in your religion. Do not yearn for the world, and do not be seduced by it. Do not resent anything you have missed in it. Proclaim the truth; work for the next world. Oppose the oppressor and support the oppressed.” Become a friend and supporter of oppressed people and an enemy of oppressors and all forms of oppression."

A leftist critique of the new imperialism. -- We lost because we were crushed. Sometimes we were crushed by army tanks and sometimes we were crushed by think tanks. And by think tanks I mean the people who are paid to think by the makers of tanks. -- Naomi Klein - ASA annual meeting.

A leftist critique of the new imperialism. -- We lost because we were crushed. Sometimes we were crushed by army tanks and sometimes we were crushed by think tanks. And by think tanks I mean the people who are paid to think by the makers of tanks. -- Naomi Klein - ASA annual meeting.