Search Result in All

[04 April 2015] Iran deal is also good for countries in region: Former Director General, IAEA - English

The attacks also left 35 Iraqi security forces injured. There\'s been a surge in terrorist attacks across Iraq in recent months. The United Nations says more than five-thousand civilians have been killed there since April. The government blames the rise in violence on al-Qaeda and former Ba\'ath party loyalists. Baghdad also points the finger at Saudi Arabia, accusing Riyadh of funding terrorist groups.

There\'s been a deadly bomb attack near the Iraqi city of Baquba. The car bomb explosion in a suburb of the city killed at least 19 people. Over two dozen others were also wounded. Iraqi officials blame such incidents on al-Qaeda elements operating in the country, and also on the remnants of the former Ba\'athist regime. The latest attack comes as Iraqi security forces are conducting mop-up operations in the western province of Anbar. Thousands of people were killed in nationwide terror attacks last year alone.

Brahimi also admitted that there has not been any breakthrough yet in the talks between the delegations from the Syrian government and foreign-backed opposition. The two sides have been negotiating in Geneva over the the past few days, with talks deadlocked over the opposition\'s insistence that President Bashar al-Assad resign. Brahimi has also said that the U-S and Russia are vehemently working to find a solution to the current conflict in Syria. The U-N-Arab League envoy says the talks will continue through Friday.

Purpose of Prophets by Agha Biria - also interview from new convert about Islam

PressTV - After South_ North Sudan also launches new currency

Egyptians in Cairo commemorate the deaths of protesters killed two years ago. They also seek reforms, with many in the crowd calling for the power of the security forces to be curbed. But clashes between warring parties have once again brought to light the deep state of polarization in Egyptian Society.

In an exclusive interview with Press TV, former Lebanese prime minister Michel Aoun, who is also the leader of Lebanon\'s Free Patriotic Movement, said that foreign-backed Takfiri terrorists pose a great threat to all the religious communities living in Syria and the region.

Also in Afghanistan, another civilian has fallen victim to a new U-S assassination drone attack in the south. A local official in Helmand province says the civilian was killed in the Nawa district. On Thursday, a child was killed and two women were wounded in a drone strike on a home in Helmand. Top U-S military commander, General Joseph Dunford has apologized for the strike and promised to investigate it. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has strongly condemned Thursday\'s air strike. He\'s threatened to reject a planned security pact with the U-S, if QUOTE \"oppressions by foreign forces continue\" in his country.

The explosion in the city of Volgograd has also injured dozens more. Officals say the bomber detonated her explosives at the entrance of the station which was packed with afternoon travellers. There\\\'s no immediate claim of responsibility. This comes ahead of the Sochi Winter Games which is to be held in February. Back in October, seven people were killed in an attack by a female bomber in the same city. Volgograd is located in the volatile North Caucasus region.

Hossien Gharedaqi is a simple teacher, who is also a professional cycle tourist. He lives in a remote village in northwest of Iran. But his latest tour handed him a memory which he would never forget. During his recent tour of the United Arab Emirates he was detained and imprisoned on allegations of espionage activities. He says he was kept in jail for 78 days in the subhuman conditions with no access to basic needs. This comes as Hossien Ghare daghi says travels to different countries with the message of peace and friendship for the world. Although Hossein is now been free, the Iranian foreign ministry says it is still following up the case through diplomatic channels. The accusation of espionage seems to have become an instrument in the hands of certain countries to put ordinary nationals of other countries in prison for a period of time. This comes Iran has always treated foreign prisoners inside the country through Islamic clemency and in return expects other countries to respect its nationals in different conditions.

Israel is building a new settlement in the occupied West Bank city of Hebron also known as al-Khalil. According to residents and rights groups, Tel Aviv has already begun leveling land and setting up mobile homes in an area that is known for its extreme right wing settler population.

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

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

Shayad bi gharary

Shayad ma hame mesle hamim

Shayad raz

Shayad ye dorogh kocholo

Shayad ghalb shekaste

highway

HIJAAB | PARDA | Na Bina Se Parda | Molana Abid Raza Naushad | Official Shrine of Imam Ali Reza #Hijaab #Parda #NaBinaSeParda Presenting By Official Shrine of Imam Ali Reza (as) Haram Imam Ali Raza (as) Official The Imam Raza shrine (Persian: حرم امام رضا‎) in Mashhad, Iran is a complex which contains the mausoleum of Imam Reza, the eighth Imam of Twelver Shiites. It is the largest mosque in the world by area. Also contained within the complex are the Goharshad Mosque, a museum, a library, four seminaries,[1] a cemetery, the Razavi University of Islamic Sciences, a dining hall for pilgrims, vast prayer halls, and other buildings. The complex is one of the tourism centers in Iran[2][3] and has been described as \"the heart of the Shia Iran\"[4] with 25 million Iranian and non-Iranian Shias visiting the shrine each year, according to a 2007 estimate.[5] The complex is managed by Astan Quds Razavi Foundation currently headed by a prominent Iranian cleric, Ahmad Marvi. The shrine itself covers an area of 267,079m2 while the seven courtyards which surround it cover an area of 331,578m2 - totaling 598,657 m2 (6,443,890 sq ft).[6] Every year the ceremony of Dust Clearing is celebrated in the Imam Raza shrine.

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution has described the \\\\\\\'unprecedented\\\\\\\' turnout of almost 85% in the election as a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy. Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said high turnout in the election, which witnessed more than 40 million Iranians casting their votes, was a great manifestation of people\\\\\\\'s solidarity with the Islamic establishment. Addressing Friday prayers congregation, Ayatollah Khamenei said that last Friday\\\\\\\'s election indicated a \\\\\\\'common sense of responsibility\\\\\\\' of the Iranian nation to determine the future of the country. The Leader added that all those who took part in the election proved their \\\\\\\'political consciousness and commitment\\\\\\\' towards the establishment to the whole world. The Leader said the high voter turnout in the election was a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy and a \\\\\\\'real celebration\\\\\\\' for the friends of the country. \\\\\\\"The Islamic Republic of Iran will by no means betray the votes of the nation,\\\\\\\" the Leader said, adding the legal system of the election will not allow any ballot rigging in Iran. Ayatollah Khamenei, however, maintained that the Guardian Council, the body tasked with overseeing the election, would look into the complaints of the candidates who are unhappy with the election results. The Leader also added that the establishment would never give-in to illegal demands, urging all presidential candidates to pursue their complaints through legal channels. Ayatollah Khamenei called for an end to illegal street protests aimed at reversing the result of the election. Following the announcement of the election outcome, supporters of the defeated candidate Mir-Hussein Mousavi-who rejected the election results-- took to the streets of Tehran and other cities in daily rallies. The Leader also warned against attempts made by foreign media outlets seeking to destabilize the country and blamed Britain in particular. Ayatollah Khamenei also decried the slander of former and incumbent top officials in pre-election debates by candidates. President Ahmadinejad was re-elected the next president of the country with over 60% percent of the votes. He won over his three rivals Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaei with almost 25 million votes. The Leader said the time is over for rivalry, stressing that all should unite and line up behind the president-elect Complete Transcript http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610 In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing. In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country. I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election. I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media. On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment. The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system. Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote. In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us. It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence. Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense. Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored. Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system. Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement. My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory. Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system. This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy. This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene. This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country. This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election. If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election. Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment. They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout. A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other. For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game. This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today. I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily. For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts. The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed. These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent. Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system. The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue. The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment. Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system. I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism. I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted. My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue. Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution. People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent. Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities. They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon. The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects. All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people. They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated. One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice. These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates. Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings. Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth. If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates. But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate. There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made. This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions. They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me. For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems. On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere. I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law. On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures. They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption. Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities. You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation. Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures. He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date. On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities. For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know. In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people. The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine. The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that. The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced. There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country. We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources. Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it. Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized. Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat. They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this. The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution. It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust. In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process. When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place? However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands. If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system. Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this. I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries. We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now. Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people. It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues. I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy. In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain. I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say. All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want. If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections? Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda. It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this? They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership. Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents. It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country. Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time. I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly. The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries. Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters. When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal. When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave. Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks. Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe? Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security. This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services. The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution. Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people. American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime? During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights? In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment!

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.

Complete Transcript http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610 In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing. In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country. I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election. I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media. On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment. The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system. Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote. In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us. It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence. Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense. Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored. Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system. Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement. My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory. Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system. This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy. This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene. This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country. This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election. If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election. Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment. They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout. A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other. For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game. This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today. I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily. For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts. The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed. These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent. Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system. The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue. The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment. Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system. I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism. I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted. My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue. Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution. People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent. Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities. They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon. The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects. All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people. They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated. One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice. These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates. Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings. Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth. If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates. But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate. There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made. This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions. They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me. For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems. On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere. I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law. On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures. They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption. Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities. You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation. Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures. He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date. On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities. For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know. In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people. The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine. The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that. The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced. There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country. We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources. Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it. Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized. Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat. They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this. The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution. It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust. In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process. When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place? However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands. If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system. Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this. I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries. We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now. Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people. It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues. I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy. In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain. I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say. All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want. If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections? Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda. It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this? They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership. Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents. It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country. Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time. I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly. The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries. Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters. When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal. When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave. Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks. Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe? Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security. This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services. The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution. Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people. American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime? During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights? In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment! Supreme Leader Ayatullah Sayyed Ali Khamenei - Friday Prayer Speech - 19Jun09 - English

(Last 9 min missing. We thank LitleButerfli for the upload.) Sayyed Nasrallah: Ready for Dialogue, Resistance Weapon Saved Lebanon Marwa Haidar As his eminence stressed that kidnapping of the Lebanese visitors would not change Hezbollah’s position from the Syrian crisis, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah announced his party’s decision to take part in the National Dialogue in Lebanon which President Michel Sleiman has called for. Sayyed Nasrallah affirmed that the Lebanese army has been the most important guarantee to establish security, urging Lebanese to support this service and to stand behind it. Addressing massive crowds who were marking the twelfth anniversary of Liberation in the southern city of Bint Jbeil, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the weapon of the resistance had defend Lebanon against the Zionist entity, adding that May 25 of the year of 2000 had hammered the last pin of the so-called “Greater Israel” coffin. Sayyed Nasralla also tackled the current developments related to the release of the Lebanese visitors who were kidnapped by Syrian opposition militants two days ago. Hezbollah S.G. thanked the three Presidents: Sleiman, Speaker Nabih Berri and Prime Minister Najib Miqati as well as former Premier Saad al-Haririr for their efforts that helped in releasing the visitors. His eminence also underlined the importance of the magical formula: army-people-resistance, saying it was the main deterrent against the Israeli attacks. Tackling the latest unrest in the north, Sayyed Nasrallah criticized what he described as the chaos of weapons, refusing to compare between these arms and the resistance weapon. “FIRM STANCE ON SYRIA” Talking about the abduction of Lebanese visitors, Sayyed Nasrallah said Hezbollah’s position from the Syrian crisis would not change, as he thanked different Lebanese, Syrian and Turkish figures for their efforts that helped in releasing the visitors. “We thank God the abduction ended without negative consequences. However it may have some positive ones,” Sayyed Nasrallah said. “Since the first moment of the abduction, several national parties launched many possible contacts in order to release the kidnapped visitors.\\\\\\\" “We thank President Sleiman, PM Miqati, Speaker Berri and Saad al-Hariri, who exert special efforts to free the visitors,” Sayyed Nasrallah added. Meanwhile, Hezbollah S.G. hailed the people’s commitment to calls of calm, noting that the cutting off the roads was useless. “We also thank people who were calm and respond to calls of self restrain.” “Cutting off roads is useless as well as attacking Syrian citizens which is forbidden,” Sayyed Nasrallah said. On the other hand, his eminence said that Hezbollah’s stance on the Syrian crisis was firm and obvious, stressing that the political solution was the only way to end the unrest there. “To kidnappers I say: your act is condemned and it harms what you are working on.” “If you were aiming at changing our political position on the Syrian crisis, then your act is fruitless and has no sense,” his eminence also told the kidnappers. “Our stance is firm and clear, we support the political solution in Syria in order to end the current crisis.” RESISTANCE ACHIEVEMENTS Talking about the occasion, Sayyed Nasrallah said that Resistance and Liberation day was for all Lebanese sects without exception, assuring that the formula of army-people-resistance was the only formula to defend Lebanon. “May 25 is a day for the Lebanese state as well as for all the national parties who contributed to this resistance. This day is also for all who supported the resistance to achieve this victory.” Sayyed Nasrallah said that the resistance had foiled Israeli project against Lebanon. “Everyone knows that the Israeli occupation of 1982 was a part of a US-Israeli project which aimed at inserting Lebanon in the Israeli era; however the resistance foiled this project.” “The Israeli enemy thought that its army would stay in Lebanon, but the resistance gave it a clear impression that the Lebanese land was not safe to implement its projects,” Sayyed Nasrallah added. “This land was liberated with dignity and without any precondition or any accord of humiliation,” Hezbollah S.G. stressed. “The conspiracy planned for Lebanon by the Israeli enemy has failed, thank God.” Sayyed Nasrallah also stressed that the Zionist entity by virtue of the resistance could not dare to attack Lebanon. “Since May 25, 2000 and till now, except for July war in 2006, the Israeli enemy hasn’t dare to attack Lebanon by virtue of army-people-resistance equation.” “Israel which has been attacking us, it fears today that we may attack it, for that the Zionist entity started the construction of the wall along the Lebanese-occupied territories borders.” “May 25 hammered the last pin of the so-called Greater Israel coffin,” Sayyed Nasrallah assured. Meanwhile, Hezbollah S.G. talked about the wall which the Zionist entity has been building along the border with Lebanon. But Sayyed Nasrallah said that this wall would not defend the Zionist entity, stressing that the resistance’s rockets have been capable of reaching any location in the occupied territories. “The Zionist entity sought to dominate the region from Nile to Furat, including Litani River. But today there are people whose rockets can reach any location in the occupied territories.” CHAOS OF WEAPONS Talking about the unrest the Lebanese witnessed in the country’s north, Sayed Nasrallah talked about a chaos of weapons in the country. His eminence also noted that no party can deny its procession of weapons, refusing to compare these arms with the weapon of resistance. “Surely no party can deny it has weapons.. Everybody in Lebanon has arms, whether it were heavy or light weapons.” “What is the aim of these weapons which we witnessed? It’s unacceptable for someone to say they are individual weapons.” Sayyed Nasrallah wondered about the achievements of these weapons, as his eminence refused to compare between the two types of arms. “We believe that there is an essential difference between the two types of arms.” Although that the two types of arms were not similar, Sayyed Nasrallah said he had no problem in discussing the resistance’s weapon. “We are ready to discuss this weapon or that. Let us discuss the defense strategy, the strategy that concerns all the Lebanese people.” In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah highlighted the importance of the army-people-resistance formula. READY FOR DIALOGUE Meanwhile, Sayyed Nasrallah said Hezbollah was ready to go on the national dialogue which President Sleiman had called for. “President Sleiman called for a national Dialogue. Hezbollah agrees to take part in the dialogue without any precondition.\\\\\\\" But Sayyed Nasrallah said that March 14 alliance should also take part in the dialogue without preconditions, as they must abandon the calls for the government to step down. Hezbollah S.G. also called on Lebanese to support the army and to stand behind it. “The important service in Lebanon is the army”, Sayyed Nasrallah said, adding that the army “is the last and the most important gurantee of the security in Lebanon.” “For that we must defend the army in order for it to do its duties,” Sayyed Nasrallah said further.

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

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