Search Result in All

Christians in Syria are criticizing Western media outlets for ignoring atrocities carried out by Takfiri terrorist groups against their community. A new report by the news service of the Pontifical Mission Societies highlights the massacre of 45 Christians in the village of Sadad near Damascus. The killing has been the biggest massacre of Christians in the Syrian conflict which began two-and-a-half years ago. The report blames the foreign-backed Takfiri militants for the massacre while criticizing the U-S government and its mainstream media for remaining silent. Christians say they are fleeing their homes as the persecution is worsening in insurgent-held territories in the north. They say kidnapping, rape and executions of Christians are being carried out by Takfiri militants and those affiliated with the Western-backed Free Syrian Army.

Christians in Syria are criticizing Western media outlets for ignoring atrocities carried out by Takfiri terrorist groups against their community. A new report by the news service of the Pontifical Mission Societies highlights the massacre of 45 Christians in the village of Sadad near Damascus. The killing has been the biggest massacre of Christians in the Syrian conflict which began two-and-a-half years ago. The report blames the foreign-backed Takfiri militants for the massacre while criticizing the U-S government and its mainstream media for remaining silent. Christians say they are fleeing their homes as the persecution is worsening in insurgent-held territories in the north. They say kidnapping, rape and executions of Christians are being carried out by Takfiri militants and those affiliated with the Western-backed Free Syrian Army.

Judith Butler describes the circumstances of the Lebanese war and political-legal maneuvering by international peace keeping bodies. Inquires into the politics surrounding UN resolutions and their implementation. Sheds light on the strategic aims of Israeli War on Lebanon in 2006. Finally she argues that criticizing the Israeli entity is not anti-semitism. That a true understanding of Jewish teachings makes the criticism of Israel not only possible but also obligatory.

China has condemned Japan for criticizing its new air identification defense zone amid an escalating war of words between the two neighbors. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has said the flight zone over a group of disputed islands in the East China Sea violates the freedom of aviation over the high seas and should be canceled. But China has once again defended the move-- saying Abe is using the situation to QUOTE maliciously slander Beijing. The Chinese Foreign Ministry says the establishment of the zone is in line with international laws and does not affect aviation freedom. Tensions have been running high between the two Asian powerhouses in the past year over the Japanese-controlled archipelago. Both countries have scrambled jets and carried out patrols in the area.

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

DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday, Following is the full text of the interview: Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President. President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness? President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else. Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example. President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces. Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria? President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir. Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel. President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference? President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else. Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command? President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance. Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance? President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now? President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak? President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change. Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game? President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan. Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do? President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons. Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles? President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis? President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names. Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups? President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves. Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month? President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend. Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options. President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see. Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions? President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear. Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term? President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\\\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government. Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014? President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk. Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League? President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League. Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations? President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them. Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted? President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house. Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel? President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world. Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon. Al-Manar: Thank you.

DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday, Following is the full text of the interview: Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President. President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness? President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else. Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example. President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces. Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria? President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir. Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel. President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference? President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else. Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command? President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance. Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance? President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now? President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action. Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak? President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change. Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game? President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan. Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do? President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons. Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles? President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future. Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis? President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names. Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups? President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves. Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month? President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend. Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options. President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see. Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions? President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear. Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term? President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government. Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014? President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk. Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League? President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League. Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations? President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them. Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted? President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house. Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel? President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world. Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon. Al-Manar: Thank you.

The Mufti of Syria, a Sunni Muslim, speaks about the Wahabi media machine that has faithfully continued the work of the Umayyad media machine that started 14 centuries ago in distorting historic facts to justify their false supremacy over humanity and other Islamic schools of thought. In this short clip, the Mufti contrasts Imam Ali and Muawiya, without mentioning any names of course. Ironically, the sermon is given in the city that was once Muawiya's capital city. Yet another confirmation that Wahabiism is a cancerous tumor that continues to cause strife between Sunnis and Shia and Muslims and Non-Muslims.

In a recorded Tuesday interview with the renowned TV host, President Ahmadinejad said that Zionism blocks research on the Holocaust. “They (Zionists) don't allow anyone to freely discuss the historical events that happened. They just say this is our account of history, this is what happened and everybody else must just accept it,” said Ahmadinejad. Larry King then asked the president if, from his point of view, the Holocaust did not happen. “No, what I am saying is let more research be done," Ahmedinejad said. "There is a claim about the extent of the calamity. There are people who agree with it and people who disagree. Some totally deny and some completely agree with the whole given account. What we are saying is that an impartial group should be formed to conduct an independent study on the extent of the calamity.” On December 2005, Ahmadinejad made several comments about the Holocaust, criticizing European laws against research on the historical event. Following his remarks, Western politicians and media outlets launched extensive attacks against him, accusing him of anti-Semitism. However, during his interview with Larry King, Ahmedinejad denied this. "Iranians and have nothing against the Jewish people or their religion," Ahmedinejad said. Ahmedinejad differentiated between Zionism and Judaism saying that Zionists are not real Jews. "How can you be religious and kill women and children at the same time?” he argued. King also asked Ahmadinejad to confirm or deny whether he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map". Ahmedinejad replied saying that the Israeli regime would disappear in the same way as apartheid South Africa and the Soviet Union. “The solution that we are proposing is a humanitarian one. What we say is that a free referendum must be held in the Palestinian territories, allowing the Palestinian people to determine their own fate," Ahmadinejad said. Interview of President of Iran Ahmedi Nijad on CNN by Larry King on various political issues

In a recorded Tuesday interview with the renowned TV host, President Ahmadinejad said that Zionism blocks research on the Holocaust. “They (Zionists) don't allow anyone to freely discuss the historical events that happened. They just say this is our account of history, this is what happened and everybody else must just accept it,” said Ahmadinejad. Larry King then asked the president if, from his point of view, the Holocaust did not happen. “No, what I am saying is let more research be done," Ahmedinejad said. "There is a claim about the extent of the calamity. There are people who agree with it and people who disagree. Some totally deny and some completely agree with the whole given account. What we are saying is that an impartial group should be formed to conduct an independent study on the extent of the calamity.” On December 2005, Ahmadinejad made several comments about the Holocaust, criticizing European laws against research on the historical event. Following his remarks, Western politicians and media outlets launched extensive attacks against him, accusing him of anti-Semitism. However, during his interview with Larry King, Ahmedinejad denied this. "Iranians and have nothing against the Jewish people or their religion," Ahmedinejad said. Ahmedinejad differentiated between Zionism and Judaism saying that Zionists are not real Jews. "How can you be religious and kill women and children at the same time?” he argued. King also asked Ahmadinejad to confirm or deny whether he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map". Ahmedinejad replied saying that the Israeli regime would disappear in the same way as apartheid South Africa and the Soviet Union. “The solution that we are proposing is a humanitarian one. What we say is that a free referendum must be held in the Palestinian territories, allowing the Palestinian people to determine their own fate," Ahmadinejad said. Interview of President of Iran Ahmedi Nijad on CNN by Larry King on various political issues

In a recorded Tuesday interview with the renowned TV host, President Ahmadinejad said that Zionism blocks research on the Holocaust. “They (Zionists) don't allow anyone to freely discuss the historical events that happened. They just say this is our account of history, this is what happened and everybody else must just accept it,” said Ahmadinejad. Larry King then asked the president if, from his point of view, the Holocaust did not happen. “No, what I am saying is let more research be done," Ahmedinejad said. "There is a claim about the extent of the calamity. There are people who agree with it and people who disagree. Some totally deny and some completely agree with the whole given account. What we are saying is that an impartial group should be formed to conduct an independent study on the extent of the calamity.” On December 2005, Ahmadinejad made several comments about the Holocaust, criticizing European laws against research on the historical event. Following his remarks, Western politicians and media outlets launched extensive attacks against him, accusing him of anti-Semitism. However, during his interview with Larry King, Ahmedinejad denied this. "Iranians and have nothing against the Jewish people or their religion," Ahmedinejad said. Ahmedinejad differentiated between Zionism and Judaism saying that Zionists are not real Jews. "How can you be religious and kill women and children at the same time?” he argued. King also asked Ahmadinejad to confirm or deny whether he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map". Ahmedinejad replied saying that the Israeli regime would disappear in the same way as apartheid South Africa and the Soviet Union. “The solution that we are proposing is a humanitarian one. What we say is that a free referendum must be held in the Palestinian territories, allowing the Palestinian people to determine their own fate," Ahmadinejad said. Interview of President of Iran Ahmedi Nijad on CNN by Larry King on various political issues

In a recorded Tuesday interview with the renowned TV host, President Ahmadinejad said that Zionism blocks research on the Holocaust. “They (Zionists) don't allow anyone to freely discuss the historical events that happened. They just say this is our account of history, this is what happened and everybody else must just accept it,” said Ahmadinejad. Larry King then asked the president if, from his point of view, the Holocaust did not happen. “No, what I am saying is let more research be done," Ahmedinejad said. "There is a claim about the extent of the calamity. There are people who agree with it and people who disagree. Some totally deny and some completely agree with the whole given account. What we are saying is that an impartial group should be formed to conduct an independent study on the extent of the calamity.” On December 2005, Ahmadinejad made several comments about the Holocaust, criticizing European laws against research on the historical event. Following his remarks, Western politicians and media outlets launched extensive attacks against him, accusing him of anti-Semitism. However, during his interview with Larry King, Ahmedinejad denied this. "Iranians and have nothing against the Jewish people or their religion," Ahmedinejad said. Ahmedinejad differentiated between Zionism and Judaism saying that Zionists are not real Jews. "How can you be religious and kill women and children at the same time?” he argued. King also asked Ahmadinejad to confirm or deny whether he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map". Ahmedinejad replied saying that the Israeli regime would disappear in the same way as apartheid South Africa and the Soviet Union. “The solution that we are proposing is a humanitarian one. What we say is that a free referendum must be held in the Palestinian territories, allowing the Palestinian people to determine their own fate," Ahmadinejad said. Interview of President of Iran Ahmedi Nijad on CNN by Larry King on various political issues

In a recorded Tuesday interview with the renowned TV host, President Ahmadinejad said that Zionism blocks research on the Holocaust. “They (Zionists) don't allow anyone to freely discuss the historical events that happened. They just say this is our account of history, this is what happened and everybody else must just accept it,” said Ahmadinejad. Larry King then asked the president if, from his point of view, the Holocaust did not happen. “No, what I am saying is let more research be done," Ahmedinejad said. "There is a claim about the extent of the calamity. There are people who agree with it and people who disagree. Some totally deny and some completely agree with the whole given account. What we are saying is that an impartial group should be formed to conduct an independent study on the extent of the calamity.” On December 2005, Ahmadinejad made several comments about the Holocaust, criticizing European laws against research on the historical event. Following his remarks, Western politicians and media outlets launched extensive attacks against him, accusing him of anti-Semitism. However, during his interview with Larry King, Ahmedinejad denied this. "Iranians and have nothing against the Jewish people or their religion," Ahmedinejad said. Ahmedinejad differentiated between Zionism and Judaism saying that Zionists are not real Jews. "How can you be religious and kill women and children at the same time?” he argued. King also asked Ahmadinejad to confirm or deny whether he wanted to "wipe Israel off the map". Ahmedinejad replied saying that the Israeli regime would disappear in the same way as apartheid South Africa and the Soviet Union. “The solution that we are proposing is a humanitarian one. What we say is that a free referendum must be held in the Palestinian territories, allowing the Palestinian people to determine their own fate," Ahmadinejad said. Interview of President of Iran Ahmedi Nijad on CNN by Larry King on various political issues

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

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

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

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has just arrived in the Lebanese capital, Beirut, for a two-day official visit. The Iranian chief executive, who is in Lebanon at an official invitation by his Lebanese counterpart Michel Sleiman, was warmly welcomed by a number of prominent Lebanese officials at Beirut International Airport on Wednesday morning. A large crowd of Lebanese people were cheering President Ahmadinejad and waving Iran's flags on his route to the Lebanese Presidential palace. He is scheduled to address international reporters in a press conference in the Lebanese capital. The Iranian chief executive will then meet with Iranian and Lebanese businessmen. Later the Iranian president will head to southern Beirut to visit the area where Israeli bombs destroyed the location during 2006 war against the state. Many analysts believe that President Ahmadinejad's trip to Lebanon is aimed at consolidating resistance's position against Israel. Earlier, President Sleiman had asked the Islamic Republic to equip the country's army and supply the state with defense industry. The Iranian president is so popular among the Lebanese nation and is seen as the sympbol of resistance against Israel as he has been outspoken, criticizing Israel's atrocities against Lebanese and Palestinians. Iran offered unconditional support to Lebanon after Israel's war on Lebanon in summer 2006, when Tel Aviv destroyed the country's main infrastructure, electricity and water systems. Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah hailed Iran's big role in rebuilding Lebanon following the Israeli war. Article Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/146471.html

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

[09 April 2012] News Bulletin - Press TV - English

[02 Nov 2012] Saudi Arabia fails to protect citizens - English

Hezbollah Secretary General, his Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, delivered a speech on Friday, August 16th, 2013, marking the 7th anniversary of the July 2006 Victory of the Islamic Resistance against the Israeli army. Sayyed Nasrallah to Takfiris: We will Capture You, We will Put an End to Terror Sara Taha Moughnieh Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivered a speech on Friday, during a ceremony celebrating the seventh anniversary of victory in the July 2006 war. Sayyed NasrallahHis eminence started his speech with a greeting to the martyrs and wounded who fell only one day before the celebration in the terrorist blast which hit Ruwais street in the Southern Suburb of Beirut. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"I pray for the recovery of all the wounded from the large and dangerous terrorist attack, and I offer my condolences to the families of martyrs who fell, and to all those who were affected physically, mentally, spiritually, and on the material level yesterday. We highly appreciate, admire, and respect the patience of people and the citizens of Dahieh who held responsibility, and were conscious, disciplined, and civilized,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he said. As he expressed gratitude for all those who stood in solidarity and denounced this painful event, Sayyed Nasrallah condemned the silence of some countries, considering that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"days will prove that they support terrorism, murder, and crime taking place in our region\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". July 2006 victory put an end to \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Greater Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" project Sayyed Nasrallah initiated his statement with words about the victory, pointing out that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the celebration was arranged to take place in Aita Al-Shaab, because it overlooks occupied Palestine, and its air is Palestinian air. Hence, you are smelling the air of occupied Palestine, and you are gathering only a stone\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s throw away from the enemy.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" His eminence further stressed that Aita\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s significance was with its symbolic representation, especially with its good hearted and firm people, its brave heroes, its martyrs, and liberated captives. Sayyed Nasrallah talked about the faithfulness of the resistance fighters who were located in Aita Al-Shaab, referring to the devoutness of those men to the path of Master of Martyrs, Imam Hussein (pbuh). July 2006 victory celebrationHe also paid gratitude to the citizens of this village, who returned to their land just hours after ceasefire in 2006, and built tents over the ruins of their houses, to sit in them. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Your historic victory in the 25th of May 2000 defeated the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"greater Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" project, because the Israeli army, which failed to stay in Lebanon, the weakest Arab country, cannot build a state from the Nile to Furat. Then the 14th of August 2006 victory , defeated Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s project of being a great country, which dominates and imposes its decisions on the region and on Iran,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. Hezbollah Secretary General added that the July 2006 victory also proved that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"this organized popular resistance, which is embraced by its people, is capable of forming real defense, at a time when the country does not have the capacities and technologies which the attacking enemy has, and the evidence on that was presented in the July war.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah warned the Israeli enemy that the resistance will not allow one Israeli soldier to set a foot in the Lebanese territories, indicating that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"we will not be tolerant in defending our villages, lands, and people.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" He further addressed the Israelis, saying: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The era of Israeli military tourism on the borders with Lebanon, and inside the Lebanese territories is over, with no return.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Response to Dahieh blast is by duplicating number of fighters in Syria In another context, Sayyed Nasrallah tackled the recent assaults on Dahieh, specifically Thursday\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s tragic attack which left over 20 killed and hundreds wounded. He indicated that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"targeting people and citizens in Dahieh and other places is nothing new. When the enemy failed, it always resorted to hitting people, even those who had no relation with the resistance. The history of Israeli wars in Qana, Dahieh, Sheyah, and other places in July war is a clear witness on that. The enemy takes such action because it knows that this is our point of weakness when it fails in confronting us militarily.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"This is a point of pride for us, as it points out that the relation between the resistance and the people is an emotional, humanitarian, moral, and spiritual relation, and that both are one. The resistance had never acted like it was an imported resistance, like some fighters act these days, hence they don’t care about people. Not at all, as throughout the past years, the resistance had never performed a military or resistance operation without taking into consideration the responses, and protecting people, until April Accord came out to protect them,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. From this point, his eminence considered that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"when there is a resistance, and people whom it shares their feelings, and suffers from their pains, this is a point of power on one hand, and a point of weakness on the other, which the enemy uses. What happened yesterday was an attack on people. It wasn’t an assassination. There wasn’t any Hezbollah official or location targeted, but the side which committed the massacre in Dahieh wanted to leave behind the largest number of casualties among people.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" He stated that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the bomb weighted over 100 KGs, and at this location in specific, like the case in Bir Al-Abed explosion, the goal was only to kill people.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed NasrallahHezbollah secretary general asserted that the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"massacre comes in the context of a wide and open battle which has been taking place since tens of years… as long as there is a group resisting and refusing to surrender to the American-Zionist will, then naturally, this group and its environment will bare this responsibility.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah assured that the rockets that hit Baalbak and its neighborhoods in the last few weeks were fired by armed Syrian groups, adding that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"rockets on Hermel, Majdal Anjar, Zahle, and Dahieh were targeting us, and the large explosion on the 9th of August targeted our people and environment. Yet we did not make a quick response… we did not accuse anyone.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" However, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"after Bir Al-Abed blast, some Lebanese parts claimed that Hezbollah planted the explosive as a pretext to ignite the situation. This is defamation and unjust, as you cannot find anyone who would love these people, and kiss the soil under the feet of these people like Hezbollah and its leadership does… This is how you work, but not how Hezbollah does.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" His eminence pointed out that during investigations about these assaults, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the first assumption was that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" was behind them, while the second was the terrorist groups who have declared war on Hezbollah long before the latter entered Al-Qusayr, and the third assumption was that some other side interfered to escalate the situation with Israel, or to create internal sedition and sectarian strife.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"After over 30 days on Bir Al-Abed explosion, and after the intelligence\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s arrests and our investigations, we have reached the result, and the names of those who planted the explosive on Hermel road are now known, and one of them is under arrest… as for the names of those involved in Bir Al-Abed blast, they are now 99.99% known,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he revealed. Sayyed Nasrallah indicated that investigations have not yet revealed that the committers were operational agents of Israel. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"They are rather affiliated with a certain Takfiri line… some of them are Lebanese, some are Syrians, and some are Palestinians.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" His eminence assured that intelligence apparatuses have informed Hezbollah about certain sides preparing booby-trapped cars to send them to Dahieh, emphasizing that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"all our measures in Dahieh were in response to the official apparatuses\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' information.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" On this point, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"these (Takfiri) groups work for Israel, and undoubtedly, US and some regional countries\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' intelligences are operating these sides.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" He highlighted that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"yesterday they put (explosives) in Dahieh, but who knows where they could put them tomorrow? Neither Israel nor Takfiris care if they were in Dahieh or somewhere else. Those kill Sunnis just like they kill Shiites, they kill Christians just like they kill Muslims, and they bomb mosques just like they bomb churches.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" As his eminence asserted that Takfiri groups could plant booby-trapped cars anywhere in Lebanon, he warned officials, politicians, security apparatuses, and all the Lebanese that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"yesterday\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s explosion was under control and the situation was under control, but if these explosions continue, Lebanon will be on the verge of Abyss. Therefore, responsible actions must be taken for Lebanon to confront this threat\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that the right precautionary measures should be taken and the government as well as its apparatuses must hold their responsibilities, if not to prevent suicide attacks, as this is impossible, then at least to minimize losses, stressing \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the importance of finding the sides sending explosives-laden cars and arresting them… as well as the importance of not giving any political or security cover to these groups.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah further emphasized \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the importance of abandoning sectarian incitements, so that the conflict remains political.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Addressing people who were affected by Thursday\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s terror attack, Hezbollah leader said: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We are aware of your patience, courage and faith, and the biggest exam was in July war… They want to harm your determination and faith, but we are certain of your faith and these aims will fail. What we fear is that those murderers drag you to uncalculated reactions which would lead to sedition and the destruction of the country…\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"(Those killers) neither have a nation nor a religion, and they are not Sunnis. They killed Sunnis even more than they killed Shiites. They seek to create a fight between the Lebanese and the (Palestinian refugee) camps. These murderers are a group of terrorists and the owners of a destructive project in the whole region, not just in Lebanon. In Iraq, there is clear evidence about the western, regional, and Israeli intelligences operating the murderers there,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he added. In conclusion, Sayyed Nasrallah called on his people to \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"stay patient and send a clear message that exploding and killing will not affect our morale, and it will not throw us in the trap of sedition. This is the responsibility of everyone in Lebanon, because if this situation continues, it could reach the verge of ambyss.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" His eminence also addressed the murderers, saying: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If you work for Israel, we know you and we will capture you if the state neglected that. Yet he indicated that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"we are not a substitute for the state, but in any field the state does not hold its responsibility in, we will hold this responsibility.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If you claim you are defending the Syrian people and punishing Hezbollah over its intervention in Syria, I tell you two things: You, the Takfiri groups are the harshest killers of the Syrian people. You even kidnapped and killed Christian priests who supported the opposition. You kill children and explode mosques.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"As for us, we fight with our values. We have never killed a captive, while you prosecute captives in daylight. We have never killed citizens, and in some of our battles, a larger number of martyrs fell in order to protect citizens, and all what is said about massacres committed by us are lies and fabrications.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Criticizing the fabrications of some Arab media stations, he assured that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the world will witness that we have only fought Takfiri groups in Syria.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Finally, Sayyed Nasrallah said: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"One of our responses to such explosions is: If we had 1000 fighters in Syria, they will become 2000, and if we had 5000, they will become 10 000, and if the battle with those terrorists required that I go with all Hezbollah to Syria, we will all go for the sake of Syria and its people, Lebanon and its people, Palestine and Al-Quds, and the central cause.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We put an end to the battle, and we set a time for this battle to end, and as we triumphed in all our wars with Israel, if you wanted us to enter a fierce battle with you, I assure to everyone that we will triumph against Takfiri terror. The cost of the battle will be high, but the least cost is being slaughtered like ewes and waiting for the murderers to come into our house.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Source: http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=106457&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=14&s1=1

Hezbollah Secretary General, his Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, delivered a speech on Friday, August 16th, 2013, marking the 7th anniversary of the July 2006 Victory of the Islamic Resistance against the Israeli army. Sayyed Nasrallah to Takfiris: We will Capture You, We will Put an End to Terror Sara Taha Moughnieh Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivered a speech on Friday, during a ceremony celebrating the seventh anniversary of victory in the July 2006 war. Sayyed NasrallahHis eminence started his speech with a greeting to the martyrs and wounded who fell only one day before the celebration in the terrorist blast which hit Ruwais street in the Southern Suburb of Beirut. \\\\\\\"I pray for the recovery of all the wounded from the large and dangerous terrorist attack, and I offer my condolences to the families of martyrs who fell, and to all those who were affected physically, mentally, spiritually, and on the material level yesterday. We highly appreciate, admire, and respect the patience of people and the citizens of Dahieh who held responsibility, and were conscious, disciplined, and civilized,\\\\\\\" he said. As he expressed gratitude for all those who stood in solidarity and denounced this painful event, Sayyed Nasrallah condemned the silence of some countries, considering that \\\\\\\"days will prove that they support terrorism, murder, and crime taking place in our region\\\\\\\". July 2006 victory put an end to \\\\\\\"Greater Israel\\\\\\\" project Sayyed Nasrallah initiated his statement with words about the victory, pointing out that \\\\\\\"the celebration was arranged to take place in Aita Al-Shaab, because it overlooks occupied Palestine, and its air is Palestinian air. Hence, you are smelling the air of occupied Palestine, and you are gathering only a stone\\\\\\\'s throw away from the enemy.\\\\\\\" His eminence further stressed that Aita\\\\\\\'s significance was with its symbolic representation, especially with its good hearted and firm people, its brave heroes, its martyrs, and liberated captives. Sayyed Nasrallah talked about the faithfulness of the resistance fighters who were located in Aita Al-Shaab, referring to the devoutness of those men to the path of Master of Martyrs, Imam Hussein (pbuh). July 2006 victory celebrationHe also paid gratitude to the citizens of this village, who returned to their land just hours after ceasefire in 2006, and built tents over the ruins of their houses, to sit in them. \\\\\\\"Your historic victory in the 25th of May 2000 defeated the \\\\\\\"greater Israel\\\\\\\" project, because the Israeli army, which failed to stay in Lebanon, the weakest Arab country, cannot build a state from the Nile to Furat. Then the 14th of August 2006 victory , defeated Israel\\\\\\\'s project of being a great country, which dominates and imposes its decisions on the region and on Iran,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. Hezbollah Secretary General added that the July 2006 victory also proved that \\\\\\\"this organized popular resistance, which is embraced by its people, is capable of forming real defense, at a time when the country does not have the capacities and technologies which the attacking enemy has, and the evidence on that was presented in the July war.\\\\\\\" In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah warned the Israeli enemy that the resistance will not allow one Israeli soldier to set a foot in the Lebanese territories, indicating that \\\\\\\"we will not be tolerant in defending our villages, lands, and people.\\\\\\\" He further addressed the Israelis, saying: \\\\\\\"The era of Israeli military tourism on the borders with Lebanon, and inside the Lebanese territories is over, with no return.\\\\\\\" Response to Dahieh blast is by duplicating number of fighters in Syria In another context, Sayyed Nasrallah tackled the recent assaults on Dahieh, specifically Thursday\\\\\\\'s tragic attack which left over 20 killed and hundreds wounded. He indicated that \\\\\\\"targeting people and citizens in Dahieh and other places is nothing new. When the enemy failed, it always resorted to hitting people, even those who had no relation with the resistance. The history of Israeli wars in Qana, Dahieh, Sheyah, and other places in July war is a clear witness on that. The enemy takes such action because it knows that this is our point of weakness when it fails in confronting us militarily.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"This is a point of pride for us, as it points out that the relation between the resistance and the people is an emotional, humanitarian, moral, and spiritual relation, and that both are one. The resistance had never acted like it was an imported resistance, like some fighters act these days, hence they don’t care about people. Not at all, as throughout the past years, the resistance had never performed a military or resistance operation without taking into consideration the responses, and protecting people, until April Accord came out to protect them,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. From this point, his eminence considered that \\\\\\\"when there is a resistance, and people whom it shares their feelings, and suffers from their pains, this is a point of power on one hand, and a point of weakness on the other, which the enemy uses. What happened yesterday was an attack on people. It wasn’t an assassination. There wasn’t any Hezbollah official or location targeted, but the side which committed the massacre in Dahieh wanted to leave behind the largest number of casualties among people.\\\\\\\" He stated that \\\\\\\"the bomb weighted over 100 KGs, and at this location in specific, like the case in Bir Al-Abed explosion, the goal was only to kill people.\\\\\\\" Sayyed NasrallahHezbollah secretary general asserted that the \\\\\\\"massacre comes in the context of a wide and open battle which has been taking place since tens of years… as long as there is a group resisting and refusing to surrender to the American-Zionist will, then naturally, this group and its environment will bare this responsibility.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah assured that the rockets that hit Baalbak and its neighborhoods in the last few weeks were fired by armed Syrian groups, adding that \\\\\\\"rockets on Hermel, Majdal Anjar, Zahle, and Dahieh were targeting us, and the large explosion on the 9th of August targeted our people and environment. Yet we did not make a quick response… we did not accuse anyone.\\\\\\\" However, \\\\\\\"after Bir Al-Abed blast, some Lebanese parts claimed that Hezbollah planted the explosive as a pretext to ignite the situation. This is defamation and unjust, as you cannot find anyone who would love these people, and kiss the soil under the feet of these people like Hezbollah and its leadership does… This is how you work, but not how Hezbollah does.\\\\\\\" His eminence pointed out that during investigations about these assaults, \\\\\\\"the first assumption was that \\\\\\\"Israel\\\\\\\" was behind them, while the second was the terrorist groups who have declared war on Hezbollah long before the latter entered Al-Qusayr, and the third assumption was that some other side interfered to escalate the situation with Israel, or to create internal sedition and sectarian strife.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"After over 30 days on Bir Al-Abed explosion, and after the intelligence\\\\\\\'s arrests and our investigations, we have reached the result, and the names of those who planted the explosive on Hermel road are now known, and one of them is under arrest… as for the names of those involved in Bir Al-Abed blast, they are now 99.99% known,\\\\\\\" he revealed. Sayyed Nasrallah indicated that investigations have not yet revealed that the committers were operational agents of Israel. \\\\\\\"They are rather affiliated with a certain Takfiri line… some of them are Lebanese, some are Syrians, and some are Palestinians.\\\\\\\" His eminence assured that intelligence apparatuses have informed Hezbollah about certain sides preparing booby-trapped cars to send them to Dahieh, emphasizing that \\\\\\\"all our measures in Dahieh were in response to the official apparatuses\\\\\\\' information.\\\\\\\" On this point, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that \\\\\\\"these (Takfiri) groups work for Israel, and undoubtedly, US and some regional countries\\\\\\\' intelligences are operating these sides.\\\\\\\" He highlighted that \\\\\\\"yesterday they put (explosives) in Dahieh, but who knows where they could put them tomorrow? Neither Israel nor Takfiris care if they were in Dahieh or somewhere else. Those kill Sunnis just like they kill Shiites, they kill Christians just like they kill Muslims, and they bomb mosques just like they bomb churches.\\\\\\\" As his eminence asserted that Takfiri groups could plant booby-trapped cars anywhere in Lebanon, he warned officials, politicians, security apparatuses, and all the Lebanese that \\\\\\\"yesterday\\\\\\\'s explosion was under control and the situation was under control, but if these explosions continue, Lebanon will be on the verge of Abyss. Therefore, responsible actions must be taken for Lebanon to confront this threat\\\\\\\". Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that the right precautionary measures should be taken and the government as well as its apparatuses must hold their responsibilities, if not to prevent suicide attacks, as this is impossible, then at least to minimize losses, stressing \\\\\\\"the importance of finding the sides sending explosives-laden cars and arresting them… as well as the importance of not giving any political or security cover to these groups.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah further emphasized \\\\\\\"the importance of abandoning sectarian incitements, so that the conflict remains political.\\\\\\\" Addressing people who were affected by Thursday\\\\\\\'s terror attack, Hezbollah leader said: \\\\\\\"We are aware of your patience, courage and faith, and the biggest exam was in July war… They want to harm your determination and faith, but we are certain of your faith and these aims will fail. What we fear is that those murderers drag you to uncalculated reactions which would lead to sedition and the destruction of the country…\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"(Those killers) neither have a nation nor a religion, and they are not Sunnis. They killed Sunnis even more than they killed Shiites. They seek to create a fight between the Lebanese and the (Palestinian refugee) camps. These murderers are a group of terrorists and the owners of a destructive project in the whole region, not just in Lebanon. In Iraq, there is clear evidence about the western, regional, and Israeli intelligences operating the murderers there,\\\\\\\" he added. In conclusion, Sayyed Nasrallah called on his people to \\\\\\\"stay patient and send a clear message that exploding and killing will not affect our morale, and it will not throw us in the trap of sedition. This is the responsibility of everyone in Lebanon, because if this situation continues, it could reach the verge of ambyss.\\\\\\\" His eminence also addressed the murderers, saying: \\\\\\\"If you work for Israel, we know you and we will capture you if the state neglected that. Yet he indicated that \\\\\\\"we are not a substitute for the state, but in any field the state does not hold its responsibility in, we will hold this responsibility.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"If you claim you are defending the Syrian people and punishing Hezbollah over its intervention in Syria, I tell you two things: You, the Takfiri groups are the harshest killers of the Syrian people. You even kidnapped and killed Christian priests who supported the opposition. You kill children and explode mosques.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"As for us, we fight with our values. We have never killed a captive, while you prosecute captives in daylight. We have never killed citizens, and in some of our battles, a larger number of martyrs fell in order to protect citizens, and all what is said about massacres committed by us are lies and fabrications.\\\\\\\" Criticizing the fabrications of some Arab media stations, he assured that \\\\\\\"the world will witness that we have only fought Takfiri groups in Syria.\\\\\\\" Finally, Sayyed Nasrallah said: \\\\\\\"One of our responses to such explosions is: If we had 1000 fighters in Syria, they will become 2000, and if we had 5000, they will become 10 000, and if the battle with those terrorists required that I go with all Hezbollah to Syria, we will all go for the sake of Syria and its people, Lebanon and its people, Palestine and Al-Quds, and the central cause.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"We put an end to the battle, and we set a time for this battle to end, and as we triumphed in all our wars with Israel, if you wanted us to enter a fierce battle with you, I assure to everyone that we will triumph against Takfiri terror. The cost of the battle will be high, but the least cost is being slaughtered like ewes and waiting for the murderers to come into our house.\\\\\\\" Source: http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=106457&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=14&s1=1

Hezbollah Secretary General, his Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, delivered a speech on Friday, August 16th, 2013, marking the 7th anniversary of the July 2006 Victory of the Islamic Resistance against the Israeli army. Sayyed Nasrallah to Takfiris: We will Capture You, We will Put an End to Terror Sara Taha Moughnieh Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivered a speech on Friday, during a ceremony celebrating the seventh anniversary of victory in the July 2006 war. Sayyed NasrallahHis eminence started his speech with a greeting to the martyrs and wounded who fell only one day before the celebration in the terrorist blast which hit Ruwais street in the Southern Suburb of Beirut. \\\\\\\"I pray for the recovery of all the wounded from the large and dangerous terrorist attack, and I offer my condolences to the families of martyrs who fell, and to all those who were affected physically, mentally, spiritually, and on the material level yesterday. We highly appreciate, admire, and respect the patience of people and the citizens of Dahieh who held responsibility, and were conscious, disciplined, and civilized,\\\\\\\" he said. As he expressed gratitude for all those who stood in solidarity and denounced this painful event, Sayyed Nasrallah condemned the silence of some countries, considering that \\\\\\\"days will prove that they support terrorism, murder, and crime taking place in our region\\\\\\\". July 2006 victory put an end to \\\\\\\"Greater Israel\\\\\\\" project Sayyed Nasrallah initiated his statement with words about the victory, pointing out that \\\\\\\"the celebration was arranged to take place in Aita Al-Shaab, because it overlooks occupied Palestine, and its air is Palestinian air. Hence, you are smelling the air of occupied Palestine, and you are gathering only a stone\\\\\\\'s throw away from the enemy.\\\\\\\" His eminence further stressed that Aita\\\\\\\'s significance was with its symbolic representation, especially with its good hearted and firm people, its brave heroes, its martyrs, and liberated captives. Sayyed Nasrallah talked about the faithfulness of the resistance fighters who were located in Aita Al-Shaab, referring to the devoutness of those men to the path of Master of Martyrs, Imam Hussein (pbuh). July 2006 victory celebrationHe also paid gratitude to the citizens of this village, who returned to their land just hours after ceasefire in 2006, and built tents over the ruins of their houses, to sit in them. \\\\\\\"Your historic victory in the 25th of May 2000 defeated the \\\\\\\"greater Israel\\\\\\\" project, because the Israeli army, which failed to stay in Lebanon, the weakest Arab country, cannot build a state from the Nile to Furat. Then the 14th of August 2006 victory , defeated Israel\\\\\\\'s project of being a great country, which dominates and imposes its decisions on the region and on Iran,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. Hezbollah Secretary General added that the July 2006 victory also proved that \\\\\\\"this organized popular resistance, which is embraced by its people, is capable of forming real defense, at a time when the country does not have the capacities and technologies which the attacking enemy has, and the evidence on that was presented in the July war.\\\\\\\" In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah warned the Israeli enemy that the resistance will not allow one Israeli soldier to set a foot in the Lebanese territories, indicating that \\\\\\\"we will not be tolerant in defending our villages, lands, and people.\\\\\\\" He further addressed the Israelis, saying: \\\\\\\"The era of Israeli military tourism on the borders with Lebanon, and inside the Lebanese territories is over, with no return.\\\\\\\" Response to Dahieh blast is by duplicating number of fighters in Syria In another context, Sayyed Nasrallah tackled the recent assaults on Dahieh, specifically Thursday\\\\\\\'s tragic attack which left over 20 killed and hundreds wounded. He indicated that \\\\\\\"targeting people and citizens in Dahieh and other places is nothing new. When the enemy failed, it always resorted to hitting people, even those who had no relation with the resistance. The history of Israeli wars in Qana, Dahieh, Sheyah, and other places in July war is a clear witness on that. The enemy takes such action because it knows that this is our point of weakness when it fails in confronting us militarily.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"This is a point of pride for us, as it points out that the relation between the resistance and the people is an emotional, humanitarian, moral, and spiritual relation, and that both are one. The resistance had never acted like it was an imported resistance, like some fighters act these days, hence they don’t care about people. Not at all, as throughout the past years, the resistance had never performed a military or resistance operation without taking into consideration the responses, and protecting people, until April Accord came out to protect them,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. From this point, his eminence considered that \\\\\\\"when there is a resistance, and people whom it shares their feelings, and suffers from their pains, this is a point of power on one hand, and a point of weakness on the other, which the enemy uses. What happened yesterday was an attack on people. It wasn’t an assassination. There wasn’t any Hezbollah official or location targeted, but the side which committed the massacre in Dahieh wanted to leave behind the largest number of casualties among people.\\\\\\\" He stated that \\\\\\\"the bomb weighted over 100 KGs, and at this location in specific, like the case in Bir Al-Abed explosion, the goal was only to kill people.\\\\\\\" Sayyed NasrallahHezbollah secretary general asserted that the \\\\\\\"massacre comes in the context of a wide and open battle which has been taking place since tens of years… as long as there is a group resisting and refusing to surrender to the American-Zionist will, then naturally, this group and its environment will bare this responsibility.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah assured that the rockets that hit Baalbak and its neighborhoods in the last few weeks were fired by armed Syrian groups, adding that \\\\\\\"rockets on Hermel, Majdal Anjar, Zahle, and Dahieh were targeting us, and the large explosion on the 9th of August targeted our people and environment. Yet we did not make a quick response… we did not accuse anyone.\\\\\\\" However, \\\\\\\"after Bir Al-Abed blast, some Lebanese parts claimed that Hezbollah planted the explosive as a pretext to ignite the situation. This is defamation and unjust, as you cannot find anyone who would love these people, and kiss the soil under the feet of these people like Hezbollah and its leadership does… This is how you work, but not how Hezbollah does.\\\\\\\" His eminence pointed out that during investigations about these assaults, \\\\\\\"the first assumption was that \\\\\\\"Israel\\\\\\\" was behind them, while the second was the terrorist groups who have declared war on Hezbollah long before the latter entered Al-Qusayr, and the third assumption was that some other side interfered to escalate the situation with Israel, or to create internal sedition and sectarian strife.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"After over 30 days on Bir Al-Abed explosion, and after the intelligence\\\\\\\'s arrests and our investigations, we have reached the result, and the names of those who planted the explosive on Hermel road are now known, and one of them is under arrest… as for the names of those involved in Bir Al-Abed blast, they are now 99.99% known,\\\\\\\" he revealed. Sayyed Nasrallah indicated that investigations have not yet revealed that the committers were operational agents of Israel. \\\\\\\"They are rather affiliated with a certain Takfiri line… some of them are Lebanese, some are Syrians, and some are Palestinians.\\\\\\\" His eminence assured that intelligence apparatuses have informed Hezbollah about certain sides preparing booby-trapped cars to send them to Dahieh, emphasizing that \\\\\\\"all our measures in Dahieh were in response to the official apparatuses\\\\\\\' information.\\\\\\\" On this point, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that \\\\\\\"these (Takfiri) groups work for Israel, and undoubtedly, US and some regional countries\\\\\\\' intelligences are operating these sides.\\\\\\\" He highlighted that \\\\\\\"yesterday they put (explosives) in Dahieh, but who knows where they could put them tomorrow? Neither Israel nor Takfiris care if they were in Dahieh or somewhere else. Those kill Sunnis just like they kill Shiites, they kill Christians just like they kill Muslims, and they bomb mosques just like they bomb churches.\\\\\\\" As his eminence asserted that Takfiri groups could plant booby-trapped cars anywhere in Lebanon, he warned officials, politicians, security apparatuses, and all the Lebanese that \\\\\\\"yesterday\\\\\\\'s explosion was under control and the situation was under control, but if these explosions continue, Lebanon will be on the verge of Abyss. Therefore, responsible actions must be taken for Lebanon to confront this threat\\\\\\\". Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that the right precautionary measures should be taken and the government as well as its apparatuses must hold their responsibilities, if not to prevent suicide attacks, as this is impossible, then at least to minimize losses, stressing \\\\\\\"the importance of finding the sides sending explosives-laden cars and arresting them… as well as the importance of not giving any political or security cover to these groups.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah further emphasized \\\\\\\"the importance of abandoning sectarian incitements, so that the conflict remains political.\\\\\\\" Addressing people who were affected by Thursday\\\\\\\'s terror attack, Hezbollah leader said: \\\\\\\"We are aware of your patience, courage and faith, and the biggest exam was in July war… They want to harm your determination and faith, but we are certain of your faith and these aims will fail. What we fear is that those murderers drag you to uncalculated reactions which would lead to sedition and the destruction of the country…\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"(Those killers) neither have a nation nor a religion, and they are not Sunnis. They killed Sunnis even more than they killed Shiites. They seek to create a fight between the Lebanese and the (Palestinian refugee) camps. These murderers are a group of terrorists and the owners of a destructive project in the whole region, not just in Lebanon. In Iraq, there is clear evidence about the western, regional, and Israeli intelligences operating the murderers there,\\\\\\\" he added. In conclusion, Sayyed Nasrallah called on his people to \\\\\\\"stay patient and send a clear message that exploding and killing will not affect our morale, and it will not throw us in the trap of sedition. This is the responsibility of everyone in Lebanon, because if this situation continues, it could reach the verge of ambyss.\\\\\\\" His eminence also addressed the murderers, saying: \\\\\\\"If you work for Israel, we know you and we will capture you if the state neglected that. Yet he indicated that \\\\\\\"we are not a substitute for the state, but in any field the state does not hold its responsibility in, we will hold this responsibility.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"If you claim you are defending the Syrian people and punishing Hezbollah over its intervention in Syria, I tell you two things: You, the Takfiri groups are the harshest killers of the Syrian people. You even kidnapped and killed Christian priests who supported the opposition. You kill children and explode mosques.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"As for us, we fight with our values. We have never killed a captive, while you prosecute captives in daylight. We have never killed citizens, and in some of our battles, a larger number of martyrs fell in order to protect citizens, and all what is said about massacres committed by us are lies and fabrications.\\\\\\\" Criticizing the fabrications of some Arab media stations, he assured that \\\\\\\"the world will witness that we have only fought Takfiri groups in Syria.\\\\\\\" Finally, Sayyed Nasrallah said: \\\\\\\"One of our responses to such explosions is: If we had 1000 fighters in Syria, they will become 2000, and if we had 5000, they will become 10 000, and if the battle with those terrorists required that I go with all Hezbollah to Syria, we will all go for the sake of Syria and its people, Lebanon and its people, Palestine and Al-Quds, and the central cause.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"We put an end to the battle, and we set a time for this battle to end, and as we triumphed in all our wars with Israel, if you wanted us to enter a fierce battle with you, I assure to everyone that we will triumph against Takfiri terror. The cost of the battle will be high, but the least cost is being slaughtered like ewes and waiting for the murderers to come into our house.\\\\\\\" Source: http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=106457&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=14&s1=1

Hezbollah Secretary General, his Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, delivered a speech on Friday, August 16th, 2013, marking the 7th anniversary of the July 2006 Victory of the Islamic Resistance against the Israeli army. Sayyed Nasrallah to Takfiris: We will Capture You, We will Put an End to Terror Sara Taha Moughnieh Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivered a speech on Friday, during a ceremony celebrating the seventh anniversary of victory in the July 2006 war. Sayyed NasrallahHis eminence started his speech with a greeting to the martyrs and wounded who fell only one day before the celebration in the terrorist blast which hit Ruwais street in the Southern Suburb of Beirut. \\\\\\\"I pray for the recovery of all the wounded from the large and dangerous terrorist attack, and I offer my condolences to the families of martyrs who fell, and to all those who were affected physically, mentally, spiritually, and on the material level yesterday. We highly appreciate, admire, and respect the patience of people and the citizens of Dahieh who held responsibility, and were conscious, disciplined, and civilized,\\\\\\\" he said. As he expressed gratitude for all those who stood in solidarity and denounced this painful event, Sayyed Nasrallah condemned the silence of some countries, considering that \\\\\\\"days will prove that they support terrorism, murder, and crime taking place in our region\\\\\\\". July 2006 victory put an end to \\\\\\\"Greater Israel\\\\\\\" project Sayyed Nasrallah initiated his statement with words about the victory, pointing out that \\\\\\\"the celebration was arranged to take place in Aita Al-Shaab, because it overlooks occupied Palestine, and its air is Palestinian air. Hence, you are smelling the air of occupied Palestine, and you are gathering only a stone\\\\\\\'s throw away from the enemy.\\\\\\\" His eminence further stressed that Aita\\\\\\\'s significance was with its symbolic representation, especially with its good hearted and firm people, its brave heroes, its martyrs, and liberated captives. Sayyed Nasrallah talked about the faithfulness of the resistance fighters who were located in Aita Al-Shaab, referring to the devoutness of those men to the path of Master of Martyrs, Imam Hussein (pbuh). July 2006 victory celebrationHe also paid gratitude to the citizens of this village, who returned to their land just hours after ceasefire in 2006, and built tents over the ruins of their houses, to sit in them. \\\\\\\"Your historic victory in the 25th of May 2000 defeated the \\\\\\\"greater Israel\\\\\\\" project, because the Israeli army, which failed to stay in Lebanon, the weakest Arab country, cannot build a state from the Nile to Furat. Then the 14th of August 2006 victory , defeated Israel\\\\\\\'s project of being a great country, which dominates and imposes its decisions on the region and on Iran,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. Hezbollah Secretary General added that the July 2006 victory also proved that \\\\\\\"this organized popular resistance, which is embraced by its people, is capable of forming real defense, at a time when the country does not have the capacities and technologies which the attacking enemy has, and the evidence on that was presented in the July war.\\\\\\\" In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah warned the Israeli enemy that the resistance will not allow one Israeli soldier to set a foot in the Lebanese territories, indicating that \\\\\\\"we will not be tolerant in defending our villages, lands, and people.\\\\\\\" He further addressed the Israelis, saying: \\\\\\\"The era of Israeli military tourism on the borders with Lebanon, and inside the Lebanese territories is over, with no return.\\\\\\\" Response to Dahieh blast is by duplicating number of fighters in Syria In another context, Sayyed Nasrallah tackled the recent assaults on Dahieh, specifically Thursday\\\\\\\'s tragic attack which left over 20 killed and hundreds wounded. He indicated that \\\\\\\"targeting people and citizens in Dahieh and other places is nothing new. When the enemy failed, it always resorted to hitting people, even those who had no relation with the resistance. The history of Israeli wars in Qana, Dahieh, Sheyah, and other places in July war is a clear witness on that. The enemy takes such action because it knows that this is our point of weakness when it fails in confronting us militarily.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"This is a point of pride for us, as it points out that the relation between the resistance and the people is an emotional, humanitarian, moral, and spiritual relation, and that both are one. The resistance had never acted like it was an imported resistance, like some fighters act these days, hence they don’t care about people. Not at all, as throughout the past years, the resistance had never performed a military or resistance operation without taking into consideration the responses, and protecting people, until April Accord came out to protect them,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. From this point, his eminence considered that \\\\\\\"when there is a resistance, and people whom it shares their feelings, and suffers from their pains, this is a point of power on one hand, and a point of weakness on the other, which the enemy uses. What happened yesterday was an attack on people. It wasn’t an assassination. There wasn’t any Hezbollah official or location targeted, but the side which committed the massacre in Dahieh wanted to leave behind the largest number of casualties among people.\\\\\\\" He stated that \\\\\\\"the bomb weighted over 100 KGs, and at this location in specific, like the case in Bir Al-Abed explosion, the goal was only to kill people.\\\\\\\" Sayyed NasrallahHezbollah secretary general asserted that the \\\\\\\"massacre comes in the context of a wide and open battle which has been taking place since tens of years… as long as there is a group resisting and refusing to surrender to the American-Zionist will, then naturally, this group and its environment will bare this responsibility.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah assured that the rockets that hit Baalbak and its neighborhoods in the last few weeks were fired by armed Syrian groups, adding that \\\\\\\"rockets on Hermel, Majdal Anjar, Zahle, and Dahieh were targeting us, and the large explosion on the 9th of August targeted our people and environment. Yet we did not make a quick response… we did not accuse anyone.\\\\\\\" However, \\\\\\\"after Bir Al-Abed blast, some Lebanese parts claimed that Hezbollah planted the explosive as a pretext to ignite the situation. This is defamation and unjust, as you cannot find anyone who would love these people, and kiss the soil under the feet of these people like Hezbollah and its leadership does… This is how you work, but not how Hezbollah does.\\\\\\\" His eminence pointed out that during investigations about these assaults, \\\\\\\"the first assumption was that \\\\\\\"Israel\\\\\\\" was behind them, while the second was the terrorist groups who have declared war on Hezbollah long before the latter entered Al-Qusayr, and the third assumption was that some other side interfered to escalate the situation with Israel, or to create internal sedition and sectarian strife.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"After over 30 days on Bir Al-Abed explosion, and after the intelligence\\\\\\\'s arrests and our investigations, we have reached the result, and the names of those who planted the explosive on Hermel road are now known, and one of them is under arrest… as for the names of those involved in Bir Al-Abed blast, they are now 99.99% known,\\\\\\\" he revealed. Sayyed Nasrallah indicated that investigations have not yet revealed that the committers were operational agents of Israel. \\\\\\\"They are rather affiliated with a certain Takfiri line… some of them are Lebanese, some are Syrians, and some are Palestinians.\\\\\\\" His eminence assured that intelligence apparatuses have informed Hezbollah about certain sides preparing booby-trapped cars to send them to Dahieh, emphasizing that \\\\\\\"all our measures in Dahieh were in response to the official apparatuses\\\\\\\' information.\\\\\\\" On this point, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that \\\\\\\"these (Takfiri) groups work for Israel, and undoubtedly, US and some regional countries\\\\\\\' intelligences are operating these sides.\\\\\\\" He highlighted that \\\\\\\"yesterday they put (explosives) in Dahieh, but who knows where they could put them tomorrow? Neither Israel nor Takfiris care if they were in Dahieh or somewhere else. Those kill Sunnis just like they kill Shiites, they kill Christians just like they kill Muslims, and they bomb mosques just like they bomb churches.\\\\\\\" As his eminence asserted that Takfiri groups could plant booby-trapped cars anywhere in Lebanon, he warned officials, politicians, security apparatuses, and all the Lebanese that \\\\\\\"yesterday\\\\\\\'s explosion was under control and the situation was under control, but if these explosions continue, Lebanon will be on the verge of Abyss. Therefore, responsible actions must be taken for Lebanon to confront this threat\\\\\\\". Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that the right precautionary measures should be taken and the government as well as its apparatuses must hold their responsibilities, if not to prevent suicide attacks, as this is impossible, then at least to minimize losses, stressing \\\\\\\"the importance of finding the sides sending explosives-laden cars and arresting them… as well as the importance of not giving any political or security cover to these groups.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah further emphasized \\\\\\\"the importance of abandoning sectarian incitements, so that the conflict remains political.\\\\\\\" Addressing people who were affected by Thursday\\\\\\\'s terror attack, Hezbollah leader said: \\\\\\\"We are aware of your patience, courage and faith, and the biggest exam was in July war… They want to harm your determination and faith, but we are certain of your faith and these aims will fail. What we fear is that those murderers drag you to uncalculated reactions which would lead to sedition and the destruction of the country…\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"(Those killers) neither have a nation nor a religion, and they are not Sunnis. They killed Sunnis even more than they killed Shiites. They seek to create a fight between the Lebanese and the (Palestinian refugee) camps. These murderers are a group of terrorists and the owners of a destructive project in the whole region, not just in Lebanon. In Iraq, there is clear evidence about the western, regional, and Israeli intelligences operating the murderers there,\\\\\\\" he added. In conclusion, Sayyed Nasrallah called on his people to \\\\\\\"stay patient and send a clear message that exploding and killing will not affect our morale, and it will not throw us in the trap of sedition. This is the responsibility of everyone in Lebanon, because if this situation continues, it could reach the verge of ambyss.\\\\\\\" His eminence also addressed the murderers, saying: \\\\\\\"If you work for Israel, we know you and we will capture you if the state neglected that. Yet he indicated that \\\\\\\"we are not a substitute for the state, but in any field the state does not hold its responsibility in, we will hold this responsibility.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"If you claim you are defending the Syrian people and punishing Hezbollah over its intervention in Syria, I tell you two things: You, the Takfiri groups are the harshest killers of the Syrian people. You even kidnapped and killed Christian priests who supported the opposition. You kill children and explode mosques.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"As for us, we fight with our values. We have never killed a captive, while you prosecute captives in daylight. We have never killed citizens, and in some of our battles, a larger number of martyrs fell in order to protect citizens, and all what is said about massacres committed by us are lies and fabrications.\\\\\\\" Criticizing the fabrications of some Arab media stations, he assured that \\\\\\\"the world will witness that we have only fought Takfiri groups in Syria.\\\\\\\" Finally, Sayyed Nasrallah said: \\\\\\\"One of our responses to such explosions is: If we had 1000 fighters in Syria, they will become 2000, and if we had 5000, they will become 10 000, and if the battle with those terrorists required that I go with all Hezbollah to Syria, we will all go for the sake of Syria and its people, Lebanon and its people, Palestine and Al-Quds, and the central cause.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"We put an end to the battle, and we set a time for this battle to end, and as we triumphed in all our wars with Israel, if you wanted us to enter a fierce battle with you, I assure to everyone that we will triumph against Takfiri terror. The cost of the battle will be high, but the least cost is being slaughtered like ewes and waiting for the murderers to come into our house.\\\\\\\" Source: http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=106457&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=14&s1=1

Hezbollah Secretary General, his Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, delivered a speech on Friday, August 16th, 2013, marking the 7th anniversary of the July 2006 Victory of the Islamic Resistance against the Israeli army. Sayyed Nasrallah to Takfiris: We will Capture You, We will Put an End to Terror Sara Taha Moughnieh Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivered a speech on Friday, during a ceremony celebrating the seventh anniversary of victory in the July 2006 war. Sayyed NasrallahHis eminence started his speech with a greeting to the martyrs and wounded who fell only one day before the celebration in the terrorist blast which hit Ruwais street in the Southern Suburb of Beirut. \\\\\\\"I pray for the recovery of all the wounded from the large and dangerous terrorist attack, and I offer my condolences to the families of martyrs who fell, and to all those who were affected physically, mentally, spiritually, and on the material level yesterday. We highly appreciate, admire, and respect the patience of people and the citizens of Dahieh who held responsibility, and were conscious, disciplined, and civilized,\\\\\\\" he said. As he expressed gratitude for all those who stood in solidarity and denounced this painful event, Sayyed Nasrallah condemned the silence of some countries, considering that \\\\\\\"days will prove that they support terrorism, murder, and crime taking place in our region\\\\\\\". July 2006 victory put an end to \\\\\\\"Greater Israel\\\\\\\" project Sayyed Nasrallah initiated his statement with words about the victory, pointing out that \\\\\\\"the celebration was arranged to take place in Aita Al-Shaab, because it overlooks occupied Palestine, and its air is Palestinian air. Hence, you are smelling the air of occupied Palestine, and you are gathering only a stone\\\\\\\'s throw away from the enemy.\\\\\\\" His eminence further stressed that Aita\\\\\\\'s significance was with its symbolic representation, especially with its good hearted and firm people, its brave heroes, its martyrs, and liberated captives. Sayyed Nasrallah talked about the faithfulness of the resistance fighters who were located in Aita Al-Shaab, referring to the devoutness of those men to the path of Master of Martyrs, Imam Hussein (pbuh). July 2006 victory celebrationHe also paid gratitude to the citizens of this village, who returned to their land just hours after ceasefire in 2006, and built tents over the ruins of their houses, to sit in them. \\\\\\\"Your historic victory in the 25th of May 2000 defeated the \\\\\\\"greater Israel\\\\\\\" project, because the Israeli army, which failed to stay in Lebanon, the weakest Arab country, cannot build a state from the Nile to Furat. Then the 14th of August 2006 victory , defeated Israel\\\\\\\'s project of being a great country, which dominates and imposes its decisions on the region and on Iran,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. Hezbollah Secretary General added that the July 2006 victory also proved that \\\\\\\"this organized popular resistance, which is embraced by its people, is capable of forming real defense, at a time when the country does not have the capacities and technologies which the attacking enemy has, and the evidence on that was presented in the July war.\\\\\\\" In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah warned the Israeli enemy that the resistance will not allow one Israeli soldier to set a foot in the Lebanese territories, indicating that \\\\\\\"we will not be tolerant in defending our villages, lands, and people.\\\\\\\" He further addressed the Israelis, saying: \\\\\\\"The era of Israeli military tourism on the borders with Lebanon, and inside the Lebanese territories is over, with no return.\\\\\\\" Response to Dahieh blast is by duplicating number of fighters in Syria In another context, Sayyed Nasrallah tackled the recent assaults on Dahieh, specifically Thursday\\\\\\\'s tragic attack which left over 20 killed and hundreds wounded. He indicated that \\\\\\\"targeting people and citizens in Dahieh and other places is nothing new. When the enemy failed, it always resorted to hitting people, even those who had no relation with the resistance. The history of Israeli wars in Qana, Dahieh, Sheyah, and other places in July war is a clear witness on that. The enemy takes such action because it knows that this is our point of weakness when it fails in confronting us militarily.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"This is a point of pride for us, as it points out that the relation between the resistance and the people is an emotional, humanitarian, moral, and spiritual relation, and that both are one. The resistance had never acted like it was an imported resistance, like some fighters act these days, hence they don’t care about people. Not at all, as throughout the past years, the resistance had never performed a military or resistance operation without taking into consideration the responses, and protecting people, until April Accord came out to protect them,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. From this point, his eminence considered that \\\\\\\"when there is a resistance, and people whom it shares their feelings, and suffers from their pains, this is a point of power on one hand, and a point of weakness on the other, which the enemy uses. What happened yesterday was an attack on people. It wasn’t an assassination. There wasn’t any Hezbollah official or location targeted, but the side which committed the massacre in Dahieh wanted to leave behind the largest number of casualties among people.\\\\\\\" He stated that \\\\\\\"the bomb weighted over 100 KGs, and at this location in specific, like the case in Bir Al-Abed explosion, the goal was only to kill people.\\\\\\\" Sayyed NasrallahHezbollah secretary general asserted that the \\\\\\\"massacre comes in the context of a wide and open battle which has been taking place since tens of years… as long as there is a group resisting and refusing to surrender to the American-Zionist will, then naturally, this group and its environment will bare this responsibility.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah assured that the rockets that hit Baalbak and its neighborhoods in the last few weeks were fired by armed Syrian groups, adding that \\\\\\\"rockets on Hermel, Majdal Anjar, Zahle, and Dahieh were targeting us, and the large explosion on the 9th of August targeted our people and environment. Yet we did not make a quick response… we did not accuse anyone.\\\\\\\" However, \\\\\\\"after Bir Al-Abed blast, some Lebanese parts claimed that Hezbollah planted the explosive as a pretext to ignite the situation. This is defamation and unjust, as you cannot find anyone who would love these people, and kiss the soil under the feet of these people like Hezbollah and its leadership does… This is how you work, but not how Hezbollah does.\\\\\\\" His eminence pointed out that during investigations about these assaults, \\\\\\\"the first assumption was that \\\\\\\"Israel\\\\\\\" was behind them, while the second was the terrorist groups who have declared war on Hezbollah long before the latter entered Al-Qusayr, and the third assumption was that some other side interfered to escalate the situation with Israel, or to create internal sedition and sectarian strife.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"After over 30 days on Bir Al-Abed explosion, and after the intelligence\\\\\\\'s arrests and our investigations, we have reached the result, and the names of those who planted the explosive on Hermel road are now known, and one of them is under arrest… as for the names of those involved in Bir Al-Abed blast, they are now 99.99% known,\\\\\\\" he revealed. Sayyed Nasrallah indicated that investigations have not yet revealed that the committers were operational agents of Israel. \\\\\\\"They are rather affiliated with a certain Takfiri line… some of them are Lebanese, some are Syrians, and some are Palestinians.\\\\\\\" His eminence assured that intelligence apparatuses have informed Hezbollah about certain sides preparing booby-trapped cars to send them to Dahieh, emphasizing that \\\\\\\"all our measures in Dahieh were in response to the official apparatuses\\\\\\\' information.\\\\\\\" On this point, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that \\\\\\\"these (Takfiri) groups work for Israel, and undoubtedly, US and some regional countries\\\\\\\' intelligences are operating these sides.\\\\\\\" He highlighted that \\\\\\\"yesterday they put (explosives) in Dahieh, but who knows where they could put them tomorrow? Neither Israel nor Takfiris care if they were in Dahieh or somewhere else. Those kill Sunnis just like they kill Shiites, they kill Christians just like they kill Muslims, and they bomb mosques just like they bomb churches.\\\\\\\" As his eminence asserted that Takfiri groups could plant booby-trapped cars anywhere in Lebanon, he warned officials, politicians, security apparatuses, and all the Lebanese that \\\\\\\"yesterday\\\\\\\'s explosion was under control and the situation was under control, but if these explosions continue, Lebanon will be on the verge of Abyss. Therefore, responsible actions must be taken for Lebanon to confront this threat\\\\\\\". Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that the right precautionary measures should be taken and the government as well as its apparatuses must hold their responsibilities, if not to prevent suicide attacks, as this is impossible, then at least to minimize losses, stressing \\\\\\\"the importance of finding the sides sending explosives-laden cars and arresting them… as well as the importance of not giving any political or security cover to these groups.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah further emphasized \\\\\\\"the importance of abandoning sectarian incitements, so that the conflict remains political.\\\\\\\" Addressing people who were affected by Thursday\\\\\\\'s terror attack, Hezbollah leader said: \\\\\\\"We are aware of your patience, courage and faith, and the biggest exam was in July war… They want to harm your determination and faith, but we are certain of your faith and these aims will fail. What we fear is that those murderers drag you to uncalculated reactions which would lead to sedition and the destruction of the country…\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"(Those killers) neither have a nation nor a religion, and they are not Sunnis. They killed Sunnis even more than they killed Shiites. They seek to create a fight between the Lebanese and the (Palestinian refugee) camps. These murderers are a group of terrorists and the owners of a destructive project in the whole region, not just in Lebanon. In Iraq, there is clear evidence about the western, regional, and Israeli intelligences operating the murderers there,\\\\\\\" he added. In conclusion, Sayyed Nasrallah called on his people to \\\\\\\"stay patient and send a clear message that exploding and killing will not affect our morale, and it will not throw us in the trap of sedition. This is the responsibility of everyone in Lebanon, because if this situation continues, it could reach the verge of ambyss.\\\\\\\" His eminence also addressed the murderers, saying: \\\\\\\"If you work for Israel, we know you and we will capture you if the state neglected that. Yet he indicated that \\\\\\\"we are not a substitute for the state, but in any field the state does not hold its responsibility in, we will hold this responsibility.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"If you claim you are defending the Syrian people and punishing Hezbollah over its intervention in Syria, I tell you two things: You, the Takfiri groups are the harshest killers of the Syrian people. You even kidnapped and killed Christian priests who supported the opposition. You kill children and explode mosques.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"As for us, we fight with our values. We have never killed a captive, while you prosecute captives in daylight. We have never killed citizens, and in some of our battles, a larger number of martyrs fell in order to protect citizens, and all what is said about massacres committed by us are lies and fabrications.\\\\\\\" Criticizing the fabrications of some Arab media stations, he assured that \\\\\\\"the world will witness that we have only fought Takfiri groups in Syria.\\\\\\\" Finally, Sayyed Nasrallah said: \\\\\\\"One of our responses to such explosions is: If we had 1000 fighters in Syria, they will become 2000, and if we had 5000, they will become 10 000, and if the battle with those terrorists required that I go with all Hezbollah to Syria, we will all go for the sake of Syria and its people, Lebanon and its people, Palestine and Al-Quds, and the central cause.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"We put an end to the battle, and we set a time for this battle to end, and as we triumphed in all our wars with Israel, if you wanted us to enter a fierce battle with you, I assure to everyone that we will triumph against Takfiri terror. The cost of the battle will be high, but the least cost is being slaughtered like ewes and waiting for the murderers to come into our house.\\\\\\\" Source: http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=106457&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=14&s1=1

Hezbollah Secretary General, his Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, delivered a speech on Friday, August 16th, 2013, marking the 7th anniversary of the July 2006 Victory of the Islamic Resistance against the Israeli army. Sayyed Nasrallah to Takfiris: We will Capture You, We will Put an End to Terror Sara Taha Moughnieh Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivered a speech on Friday, during a ceremony celebrating the seventh anniversary of victory in the July 2006 war. Sayyed NasrallahHis eminence started his speech with a greeting to the martyrs and wounded who fell only one day before the celebration in the terrorist blast which hit Ruwais street in the Southern Suburb of Beirut. \\\\\\\"I pray for the recovery of all the wounded from the large and dangerous terrorist attack, and I offer my condolences to the families of martyrs who fell, and to all those who were affected physically, mentally, spiritually, and on the material level yesterday. We highly appreciate, admire, and respect the patience of people and the citizens of Dahieh who held responsibility, and were conscious, disciplined, and civilized,\\\\\\\" he said. As he expressed gratitude for all those who stood in solidarity and denounced this painful event, Sayyed Nasrallah condemned the silence of some countries, considering that \\\\\\\"days will prove that they support terrorism, murder, and crime taking place in our region\\\\\\\". July 2006 victory put an end to \\\\\\\"Greater Israel\\\\\\\" project Sayyed Nasrallah initiated his statement with words about the victory, pointing out that \\\\\\\"the celebration was arranged to take place in Aita Al-Shaab, because it overlooks occupied Palestine, and its air is Palestinian air. Hence, you are smelling the air of occupied Palestine, and you are gathering only a stone\\\\\\\'s throw away from the enemy.\\\\\\\" His eminence further stressed that Aita\\\\\\\'s significance was with its symbolic representation, especially with its good hearted and firm people, its brave heroes, its martyrs, and liberated captives. Sayyed Nasrallah talked about the faithfulness of the resistance fighters who were located in Aita Al-Shaab, referring to the devoutness of those men to the path of Master of Martyrs, Imam Hussein (pbuh). July 2006 victory celebrationHe also paid gratitude to the citizens of this village, who returned to their land just hours after ceasefire in 2006, and built tents over the ruins of their houses, to sit in them. \\\\\\\"Your historic victory in the 25th of May 2000 defeated the \\\\\\\"greater Israel\\\\\\\" project, because the Israeli army, which failed to stay in Lebanon, the weakest Arab country, cannot build a state from the Nile to Furat. Then the 14th of August 2006 victory , defeated Israel\\\\\\\'s project of being a great country, which dominates and imposes its decisions on the region and on Iran,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. Hezbollah Secretary General added that the July 2006 victory also proved that \\\\\\\"this organized popular resistance, which is embraced by its people, is capable of forming real defense, at a time when the country does not have the capacities and technologies which the attacking enemy has, and the evidence on that was presented in the July war.\\\\\\\" In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah warned the Israeli enemy that the resistance will not allow one Israeli soldier to set a foot in the Lebanese territories, indicating that \\\\\\\"we will not be tolerant in defending our villages, lands, and people.\\\\\\\" He further addressed the Israelis, saying: \\\\\\\"The era of Israeli military tourism on the borders with Lebanon, and inside the Lebanese territories is over, with no return.\\\\\\\" Response to Dahieh blast is by duplicating number of fighters in Syria In another context, Sayyed Nasrallah tackled the recent assaults on Dahieh, specifically Thursday\\\\\\\'s tragic attack which left over 20 killed and hundreds wounded. He indicated that \\\\\\\"targeting people and citizens in Dahieh and other places is nothing new. When the enemy failed, it always resorted to hitting people, even those who had no relation with the resistance. The history of Israeli wars in Qana, Dahieh, Sheyah, and other places in July war is a clear witness on that. The enemy takes such action because it knows that this is our point of weakness when it fails in confronting us militarily.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"This is a point of pride for us, as it points out that the relation between the resistance and the people is an emotional, humanitarian, moral, and spiritual relation, and that both are one. The resistance had never acted like it was an imported resistance, like some fighters act these days, hence they don’t care about people. Not at all, as throughout the past years, the resistance had never performed a military or resistance operation without taking into consideration the responses, and protecting people, until April Accord came out to protect them,\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. From this point, his eminence considered that \\\\\\\"when there is a resistance, and people whom it shares their feelings, and suffers from their pains, this is a point of power on one hand, and a point of weakness on the other, which the enemy uses. What happened yesterday was an attack on people. It wasn’t an assassination. There wasn’t any Hezbollah official or location targeted, but the side which committed the massacre in Dahieh wanted to leave behind the largest number of casualties among people.\\\\\\\" He stated that \\\\\\\"the bomb weighted over 100 KGs, and at this location in specific, like the case in Bir Al-Abed explosion, the goal was only to kill people.\\\\\\\" Sayyed NasrallahHezbollah secretary general asserted that the \\\\\\\"massacre comes in the context of a wide and open battle which has been taking place since tens of years… as long as there is a group resisting and refusing to surrender to the American-Zionist will, then naturally, this group and its environment will bare this responsibility.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah assured that the rockets that hit Baalbak and its neighborhoods in the last few weeks were fired by armed Syrian groups, adding that \\\\\\\"rockets on Hermel, Majdal Anjar, Zahle, and Dahieh were targeting us, and the large explosion on the 9th of August targeted our people and environment. Yet we did not make a quick response… we did not accuse anyone.\\\\\\\" However, \\\\\\\"after Bir Al-Abed blast, some Lebanese parts claimed that Hezbollah planted the explosive as a pretext to ignite the situation. This is defamation and unjust, as you cannot find anyone who would love these people, and kiss the soil under the feet of these people like Hezbollah and its leadership does… This is how you work, but not how Hezbollah does.\\\\\\\" His eminence pointed out that during investigations about these assaults, \\\\\\\"the first assumption was that \\\\\\\"Israel\\\\\\\" was behind them, while the second was the terrorist groups who have declared war on Hezbollah long before the latter entered Al-Qusayr, and the third assumption was that some other side interfered to escalate the situation with Israel, or to create internal sedition and sectarian strife.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"After over 30 days on Bir Al-Abed explosion, and after the intelligence\\\\\\\'s arrests and our investigations, we have reached the result, and the names of those who planted the explosive on Hermel road are now known, and one of them is under arrest… as for the names of those involved in Bir Al-Abed blast, they are now 99.99% known,\\\\\\\" he revealed. Sayyed Nasrallah indicated that investigations have not yet revealed that the committers were operational agents of Israel. \\\\\\\"They are rather affiliated with a certain Takfiri line… some of them are Lebanese, some are Syrians, and some are Palestinians.\\\\\\\" His eminence assured that intelligence apparatuses have informed Hezbollah about certain sides preparing booby-trapped cars to send them to Dahieh, emphasizing that \\\\\\\"all our measures in Dahieh were in response to the official apparatuses\\\\\\\' information.\\\\\\\" On this point, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that \\\\\\\"these (Takfiri) groups work for Israel, and undoubtedly, US and some regional countries\\\\\\\' intelligences are operating these sides.\\\\\\\" He highlighted that \\\\\\\"yesterday they put (explosives) in Dahieh, but who knows where they could put them tomorrow? Neither Israel nor Takfiris care if they were in Dahieh or somewhere else. Those kill Sunnis just like they kill Shiites, they kill Christians just like they kill Muslims, and they bomb mosques just like they bomb churches.\\\\\\\" As his eminence asserted that Takfiri groups could plant booby-trapped cars anywhere in Lebanon, he warned officials, politicians, security apparatuses, and all the Lebanese that \\\\\\\"yesterday\\\\\\\'s explosion was under control and the situation was under control, but if these explosions continue, Lebanon will be on the verge of Abyss. Therefore, responsible actions must be taken for Lebanon to confront this threat\\\\\\\". Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that the right precautionary measures should be taken and the government as well as its apparatuses must hold their responsibilities, if not to prevent suicide attacks, as this is impossible, then at least to minimize losses, stressing \\\\\\\"the importance of finding the sides sending explosives-laden cars and arresting them… as well as the importance of not giving any political or security cover to these groups.\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah further emphasized \\\\\\\"the importance of abandoning sectarian incitements, so that the conflict remains political.\\\\\\\" Addressing people who were affected by Thursday\\\\\\\'s terror attack, Hezbollah leader said: \\\\\\\"We are aware of your patience, courage and faith, and the biggest exam was in July war… They want to harm your determination and faith, but we are certain of your faith and these aims will fail. What we fear is that those murderers drag you to uncalculated reactions which would lead to sedition and the destruction of the country…\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"(Those killers) neither have a nation nor a religion, and they are not Sunnis. They killed Sunnis even more than they killed Shiites. They seek to create a fight between the Lebanese and the (Palestinian refugee) camps. These murderers are a group of terrorists and the owners of a destructive project in the whole region, not just in Lebanon. In Iraq, there is clear evidence about the western, regional, and Israeli intelligences operating the murderers there,\\\\\\\" he added. In conclusion, Sayyed Nasrallah called on his people to \\\\\\\"stay patient and send a clear message that exploding and killing will not affect our morale, and it will not throw us in the trap of sedition. This is the responsibility of everyone in Lebanon, because if this situation continues, it could reach the verge of ambyss.\\\\\\\" His eminence also addressed the murderers, saying: \\\\\\\"If you work for Israel, we know you and we will capture you if the state neglected that. Yet he indicated that \\\\\\\"we are not a substitute for the state, but in any field the state does not hold its responsibility in, we will hold this responsibility.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"If you claim you are defending the Syrian people and punishing Hezbollah over its intervention in Syria, I tell you two things: You, the Takfiri groups are the harshest killers of the Syrian people. You even kidnapped and killed Christian priests who supported the opposition. You kill children and explode mosques.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"As for us, we fight with our values. We have never killed a captive, while you prosecute captives in daylight. We have never killed citizens, and in some of our battles, a larger number of martyrs fell in order to protect citizens, and all what is said about massacres committed by us are lies and fabrications.\\\\\\\" Criticizing the fabrications of some Arab media stations, he assured that \\\\\\\"the world will witness that we have only fought Takfiri groups in Syria.\\\\\\\" Finally, Sayyed Nasrallah said: \\\\\\\"One of our responses to such explosions is: If we had 1000 fighters in Syria, they will become 2000, and if we had 5000, they will become 10 000, and if the battle with those terrorists required that I go with all Hezbollah to Syria, we will all go for the sake of Syria and its people, Lebanon and its people, Palestine and Al-Quds, and the central cause.\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\"We put an end to the battle, and we set a time for this battle to end, and as we triumphed in all our wars with Israel, if you wanted us to enter a fierce battle with you, I assure to everyone that we will triumph against Takfiri terror. The cost of the battle will be high, but the least cost is being slaughtered like ewes and waiting for the murderers to come into our house.\\\\\\\" Source: http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=106457&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=14&s1=1

Hezbollah Secretary General, his Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, delivered a speech on Friday, August 16th, 2013, marking the 7th anniversary of the July 2006 Victory of the Islamic Resistance against the Israeli army. Sayyed Nasrallah to Takfiris: We will Capture You, We will Put an End to Terror Sara Taha Moughnieh Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivered a speech on Friday, during a ceremony celebrating the seventh anniversary of victory in the July 2006 war. Sayyed NasrallahHis eminence started his speech with a greeting to the martyrs and wounded who fell only one day before the celebration in the terrorist blast which hit Ruwais street in the Southern Suburb of Beirut. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"I pray for the recovery of all the wounded from the large and dangerous terrorist attack, and I offer my condolences to the families of martyrs who fell, and to all those who were affected physically, mentally, spiritually, and on the material level yesterday. We highly appreciate, admire, and respect the patience of people and the citizens of Dahieh who held responsibility, and were conscious, disciplined, and civilized,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he said. As he expressed gratitude for all those who stood in solidarity and denounced this painful event, Sayyed Nasrallah condemned the silence of some countries, considering that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"days will prove that they support terrorism, murder, and crime taking place in our region\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". July 2006 victory put an end to \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Greater Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" project Sayyed Nasrallah initiated his statement with words about the victory, pointing out that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the celebration was arranged to take place in Aita Al-Shaab, because it overlooks occupied Palestine, and its air is Palestinian air. Hence, you are smelling the air of occupied Palestine, and you are gathering only a stone\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s throw away from the enemy.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" His eminence further stressed that Aita\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s significance was with its symbolic representation, especially with its good hearted and firm people, its brave heroes, its martyrs, and liberated captives. Sayyed Nasrallah talked about the faithfulness of the resistance fighters who were located in Aita Al-Shaab, referring to the devoutness of those men to the path of Master of Martyrs, Imam Hussein (pbuh). July 2006 victory celebrationHe also paid gratitude to the citizens of this village, who returned to their land just hours after ceasefire in 2006, and built tents over the ruins of their houses, to sit in them. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Your historic victory in the 25th of May 2000 defeated the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"greater Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" project, because the Israeli army, which failed to stay in Lebanon, the weakest Arab country, cannot build a state from the Nile to Furat. Then the 14th of August 2006 victory , defeated Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s project of being a great country, which dominates and imposes its decisions on the region and on Iran,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. Hezbollah Secretary General added that the July 2006 victory also proved that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"this organized popular resistance, which is embraced by its people, is capable of forming real defense, at a time when the country does not have the capacities and technologies which the attacking enemy has, and the evidence on that was presented in the July war.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah warned the Israeli enemy that the resistance will not allow one Israeli soldier to set a foot in the Lebanese territories, indicating that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"we will not be tolerant in defending our villages, lands, and people.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" He further addressed the Israelis, saying: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The era of Israeli military tourism on the borders with Lebanon, and inside the Lebanese territories is over, with no return.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Response to Dahieh blast is by duplicating number of fighters in Syria In another context, Sayyed Nasrallah tackled the recent assaults on Dahieh, specifically Thursday\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s tragic attack which left over 20 killed and hundreds wounded. He indicated that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"targeting people and citizens in Dahieh and other places is nothing new. When the enemy failed, it always resorted to hitting people, even those who had no relation with the resistance. The history of Israeli wars in Qana, Dahieh, Sheyah, and other places in July war is a clear witness on that. The enemy takes such action because it knows that this is our point of weakness when it fails in confronting us militarily.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"This is a point of pride for us, as it points out that the relation between the resistance and the people is an emotional, humanitarian, moral, and spiritual relation, and that both are one. The resistance had never acted like it was an imported resistance, like some fighters act these days, hence they don’t care about people. Not at all, as throughout the past years, the resistance had never performed a military or resistance operation without taking into consideration the responses, and protecting people, until April Accord came out to protect them,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah added. From this point, his eminence considered that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"when there is a resistance, and people whom it shares their feelings, and suffers from their pains, this is a point of power on one hand, and a point of weakness on the other, which the enemy uses. What happened yesterday was an attack on people. It wasn’t an assassination. There wasn’t any Hezbollah official or location targeted, but the side which committed the massacre in Dahieh wanted to leave behind the largest number of casualties among people.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" He stated that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the bomb weighted over 100 KGs, and at this location in specific, like the case in Bir Al-Abed explosion, the goal was only to kill people.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed NasrallahHezbollah secretary general asserted that the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"massacre comes in the context of a wide and open battle which has been taking place since tens of years… as long as there is a group resisting and refusing to surrender to the American-Zionist will, then naturally, this group and its environment will bare this responsibility.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah assured that the rockets that hit Baalbak and its neighborhoods in the last few weeks were fired by armed Syrian groups, adding that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"rockets on Hermel, Majdal Anjar, Zahle, and Dahieh were targeting us, and the large explosion on the 9th of August targeted our people and environment. Yet we did not make a quick response… we did not accuse anyone.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" However, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"after Bir Al-Abed blast, some Lebanese parts claimed that Hezbollah planted the explosive as a pretext to ignite the situation. This is defamation and unjust, as you cannot find anyone who would love these people, and kiss the soil under the feet of these people like Hezbollah and its leadership does… This is how you work, but not how Hezbollah does.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" His eminence pointed out that during investigations about these assaults, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the first assumption was that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Israel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" was behind them, while the second was the terrorist groups who have declared war on Hezbollah long before the latter entered Al-Qusayr, and the third assumption was that some other side interfered to escalate the situation with Israel, or to create internal sedition and sectarian strife.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"After over 30 days on Bir Al-Abed explosion, and after the intelligence\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s arrests and our investigations, we have reached the result, and the names of those who planted the explosive on Hermel road are now known, and one of them is under arrest… as for the names of those involved in Bir Al-Abed blast, they are now 99.99% known,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he revealed. Sayyed Nasrallah indicated that investigations have not yet revealed that the committers were operational agents of Israel. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"They are rather affiliated with a certain Takfiri line… some of them are Lebanese, some are Syrians, and some are Palestinians.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" His eminence assured that intelligence apparatuses have informed Hezbollah about certain sides preparing booby-trapped cars to send them to Dahieh, emphasizing that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"all our measures in Dahieh were in response to the official apparatuses\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' information.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" On this point, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"these (Takfiri) groups work for Israel, and undoubtedly, US and some regional countries\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' intelligences are operating these sides.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" He highlighted that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"yesterday they put (explosives) in Dahieh, but who knows where they could put them tomorrow? Neither Israel nor Takfiris care if they were in Dahieh or somewhere else. Those kill Sunnis just like they kill Shiites, they kill Christians just like they kill Muslims, and they bomb mosques just like they bomb churches.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" As his eminence asserted that Takfiri groups could plant booby-trapped cars anywhere in Lebanon, he warned officials, politicians, security apparatuses, and all the Lebanese that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"yesterday\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s explosion was under control and the situation was under control, but if these explosions continue, Lebanon will be on the verge of Abyss. Therefore, responsible actions must be taken for Lebanon to confront this threat\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that the right precautionary measures should be taken and the government as well as its apparatuses must hold their responsibilities, if not to prevent suicide attacks, as this is impossible, then at least to minimize losses, stressing \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the importance of finding the sides sending explosives-laden cars and arresting them… as well as the importance of not giving any political or security cover to these groups.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Sayyed Nasrallah further emphasized \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the importance of abandoning sectarian incitements, so that the conflict remains political.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Addressing people who were affected by Thursday\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s terror attack, Hezbollah leader said: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We are aware of your patience, courage and faith, and the biggest exam was in July war… They want to harm your determination and faith, but we are certain of your faith and these aims will fail. What we fear is that those murderers drag you to uncalculated reactions which would lead to sedition and the destruction of the country…\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"(Those killers) neither have a nation nor a religion, and they are not Sunnis. They killed Sunnis even more than they killed Shiites. They seek to create a fight between the Lebanese and the (Palestinian refugee) camps. These murderers are a group of terrorists and the owners of a destructive project in the whole region, not just in Lebanon. In Iraq, there is clear evidence about the western, regional, and Israeli intelligences operating the murderers there,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" he added. In conclusion, Sayyed Nasrallah called on his people to \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"stay patient and send a clear message that exploding and killing will not affect our morale, and it will not throw us in the trap of sedition. This is the responsibility of everyone in Lebanon, because if this situation continues, it could reach the verge of ambyss.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" His eminence also addressed the murderers, saying: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If you work for Israel, we know you and we will capture you if the state neglected that. Yet he indicated that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"we are not a substitute for the state, but in any field the state does not hold its responsibility in, we will hold this responsibility.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If you claim you are defending the Syrian people and punishing Hezbollah over its intervention in Syria, I tell you two things: You, the Takfiri groups are the harshest killers of the Syrian people. You even kidnapped and killed Christian priests who supported the opposition. You kill children and explode mosques.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"As for us, we fight with our values. We have never killed a captive, while you prosecute captives in daylight. We have never killed citizens, and in some of our battles, a larger number of martyrs fell in order to protect citizens, and all what is said about massacres committed by us are lies and fabrications.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Criticizing the fabrications of some Arab media stations, he assured that \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the world will witness that we have only fought Takfiri groups in Syria.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Finally, Sayyed Nasrallah said: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"One of our responses to such explosions is: If we had 1000 fighters in Syria, they will become 2000, and if we had 5000, they will become 10 000, and if the battle with those terrorists required that I go with all Hezbollah to Syria, we will all go for the sake of Syria and its people, Lebanon and its people, Palestine and Al-Quds, and the central cause.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"We put an end to the battle, and we set a time for this battle to end, and as we triumphed in all our wars with Israel, if you wanted us to enter a fierce battle with you, I assure to everyone that we will triumph against Takfiri terror. The cost of the battle will be high, but the least cost is being slaughtered like ewes and waiting for the murderers to come into our house.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" Source: http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=106457&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=14&s1=1

The biggest donor to the U-S Republican Party, Sheldon Adelson says America should begin negotiations with Iran only after nuking it. Adelson made the comments at Yeshiva University in New York, criticizing Washington\'s recent diplomatic outreach to Tehran. The gambling mogul donated nearly a hundred million dollars to Republicans last year. He\'s seen as an influential figure in devising U-S policies in favor of Israel. The 80-year-old is also a powerful figure inside Israel. He owns a Tel Aviv newspaper that frequently magnifies warnings from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Iran would pose an existential threat to Israel.