[25 Feb 2014] Pakistan most terror-hit nation: Report - English
Dealing with violent security situation still remains a serious challenge in Pakistan.
Now after months of consultations, Pakistan government has...
Dealing with violent security situation still remains a serious challenge in Pakistan.
Now after months of consultations, Pakistan government has finally approved a new national security policy. The 86-page document gives a rare insight into the country\'s current security problems. According to the first-ever national security policy document, close to 50,000 people were killed in Pakistan among them over 5000 personnel of the law-enforcement agencies since the country joined the so-called US-led war on terror after 9/11 attacks in 2001. The document goes on to estimate the total loss to economy in the last ten years because of terrorism at $78 billion.
1m:51s
5393
Comparing Two Opposites: Ali (A) and Muawiyah | Agha Rahimpour...
How did Imam Ali (A) approach politics and war? How did Muawiyah? What were their methods of dealing with the enemy? No judgements, just...
How did Imam Ali (A) approach politics and war? How did Muawiyah? What were their methods of dealing with the enemy? No judgements, just cold, hard facts from Agha Rahimpour Azghadi.
3m:38s
14244
Video Tags:
Pure,
Stream,
Media,
PureStreamMedia,
Rahimpour,
Azghadi,
Agha,
Imam,
Ali,
Muawiyah,
Opposites,
Comparing,
Comparison,
Politics,
Warship,
War,
Fight,
Deal,
Dealing,
Enemy,
Enemies,
Judgements,
Calipha,
Khalifa,
Khulfa,
America Should be Ashamed of how it is dealing with COVID19 | CubeSync |...
Despite Americaβs collapse into Covid-19 chaos, there are *STILL* people who insist on either worshipping Trump as some sort of hero, or pinning...
Despite Americaβs collapse into Covid-19 chaos, there are *STILL* people who insist on either worshipping Trump as some sort of hero, or pinning the blame ENTIRELY on this humble President. Actually, the time has come for all to recognise that the AMERICAN leadership, the American system and the American dream TOGETHER have plunged the world into turmoil and doomed the people of the USA; embroiled in the virus-infested bloodbath of 2020. Americans should be utterly ASHAMED.
#Covid19 #Coronavirus #TrumpVirus #Covid1984 #Covid1948
5m:50s
6173
Video Tags:
islamicpulse,
production,
covid
19
america,
covid
19
america
analysis,
american
leadership,
American
system,
American
Dream,
Trump,
pinning
blame,
america
ashamed,
covid
19
chaos
america
dealing
covid
19,
turmoil,
doomed
people
USA,
virus
infested
bloodbath,
american
should
ashamed,
cubesync
shahryar
naqvi
Dealing With INDECENT CONTENT In Islam | English
FREE COURSES!
π‘ Tawhid
π‘ Resurrection
π‘ Tajweed
π‘ Arabic Alphabet
π‘ Fiqh β Ahkam β Jaβfari Madhab
π‘ Karbala and...
FREE COURSES!
π‘ Tawhid
π‘ Resurrection
π‘ Tajweed
π‘ Arabic Alphabet
π‘ Fiqh β Ahkam β Jaβfari Madhab
π‘ Karbala and moreβ¦β¦β¦β¦..!
π‘ www.ilme.net.au
DONATE!
As you may know that this is a non-profit organisation and your help is much needed to continue this project. Become a monthly donor and help us create more content. Sometimes people do not realise that most video editors have to pay for yearly if not monthly subscriptions for their programs. They also have website costs and other related things. What we have to remember is that every cent is a source of Sadaqa Jariya β a reward that continues to benefit you even after we have left this world. And what better reward can it be than passing down knowledge through millions of people and generations to come in shaa Allah.
https://islamiclessonsmadeeasy.com.au/donate/
FOLLOW US!
π‘ www.facebook.com/islamiclessonsmadeeasy
π‘ www.youtube.com/islamiclessonsmadeeasy
π‘ www.instagram.com /Islamic_lessons_me
π‘ www.islamiclessonsmadeeasy.com.au
π‘ www.ilme.net.au
π‘ www.Shiatv.net/user/islamiclessons
4m:45s
1429
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah - Speech - October 30, 2020 - Milad an-Nabi -...
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] has a vital miracle that will remain until the day of resurrection, which is witnessed in all times;...
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] has a vital miracle that will remain until the day of resurrection, which is witnessed in all times; it is the holy book that Allah has sent him, the Holy Quran.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The survival of this holy book in this accurate manner is a miracle in itself despite all reasons to distort it.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The most notable achievement of Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] is the humanitarian achievement he made in the deep and huge transformation of the Arabian Peninsula community.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: All Muslims respect, sanctify, and appreciate this great prophet unlike any other human, though they love and appreciate all other prophets.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Among the most important social points for Muslims is that they believe in the rank and the greatness of Prophet Muhammad [PBUH], and they view him as the most complete human and the closest creature to Allah the almighty.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Muslims could never tolerate any insult or humiliation directed at the great prophet, and they consider defending the dignity of their prophet among the top priorities that is above all other interests and calculations.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The Nice incident is strongly condemned and rejected by Islam, the religion that forbids killing or attacking civilians. All similar attacks are rejected in the first place from Islam\'s viewpoint.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Neither the French authorities nor others are permitted to hold responsible the religion or the community of the religion to which the perpetrator belongs.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: If a Christian man commits such a crime, which happened indeed in France, is it right to say that all world\'s Christians are responsible for this crime?
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The US today commits crimes all over the world, and they admit the killing of thousands in such wars. Did any Muslim accuse Christians of those crimes just because the US President is Christian?
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Respecting Islam as a religion requires not using the terms of \"Islamic terrorism\" and \"Islamic fascism\"
π Sayyed Nasrallah: If some Muslims offended Islam it doesn\'t give the right to any other side to offend it too.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The Takfiri terrorist ideology, which adopted killing just for ideological differences in our region, was protected by the West.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The West has, in the first place, to look for its responsibility for Takfiri groups.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The US administration and the European governments supported and funded Takfiri groups in Syria and Iraq.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] and the Muslim nation have nothing to do with the crimes committed by the Takfiri groups.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The Americans and the Europeans should reassess their behavior of using terrorists as tools in their political schemes and wars.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Using such kind of tools must stop, otherwise you [the US and the West] will pay the prices for those mistakes.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The crisis began when the French magazine published cartoons insulting Prophet Muhammad [PBUH], & the French authorities, instead of dealing with the issue, started a war of this kind & insisted to continue publishing such sarcastic cartoons.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Instead of dealing with the repercussions, the French authorities should deal with the reasons. We have many evidences that they suppressed the freedom of expression in less sensitive issues that insulting the Prophet.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Instead of dealing with the repercussions, the French authorities should deal with the reasons. We have many evidences that they suppressed the freedom of expression in less sensitive issues that insulting the Prophet.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Freedom of expression in France and Europe is not absolute, it is rather restricted with security and political considerations. When it comes to \'Israel\', this freedom stops in France, and the examples are many. Why does it stop when it comes to anti-Semitism?
π Sayyed Nasrallah: We demand reassessing the concept of the freedom of expression, especially when it harms dignities. The French authorities should deal with this grave mistake.
π Sayyed Nasrallah addressing French authorities: Do not allow the progress of this aggression, violation and sarcasm. Offending the dignities of our Prophets is not accepted by any Muslim in the world.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The Arab regimes that normalize with \'Israel\' can not remain silent and cover such offense against the sacred prophet for their people.
π Sayyed Nasrallah to the French authorities: You will lose this battle that you insist to continue. Where are France\'s interests in its relations with the Muslim world if it wants to continue in this situation?
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The responsibility for dealing with what happened in France is related to the French authorities\' performance.
π Sayyed Nasrallah hailed the strong significances of the Yemenis\' presence in defending the Prophet [PBUH] despite all difficulties: Despite the siege and war in Yemen, we find the Yemeni people assemble to celebrate the Prophet\'s birth anniversary.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: Muslims and the world should read yesterday\'s scene in Yemen with fidelity and religious background. And a major movement must be formed in the Arab world to press for ending this brutal war against Yemen. It is the least of our duties.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: The most significant thing Muslims would present today to Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] is to support the Yemeni people.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: We can not continue with a caretaker government. Hezbollah\'s information say that the cabinet formation circumstances are good and acceptable. We will cooperate and facilitate the formation. Time now is not for internal problems.
π Sayyed Nasrallah: I repeat and recall that leniency in the battle with the Coronavirus is unethical, inhumane and illegitimate. The responsibility for fighting the Coronavirus belongs to everybody; the government and people, not the Health Ministry alone.
60m:2s
3278
Video Tags:
prophet,
muhammad,
milad,
nabi,
france,
islamophobia,
macron,
sayyed,
hassan,
nasrallah,
hezbollah,
zionist
project,
miracle,
freedom
of
speech,
islamophobia,
quran,
allah,
love-muhammad
911 Debate - Loose Change vs. Popular Mechanics pt. 1 - Eng
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and...
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and Pennsylvania. Websites articles books and documentaries have put forward a variety of alternate theories to the governments account of what happened. The most popular of these is a documentary called LOOSE CHANGE. Now a book dealing with many of these theories has just been published by the magazine Popular Mechanics. It is called DEBUNKING 911 MYTHS. Democracy Now! hostS a debate between the filmmakers of Loose Change and the editors of Popular Mechanics on 911.
7m:15s
8314
911 Debate - Loose Change vs. Popular Mechanics pt. 2 - Eng
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and...
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and Pennsylvania. Websites articles books and documentaries have put forward a variety of alternate theories to the governments account of what happened. The most popular of these is a documentary called LOOSE CHANGE. Now a book dealing with many of these theories has just been published by the magazine Popular Mechanics. It is called DEBUNKING 911 MYTHS. Democracy Now! hostS a debate between the filmmakers of Loose Change and the editors of Popular Mechanics on 911.
8m:8s
7769
911 Debate - Loose Change vs. Popular Mechanics pt. 3 - Engl
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and...
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and Pennsylvania. Websites articles books and documentaries have put forward a variety of alternate theories to the governments account of what happened. The most popular of these is a documentary called LOOSE CHANGE. Now a book dealing with many of these theories has just been published by the magazine Popular Mechanics. It is called DEBUNKING 911 MYTHS. Democracy Now! hostS a debate between the filmmakers of Loose Change and the editors of Popular Mechanics on 911.
8m:8s
7667
911 Debate - Loose Change vs. Popular Mechanics pt. 4 - Engl
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and...
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and Pennsylvania. Websites articles books and documentaries have put forward a variety of alternate theories to the governments account of what happened. The most popular of these is a documentary called LOOSE CHANGE. Now a book dealing with many of these theories has just been published by the magazine Popular Mechanics. It is called DEBUNKING 911 MYTHS. Democracy Now! hostS a debate between the filmmakers of Loose Change and the editors of Popular Mechanics on 911.
5m:21s
7774
911 Debate - Loose Change vs. Popular Mechanics pt. 5 - Engl
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and...
September 11 2001 - five years after the attacks many people are asking questions about what happened on that day in New York Washington and Pennsylvania. Websites articles books and documentaries have put forward a variety of alternate theories to the governments account of what happened. The most popular of these is a documentary called LOOSE CHANGE. Now a book dealing with many of these theories has just been published by the magazine Popular Mechanics. It is called DEBUNKING 911 MYTHS. Democracy Now! hostS a debate between the filmmakers of Loose Change and the editors of Popular Mechanics on 911.
7m:26s
7876
Part 2 (Must Watch) Tehran Sermon - Rehbar Syed Ali Khamenie...
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution has described the \\\\\\\'unprecedented\\\\\\\' turnout of almost 85% in the election as a \\\\\\\'political...
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution has described the \\\\\\\'unprecedented\\\\\\\' turnout of almost 85% in the election as a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy.
Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said high turnout in the election, which witnessed more than 40 million Iranians casting their votes, was a great manifestation of people\\\\\\\'s solidarity with the Islamic establishment.
Addressing Friday prayers congregation, Ayatollah Khamenei said that last Friday\\\\\\\'s election indicated a \\\\\\\'common sense of responsibility\\\\\\\' of the Iranian nation to determine the future of the country.
The Leader added that all those who took part in the election proved their \\\\\\\'political consciousness and commitment\\\\\\\' towards the establishment to the whole world.
The Leader said the high voter turnout in the election was a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy and a \\\\\\\'real celebration\\\\\\\' for the friends of the country.
\\\\\\\"The Islamic Republic of Iran will by no means betray the votes of the nation,\\\\\\\" the Leader said, adding the legal system of the election will not allow any ballot rigging in Iran.
Ayatollah Khamenei, however, maintained that the Guardian Council, the body tasked with overseeing the election, would look into the complaints of the candidates who are unhappy with the election results.
The Leader also added that the establishment would never give-in to illegal demands, urging all presidential candidates to pursue their complaints through legal channels. Ayatollah Khamenei called for an end to illegal street protests aimed at reversing the result of the election.
Following the announcement of the election outcome, supporters of the defeated candidate Mir-Hussein Mousavi-who rejected the election results-- took to the streets of Tehran and other cities in daily rallies.
The Leader also warned against attempts made by foreign media outlets seeking to destabilize the country and blamed Britain in particular. Ayatollah Khamenei also decried the slander of former and incumbent top officials in pre-election debates by candidates.
President Ahmadinejad was re-elected the next president of the country with over 60% percent of the votes.
He won over his three rivals Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaei with almost 25 million votes.
The Leader said the time is over for rivalry, stressing that all should unite and line up behind the president-elect
Complete Transcript
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610
In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing.
In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country.
I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election.
I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media.
On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment.
The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system.
Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote.
In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us.
It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence.
Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense.
Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored.
Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system.
Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement.
My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory.
Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system.
This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy.
This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene.
This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country.
This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election.
If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election.
Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment.
They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout.
A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other.
For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game.
This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today.
I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily.
For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts.
The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed.
These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent.
Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system.
The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue.
The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment.
Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system.
I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism.
I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted.
My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue.
Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution.
People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent.
Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities.
They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon.
The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects.
All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people.
They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated.
One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice.
These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates.
Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings.
Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth.
If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates.
But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate.
There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made.
This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions.
They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me.
For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems.
On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere.
I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law.
On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures.
They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption.
Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities.
You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation.
Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures.
He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date.
On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities.
For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know.
In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people.
The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine.
The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that.
The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced.
There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country.
We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources.
Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it.
Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countriesβ¦. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized.
Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat.
They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this.
The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution.
It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust.
In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process.
When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place?
However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands.
If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system.
Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this.
I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries.
We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now.
Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people.
It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues.
I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy.
In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain.
I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say.
All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want.
If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections?
Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda.
It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this?
They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership.
Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents.
It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country.
Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time.
I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly.
The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries.
Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters.
When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal.
When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave.
Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks.
Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe?
Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security.
This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services.
The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution.
Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people.
American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime?
During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights?
In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment!
45m:31s
49836
[FULL SPEECH] Supreme Leader Ayatullah Sayyed Ali Khamenei - Friday...
Complete Transcript
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610
In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended...
Complete Transcript
http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610
In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing.
In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country.
I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election.
I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media.
On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment.
The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system.
Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote.
In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us.
It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence.
Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense.
Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored.
Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system.
Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement.
My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory.
Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system.
This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy.
This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene.
This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country.
This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election.
If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election.
Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment.
They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout.
A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other.
For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game.
This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today.
I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily.
For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts.
The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed.
These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent.
Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system.
The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue.
The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment.
Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system.
I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism.
I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted.
My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue.
Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution.
People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent.
Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities.
They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon.
The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects.
All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people.
They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated.
One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice.
These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates.
Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings.
Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth.
If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates.
But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate.
There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made.
This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions.
They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me.
For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems.
On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere.
I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law.
On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures.
They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption.
Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities.
You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation.
Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures.
He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date.
On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities.
For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know.
In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people.
The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine.
The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that.
The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced.
There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country.
We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources.
Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it.
Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countriesβ¦. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized.
Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat.
They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this.
The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution.
It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust.
In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process.
When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place?
However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands.
If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system.
Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this.
I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries.
We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now.
Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people.
It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues.
I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy.
In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain.
I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say.
All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want.
If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections?
Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda.
It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this?
They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership.
Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents.
It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country.
Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time.
I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly.
The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries.
Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters.
When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal.
When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave.
Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks.
Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe?
Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security.
This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services.
The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution.
Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people.
American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime?
During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights?
In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment!
Supreme Leader Ayatullah Sayyed Ali Khamenei - Friday Prayer Speech - 19Jun09 - English
105m:31s
53975
Hassan Abbasi on US doctrines against Iran and Political Islam since...
Lecture on American strategic doctrines since Cold War against Russia and their propaganda campaign. time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,11...
Lecture on American strategic doctrines since Cold War against Russia and their propaganda campaign. time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,11 51823,00.html
"A slow squeeze for the Iranian frog"
Good Cop Bad Cop: Many in the US capital doubt the effectiveness of Europe's softer approach to Iran. Danielle
Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute, an influential neoconservative thinktank, says: "The longer we wait
and the more we negotiate, the longer Iran has to pursue a covert program." The road to co-operation between
Europe and the US involves pursuing the "good cop, bad cop" routine because it will force the Iranians to be
serious about dealing with the friendlier party. However, there's a suspicion in the US and in Europe, and a
strong certainty in Iran, that when push comes to shove, the Europeans aren't going to be willing to cut the
ties with the Iranians and say simply that Iran has been cheating, the deal is broken. We need to persuade the
Europeans that even if you're the good cop, you have to be prepared to pull the gun and make the arrest. Iran
was expected to respond to the IAEA report Wednesday.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4290161.stm
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0302/dailyUpdate.html
9m:57s
6755
Conver(t)sations: the Unheard Stories of Muslim Converts -...
This panel was a part of 2nd Annual ICNYU Conference held during the first weekend of February at New York University. Panelists included Suhaib...
This panel was a part of 2nd Annual ICNYU Conference held during the first weekend of February at New York University. Panelists included Suhaib Webb, Raymond Brock Murray, Lisa Shah, Will Caldwell, Musa Bryant, Megan Putney, Whitney Terrill, Lisa Shah, Peter Casey, Cyrus McGoldrick , Jay Dabhi and the discussion was facilitated by Khalid Latif.
Usually when the convert experience is discussed in a Muslim community, the discussion focuses on why the individual converted. Although there is a great benefit in hearing these stories, the discussion never deepens into issues a convert faces after converting. This panel discusses the real experiences that converts face in dealing with the Muslim community after converting as well as issues with family, relationship, education, and many other topics.
ICNYU started the Conver(t)sations program this past January. This program aims to establish an entry point into the community for those who have converted or reverted to Islam. It can be hard for many of us to fit in and find a comfortable place in the Muslim community, and those who are converts are no exception to this. Our hope is to provide an outlet for socializing, mentorship, and discussion that makes the transition process easier for our brothers and sisters who have made the decision to embrace the faith.
122m:31s
7968
Pakistanis stage solidarity rally with Bahrainis - 17Apr2011 - English
Despite scorching temperatures, thousands of Pakistanis took to the street of the port city of Karachi to protest against what they say is the...
Despite scorching temperatures, thousands of Pakistanis took to the street of the port city of Karachi to protest against what they say is the passive response and double standards of the international community in dealing with Bahrain.
2m:31s
9445
Reverse or Rewind Timeline Animations Flash Tutorial Beginning CS3 CS4 -...
Learn how to script reverse animations or manually reverse them in Flash CS3, CS4, CS5, or CS8000. This ActionScript 3.0 trick may save you time...
Learn how to script reverse animations or manually reverse them in Flash CS3, CS4, CS5, or CS8000. This ActionScript 3.0 trick may save you time when dealing with long intricate timeline animations that you need reversed. It may be just the Flash AS3 tip you needed.
13m:37s
6605
Tariq Ali - Whenever West intervenes, its a disaster - May 19, 2011 -...
In the past few hours, the U.S. confirmed it's imposing sanctions on Syria's president for human rights abuses, following the violent crackdowns on...
In the past few hours, the U.S. confirmed it's imposing sanctions on Syria's president for human rights abuses, following the violent crackdowns on anti-government protesters. The measures are the first to target President Assad personally. They include an asset freeze and bar Americans from dealing with him. The restrictions also apply to six senior Syrian officials. Let's discuss these developments with Middle East expert Tariq Ali.
5m:58s
5185
Retro/Glam Sparkles and Shines Illustrator Tutorial - English
In the following video we will cover how to create retro looking sparkles. The bulk of the video will cover the many advantages to using symbols...
In the following video we will cover how to create retro looking sparkles. The bulk of the video will cover the many advantages to using symbols when and where you can in your illustrations when dealing with many of the same graphic objects. Learn to edit 100's of objects in no time, and learn about many of the symbolism tools available to you in Adobe Illustrator! Please enjoy responsibly and check out.
18m:41s
4661
Mohammad Javad Larijani Interview with MSNBC - He Just Shut Up CFR...
Iran's Secretary General of the High Council for Human Rights, Mohammad Javad Larijani has said that the recent claims by the International Atomic...
Iran's Secretary General of the High Council for Human Rights, Mohammad Javad Larijani has said that the recent claims by the International Atomic Energy Agency against Tehran are βlaughable.β
In his November 8 report on Iran's nuclear program, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano claimed that Iran had engaged in activities related to developing nuclear weapons before 2003, adding that these activities βmay still be ongoing.β
Based on the report, which Iran has called "unfounded and unbalanced," the IAEA Board of Governors on Friday passed a new resolution on the Islamic Republic's nuclear activities.
The resolution voices "deep and increasing concern" over Tehran's nuclear program and also calls for Iran and the IAEA to intensify dialogue to resolve the dispute over the issue.
Larijani made the remarks in a heated television debate aired on the American channel MSNBC.
US president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Dr. Richard Haass, Mike Barnicle and John Mitchun were the other guests on the television debate.
What follows is a rough transcription of the interview:
MSNBC: Let's go to the heart of the matter when it comes to Iran, the headlines of the past week, the IAEA report found evidence of nuclear weapons program in Iran and you are quoted as saying that is βquite laughable.β Why sir?
Larijani: The reason is very simple. There is no single evidence in that. These allegations which is aired again is based on a document which was put to us four years ago based on a laptop somewhere found by United States authorities.
And at that time, four years ago, it has been discussed with the agency and the conclusion was that none of these allegations could be verified.
So by a letter it has been closed- the whole issue. Then again it has been renewed and [let me] just give you an example. A good part of this so-called document which is on the laptop, for example lecture notes that somebody presented in Brussels or at some universities. Some of them are parts of some textbook as put together with pictures, formulas, so it is totally inconclusive.
MSNBC: Let's back up. Before I send this to Richard Haass- are you saying it doesn't exist? There is no nuclear program?
Larijani: Well we have a very extensive nuclear program but not to the direction of producing arms. Our nuclear project is very extensive, very advanced. We are number one in the Middle East but we are not pursuing the nuclear armament for two basic reasons.
Number one there is a Fatwa by Ayatollah Khamenei, the leader and it is against the Islamic jurisprudence to build and use mass destructing weapons. It is Haram we call it, unlawful.
And secondly, it doesn't add to our security. It is more liability than asset for us. Our military muscle is strong enough to repel or to deter any imminent threat and this is basically very important achievement.
MSNBC: Richard Haass, put this into perspective for us. What the reports were saying and what this gentleman is saying.
Haass: Well quite frankly it is impossible to take the Iranian denial seriously. They are preposterous. The International Atomic Energy Agency taking information from all the member states in the United Nations have put together a comprehensive and extraordinarily damning report.
And what there is, is a pattern, not a single incident, a pattern over years of Iranian program to move in the direction of developing nuclear weapons.
We see a procurement mechanism to gain access to all sorts of equipment, we see all sorts of undeclared efforts to produce nuclear material now up to 20 percent well on its way to what it needs to produce a weapon, most important there is now serious evidence about the Iranian testing of the implosive device that would actually be the heart of the nuclear weapon.
So the idea that the Iranians have all these underground and undeclared facilities, that they have been misleading the International Atomic Energy Agency for years, the idea they're doing this- this oil rich country in order to produce electricity? If you believe that you seriously have to believe in the tooth fairy.
MSNBC: Sir this doesn't sound like preposterous, little pieces of information that were roaming together randomly.
Larijani: Well the whole scenes of allegation is produced and initiated by the United States. It seems there is a good machinery to produce perpetual allegation against Iran, it is not only one case.
I am telling you exactly that there are no secret programs in our nuclear program and development. Iran's transparency is far ahead of United States, far ahead of UK, far ahead of France and incomparable to Israel which is a renegade state in the sense of NPT.
Barnicle: So you allow inspectors to just come into Iran.
Larijani: The inspectors are coming to Iran periodically, the cameras are there 24 hours. This is quite obvious.
Haass: But the whole concept the way this works, just when you talk about inspectors, let's just be clear, I am sure if everyone watching this will understand, the entire international nuclear inspection effort depends upon the willingness of the country in question to cooperate fully.
This is a gentlemen's agreement. They declare their facilities that are involved in the nuclear business then the inspectors come in and look at them. If they do not declare facilities the inspectors don't give a chance and the problem is this is a gentlemen's agreement in a world where not every country is a gentleman.
So Iran quite frankly has undeclared facilities and undeclared programs which the inspectors had not had access to and the reason we only know about it is that member states, not simply the United States sir, but many, many member states of the United Nations have provided independent information to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which by the way you know and I know is not controlled by the United States.
We have fundamental differences with this agency over the years including over Iraq. We had fundamental differences and we've also had differences over Iran where we the United States felt, this agency was not being nearly tough enough. So now they have come in with an extraordinarily damning report and Iranian officials can dismiss it.
MSNBC: So if this is a gentlemen's agreement, the gentlemen certainly don't agree and sir, you seem very confident and almost as if it's funny it's interesting because we interviewed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about this about a year ago, off camera, and he too seemed very comfortable about his position which is similar to yours.
And if you are so comfortable with your position about the lack of nuclear armament and the facilities that the IAEA is talking about, why not let inspectors completely come in? Open the door let them come in and see what you have.
Larijani: Well the mechanism that the gentleman addressed is not complete because first of all there is no single secret installment or activity which is concealed from the agency.
Secondly, two years ago we asked the agency tell us all the questions you have and he managed to put to us six groups of questions. The questions were raised by themselves not dictated by us. So one by one groups of inspectors came to Iran and we cleared them up and there is official letters from them this group has been finished then we moved to another one.
Well it doesn't make sense that every morning somebody says we guess there is some secret things done there. There should be foundation for this allegation. What do you mean the door should be open? They should ask where do you want to inspect? Did they want to inspect my bedroom or other places? I mean it doesn't make sense.
Barnicle: A few moments ago when you mentioned the nuclear programs of other nations I detected a definite edge in your voice when you mentioned the state of Israel. Do you fear an attack from the state of Israel on your nuclear facilities?
Larijani: Well I am beyond the fear. What is the difference between us and Israel? Israel has a bomb, not a member of NPT; it doesn't disclose anything to agency, nothing wrong with it. You see what the double standard is in here.
We are member of NPT, they periodically come to Iran, their cameras are there, we don't have the weapon then the whole pressure is put on us. No, not at all. We don't fear any attack from anyone. We take it serious in our calculation but we don't fear. There is a difference between that.
Mitchum: Given your tone again Sir when you talk about Israel, just a second ago why shouldn't we suspect that there would be ambitions for Iran to join the club of which Israel is a part with the nuclear arms?
Larijani: We are very advanced in the nuclear technology which is a matter of pride for us and that gentleman mentioned that we have plenty of gas and oil with all good calculations, the age of this is up to 20-25 period, 25 years from now.
It means that if we don't have it, then we should beg in front of the Western countries to light our houses and we know how bad they are treating us in this area. We are right now very happy that we have the first power plant, we know how to make the fuel. We already have more than 25 percent share of sodalite and erudite they don't give us a bit of this fuel that we need, even the twenty percent that we needed for Tehran.
Haass: It's important to keep in mind we are not talking about an established democracy that treats its own people with respect, we are talking about a country also that is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. So this is obvious and understandable concern about what Iran is doing.
Larijani: In terms of record I think United States of America is the largest and the greatest country supporting terrorism. The records of terrorist activity which is supported by the tax money of these people is enormous, I can go one by one.
Barnicle: Wait a minute. This is a free country. And part of our gift is we have the liberty and the freedom to say anything and to sound foolish, to sound absurd, to sound smart. That's absurd saying that America is the biggest terrorist nation in the world.
My question to you Sir is, you seem like a really nice guy, alright, why doesn't your country be a better neighbor?
Larijani: We have fantastic relations with all of our neighbors...
Barnicle: Really? [laughing]
Larijani: Definitely, but the policy of demonizing Iran, a very important policy which is pursued in the region- well it has its own benefit.
Barnicle But it's just in little things, like the American tourists cross the border, supposedly cross the border, you grab them, you scoop them, you hold them for months on end. Why?
Larijani: This is a very simple question I answered before; suppose the security of your people...
Barnicle You're here...
Larijani: No, I'm here with visa- It's quite different. [Suppose] The security of the United States' people, on a patrol with Mexico elsewhere they pick 3 Iranians and ask them why are you here? They say well we are just walking in the desert.
Well, with the whole hostility and suspicion which is between the two countries, you are in here to blow up somewhere definitely they will be put into jail for years if not in Guantanamo, they bring them somewhere else.
It took a lot of time that we convince- I was working on this case because they were like me from ... Berkeley. I talked with their families, managed to contact between them and their families when they were arrested- for their families to come to Iran to take the suspicion away.
This is very natural for security of people to suspect a cross bordering which is in the most volatile regional area of Iran- in which there is daily shooting over there.
Barnicle Ok. They're going to blow up the desert. What is the root? What do you think is the root of Iranian paranoia towards the United States and towards many of its neighbors?
What is the root of this paranoia? Is it the fear that we find out about your nuclear program?
Larijani: We don't have any paranoia about our neighbors. We are very suspicious of American paranoia with us. The question is what is wrong with Iran that this persistent hostility...
Barnicle: You have a track record of international terrorism.
Larijani: This is not true. We are ourselves the victim of international terrorism- terrorism in the area. Let me ask you, who was helping Al-Qaida and Taliban for years while we were at war with them in Afghanistan? The United States of America.
The money from the United States was pouring to Al-Qaida and Taliban- the idea was we should curb Iran by another religious front. Is it correct?
Haass: No it's not correct. The United States did support the Mujahidin; obviously in order to get rid of the Soviet... to say that the United States supported Al-Qaida is again preposterous- the fact is that Iran is supporting terrorism in Lebanon, it's supporting groups like Hezbollah, groups like Hamas; it is involved in Iraq; it is involved in Afghanistan.
Iran has basically become a regional power that is trying to destabilize many countries, trying to make them in some ways heavily influenced by Tehran and that is simply a fact of life- which again is one of the reasons the world is so concerned about Iranian nuclear program.
How do we know Iran will not become even more aggressive? How do we know that nuclear materials will not end in the hands of a group like Hezbollah? What do we see about Iran's track record that would lead us to believe that Iran in any way would be responsible with nuclear material?
This is a genuine concern and if you dismiss it as laughable Sir you are seriously underestimating not simply the American, not simply the Israeli, but I would suggest the world's concern over the direction your government is heading.
Larijani: The disastrous thing is the blind policy of the United States in supporting carte blanche renegade Israel which is the source of all tension in the region. If you call Hezbollah and Hamas terrorist groups- they are fighting to be given the permission to live. What about Israel?
Israel is involved in government sponsored terrorism. Kills anybody who thinks that it's not correct and deprives millions of people from basic tenures of life. 60 years of atrocity in that area is supported carte blanche by the US, this is even against the basic interests of that nation- they don't know it.
Mitchum:Sir do you recognize the right of Israel to exist?
Larijani: We recognize the rights of Jews, Christians and Muslims to live together in peace and tranquility- to create a racist regime in the middle of a land put the others out is like creating a small colony for the blacks and leave the rest for the whites.
Mitchum: Thank you for the answer.
Barnicle: The answer is no.
Larijani: No, the answer is not no. We respect any decision by Palestinians. We are not in a position to tell them what kind of state they [should] have. But they should be given the chance to decide.
MSNBC:This has been fascinating and a great picture window into the choices that Americans make when they're choosing their president and also a sense of what our Secretary of State and what our diplomats have to confront in dealing with when they're going out into the world and working with other countries.
It is extremely complicated and often conversations feel like they're going in circles because it's very hard to develop a common understanding or even a place where you can start engaging and I think this was an example of that. Mohammad Javad Larijani, thank you for coming on the show this morning.
20m:49s
14162
Court shown fatal US police beating video - 10May12 - All Languages
Two US police officers have been ordered to stand trial in the death of a mentally ill homeless man following a violent arrest last summer....
Two US police officers have been ordered to stand trial in the death of a mentally ill homeless man following a violent arrest last summer.
California's Orange County Superior Court Judge Walter Schwarm made the ruling after a hearing that included surveillance video of the confrontation between the officers and 37-year-old Kelly Thomas in the city of Fullerton.
Officer Manuel Ramos is charged with second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter. Jay Cicinelli is charged with involuntary manslaughter and assault or battery by a public officer. Both have pleaded not guilty.
The officers confronted Thomas while responding to reports that a homeless man was looking into parked cars at a transit center.
"This is another victory, on another battle," said Thomas' father, Ron. "We're going to start a new one with the trial."
John Barnett, Ramos' attorney, said he would seek another court's review of Schwarm's ruling and did not expect his client would end up facing a jury trial.
"We're disappointed that they were held to answer but we will seek review in an appropriate manner," he told reporters after the ruling. "He believes, and he is innocent."
Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas said during the hearing that Ramos bullied a shirtless Thomas with his menacing remarks and aggressive stance β actions that would have led anyone to fear they were about to get beaten by police.
"Any person, any creature on this earth would have fear at that point," Rackauckas told the court during the preliminary hearing.
"You're going to fight or flee because this is an imminent threat of a serious beating by a police officer who is there with a baton and a gun and other police officers.... This is going to be a very bad deal," the prosecutor said.
Defence attorneys countered that police β who are authorised and trained to use force when necessary β viewed the incident as an encounter with a man who refused to give his name and continued to resist arrest even as multiple officers rushed to assist.
The three-day hearing was marked by repeated showing of clips from surveillance video and audio recordings of the confrontation. The footage includes scenes of officers pummelling and pinning down Thomas as he screams that he can't breathe and moans for his father until he goes silent and is taken away by medics, leaving behind a pool of blood.
Barnett, Ramos' attorney, said during the hearing that the video β which was introduced by the prosecution β shows that his client made a conditional threat during his conversation with Thomas, stating he wanted the man to start listening and following police orders, such as sitting with his legs stretched out and providing his name to officers.
"All that Kelly Thomas had to do was simply comply," Barnett said. "Officer Ramos just lifts him up, he's going to arrest him. ... Not only can he do it, he must do it. He is bound to do it."
"Officer Ramos didn't do anything that should or could kill Kelly Thomas," Barnett said, pointing out that his client is often seen on the video at the man's feet.
Prosecutors have argued that Ramos punched Thomas in the ribs, tackled him and lay on him to hold him down while Cicinelli β who arrived later on the scene β used a Taser four times on Thomas as he hollered in pain and hit him in the face eight times with the Taser.
Thomas lost consciousness and was taken to a hospital. He was taken off life support and died five days later.
The coroner's office found that Thomas died from compression of his chest that made it difficult for him to breathe and deprived his brain of oxygen, and facial injuries stemming from his confrontation with law enforcement.
In court, Schwartz, Cicinelli's attorney, challenged those findings, noting that testimony by a paramedic who treated Thomas at the scene indicates that Thomas was breathing, although with difficulty, during the confrontation.
Schwartz also defended his client's use of the Taser on Thomas, who was still struggling and resisting officers' efforts to handcuff him, and said Cicinelli only swung the Taser at Thomas' hand when the man made an effort to grab the weapon.
"To call that a crime is to effectively handcuff our police officers out in the field from dealing with any combative suspect," Schwartz said.
The hearing in a Santa Ana courtroom was marked by lengthy testimony from medical experts and graphic photos of Thomas' injuries, including multiple bruises and a bloodied eye, while he was lying on the autopsy table.
Attorneys repeatedly played portions of the grainy surveillance video, which was paired with audio from digital recorders worn by some of the officers who were present and which brought some of Thomas' supporters to tears and prompted them to leave the courtroom.
The incident last July prompted an ongoing FBI investigation to determine if Thomas' civil rights were violated, an internal probe by the city, protests by residents and an effort to recall three Fullerton councilmembers that is slated for next month's ballot.
The recall was sparked after angry residents chastised the council members for failing to take significant action regarding the incident.
1m:59s
8502
[30 July 2012] Bahrainis not to give up revolution - News Analysis -...
[30 July 2012] Bahrainis not to give up revolution - News Analysis - English
Almost a year in a half into its revolution, Bahrainis continue to...
[30 July 2012] Bahrainis not to give up revolution - News Analysis - English
Almost a year in a half into its revolution, Bahrainis continue to take to the streets calling for the end of the Al Khalifa regime. And the regime continues with its brutal crackdown, continuing arrests, and oppressive tactics when dealing with demonstrators. And a year and a half later, the western supporters of Manama continue trying to look the other way as people continue to die in Bahrain.
24m:22s
6562
[08 Sept 2012] What next for Syria - Middle East - English
[08 Sept 2012] What next for Syria - Middle East - English
Reports have mentioned that US secretary of state Clinton and Turkish Prime Minister...
[08 Sept 2012] What next for Syria - Middle East - English
Reports have mentioned that US secretary of state Clinton and Turkish Prime Minister Erdogon are still seeking to intensify pressure on both Hezbollah and Syria perhaps through the deployment of international troops along Lebanon's northern border with Syria thereby crippling all the Lebanese-Syrian efforts of securing the border from arms smuggling. In this edition of the show we ask; what's next for Syria?
26m:40s
6139
Hezbollah Chief: Turkey, Saudia Arabia & Qatar Arming &...
(03-01-2013) Hezbollah Chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on the role of Turkey, Saudia Arabia and Qatar in financing and arming groups in...
(03-01-2013) Hezbollah Chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on the role of Turkey, Saudia Arabia and Qatar in financing and arming groups in Syria. Sayyed Nasrallah was dealing with the issue of the kidnapped Lebanese pigrims in Syria.
(With English Subtitles)
0m:53s
17898
[06 June 13] US soldiers taught to dehumanize, massacre - English
Press TV has conducted an interview with Edward Corrigan, human rights lawyer, Ontario, about a court case dealing with the 2012 massacre by at...
Press TV has conducted an interview with Edward Corrigan, human rights lawyer, Ontario, about a court case dealing with the 2012 massacre by at least one US soldier that slaughtered 16 innocent Afghans while they were sleeping, in an act of revenge.
6m:22s
4290