Dua Nudba Urdu Translation
Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. And blessings of Allah and peace be on our Chief Muhammad, His Prophet, and on his children. O my Allah! (All) praise is for Thee for that which Thou...
Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. And blessings of Allah and peace be on our Chief Muhammad, His Prophet, and on his children. O my Allah! (All) praise is for Thee for that which Thou decided upon and resolved in the matter of Thy friends, whom Thou purified for Thyself and Thy religion. When wisdom and high rank from Thee, prostrated themselves in adoration before them (from the Bountiful Preserving Lord), for whom neither there was any decreased, nor dispersion thereafter, then Thou stipulated for them piety and righteousness. While they were in this mean and crooked world, free from its pomp, vanity and false enjoyments, Thy overreaching authority made known their identity; and equipped them with sincerity and perfection stood surety for them and communicated intimately with them, sent the news of their auspicious arrival in advance, and praised them in clear terms for the benefit of one and all.
Fell down on the ground in prostration Thy Angels before them, Thou chose them to reveal Thy Words, gave them Thy wisdom as a gift, set them up as the (only) medium to reach Thee, the only means to the eternal land of peace and happiness. One dwelled in Paradise until Thou sent him on (as the first Prophet).
One was made to cruise the "Ark", and had been rescued, and kept safe from destruction through Thy mercy.
One was chosen and prepared for Thy Mission, as (Thy) Friend, (who) made a request to Thee for a good report in (his) later generations, so Thou approved and complied with, exalted them and gave them authority.
One was spoken directly through the Tree, his brother was appointed his successor and helper. One was brought in without a father, was given clear proofs, and was supported with the Holy Spirit.
For each Thou prescribed a Divine law, and set up a traced out path, each was appointed a guardian-executor, (and each) fulfilled the duty after being kept safe and protected, in the term of establishing Thy religion, a witness and argument over Thy servants (mankind), Lest the truth staggered from its firm stand and foundation, and the falsehood conquered the hearts of the people, and might not say a single man: "If only Thou had sent a Messenger unto us as a Warner, to show us the path of wisdom and guidance, so that we might have followed Thy revelations before we were (thus) humbled and disgraced!" Then Thou made plans to bring out the wonderful advent of Muhammad, (Send blessing on him and on his children).
So Thou just as chose him master of Whosoever Thou created, made him (whom Thou Selected), pure, clean and the best, exalted and praised him (whom Thou elected), surpassed in generosity and liberality while bestowing high-mindedness and beneficence upon him (whom Thou took in confidence and relied upon); made him leader-in-chief of (all) thy Prophets, and sent him to the troubled world of men and jinn, among Thy servants, lowered and humbled before him the Easts and the Wests, under his total control was brought all affairs, exalted his soul in Thy heavens gave over to him the knowledge of what took place and what will happen, concerning facts and operation of creation.
Then invested him with awe and majesty, Jibraeel, Meekaaeel, and distinguished Angels stood around; him at his beck and call, gave Thy word to him that Thou would make his religion prevail over all religions, however much the idolaters may be averse.
Thereafter acknowledged his atonement and provided good and perfection for his children, allotted for him and his children the first sanctuary appointed for mankind, at Becca (Mecca), a blessed place, a guidance to the people, wherein are plain and clear signs; the place where Ibraahim stood up to pray, and whosoever enters it is safe.
Thou said: "Allah’s wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O "People of the House", and purify you with a thorough purification." Thereupon Thou settled conclusively fee (recompense) of Muhammad (Thy blessings be on him and on his children) love for them, in Thy Holy Book.
So Thou said: "Say (O Muhammad): I ask of you no fee (recompense) therefore, save love of (my) Kinsfolk." And Thou said: "Whatever recompense (return) I have asked for you, (it) is only for yourselves." And Thou said: "I ask of you no reward for this, save that, whoso will, chooses a way unto his Lord." Therefore they are the (only) means to (approach) Thee, the (only) medium to get Thy favours.
So Thou certainly did not let his hard work go waste, and gave authority to his successor, Ali ibne Abi Taalib, (Thy blessings be on them both, and on this children), a guide. At the time when he was made a warner and a guide for every people, said he (the Holy Prophet), their Guide, in a public meeting overflowing with people; "Of Whomsoever I am the Mawlaa (Lord, Master) Ali is his Mawlaa. O Allah! be a friend of him who is a friend of him, be an enemy of him who is an enemy of him, help that man who helps him, forsake that man who forsakes him" and said: "Of whosoever I am the Prophet Ali is his Chief."
And said: "I and Ali are (one basic root of) a tree, and the rest of mankind are like diverse plants, he proclaims the position (relationship) of Haaroon to Moosaa." Therefore he told him: "I am to you as Moosaa was to Haaroon, but certainly there is no Prophet after me."
His (Ali’s) life partner was his (Muhammad’s) daughter the chief of the women of the worlds. Lawful was for him (Ali), in "the mosque", that which was permitted to him (Muhammad), all doors were closed, except his door.
He (Muhammad) gave his knowledge and wisdom into his (Ali’s) keeping. He said: "I am the city (center) of knowledge and Ali is its gate.
Whoso desires to approach and dwell in the city of knowledge and wisdom should come through its door." Thereafter he said: "You are my brother, successor and inheritor, your flesh is my flesh, your blood is my blood, your truce is my truce, your fight is my fight, faith is blended, mixed and mingled (part and parcel) in your flesh and blood, just as it is compounded in my flesh and blood, you shall take charge of the reservoir of my inheritance, you are the fulfilment of my religion, you shall execute and keep alive my "way of life", your friends and followers shall speak with authority, command respect and hold the torch of good manners and refinements, their faces will be all around me in the eternal land of peace and bliss (Paradise), in my close company.
Were it not you O Ali, the faithfuls would not know the truth after me." After him (Muhammad) be (Ali) was the guide for the wanderers, a bright light in the blind darkness, the strong rope of Allah, and the right path, did not ever hold back kindness and compassion from the common people, nor ever made excuses or delay to give priority to the matters of religion, nor blew his own trumpet nor felt proud of his glory, did the same thing the Messenger used to do, (Blessing of Allah be on them both and on their children) put an end to misinterpretation, did not lose temper, for the sake of Allah, if any one turned to mud-slinging and name-calling.
He had thrown the proud tribal chiefs of Arabia into a fright, destroyed their heroes, attacked and dispersed their cavalries, because of which hatred and deep grudge took root in their hearts. Badr, Khaybar, and Hunain created jealousy and envy in them, therefore, united they joined hands to oppose him, and came out in great number to fight against him, till he destroyed all deserters, who had swerved from what was right, the shameless who deviated from true religion, while he was carrying out the important mission.
Killed him a malicious criminal, a contemporary, serving the interest and following the doctrine of earlier impudent villians. An unparalleled and outlandish approach was applied to the directions of the Messenger of Allah, (Blessings of Allah be on him and on his children), concerning the "Guides" (Imaams), one after the other. The narrow-minded obstinate "ummah" did not care for and had ill-feelings towards him.
Flocked together to pass up and deny his connection with his family, and pushed his children out of their way, but a handful of sincere faithfuls kept their promise and dutifully upheld the rights of his children; Some were slain, some were held prisoners, some were sent to distant foreign lands, and they met face to face (when came upon) their destiny (martyrdom).
That which is given to each (of them) as reward of good deeds is the best recompense, since the earth belongs to Allah, and He gives it for an inheritance to whom He wants from among His servants, and the (good) end is for the God-fearing wise; glory to our Lord! Verily the promise of our Lord must be fulfilled; Allah does not break His word, He is Almighty, Wise.
So be purified and refined by making known and remembering the choicest children of Muhammad and Ali, blessings of Allah be on them both, and on their children.
The heartbroken, in tears, make their hearts bleed, together with them, the deeply moved perceptive men of letters describe their wisdom and liberality, as they themselves used to do, eyes of sensitive and thoughtful people are full of overflowing tears, their voices choked up with emotion; they cry out to protest against the injustice done, they call up dumb and insensate souls to stir and take notice. Where is Hasan? Where is Husayn? Where are the children of Husayn? The whole good, one and all! The truth altogether! Where is the regular unbroken vital connection? Where is the on going sequence of desirable goodness? Where are the clear source and spring of Light (vision and insight)? Where are the lively vivid handsome faces? Where are the distinctly visible pioneers? Where are the "know all the answers" scholars who communicated and made clear the religion of Allah? The fundamentals of knowledge and wisdom! Where is the ‘Everlasting legacy of God"? (never ever is the "family of Guides" without One).
Where is the impenetrable defense who broke the back of the oppressive tyrants? Where is the "awaited saviour" who will set the have-nots and the depressed on their feet? Where is the "The Hope" who will put and end to tyranny and oppression? Where is the "preserved guaranty" who shall give new life to rule of law and refined way of life? Where is the "Chosen in preference good" who shall raise the spirits of the people and give currency to justice and fairplay? Where is the "hope-giving confidante" who shall make full use of the "Book" and define the sphere of action? Where is he who shall blot out dogma in the matter of religion and his (Muhammad’s) children? Where is he who shall break up meddlesome trouble and tampering? Where is he who shall pull down the foundations of confusion (polytheists) and hypocrisy? Where is he who shall stamp out corruption, vice, reaction and injustice? Where is he who shall trim the outgrowth of despair, longing and hardships? Where is he who shall erase the traces of unfairness and self-seeking conceit? Where is he who shall untie the twisted knotes of falsehood and disruption? Where is he who shall separate senselessness and insolence from the people? Where is he who shall tear up by the roots obstinacy, corruption and apostasy? Where is he who shall love dearly the favourites of Allah and take pains to tame and train the trangressors? Where is he who shall make people familiar with "words of wisdom"? Where is the ultimate (Divine) source of plenty and prosperity? Where is the "Divine aspect" the God-fearing may look up to? Where is the link that connects the cosmic complex? Where is the authority who shall communicate and make known the true point of view? Where is the author of the conception of peace, fairplay and welfare? Where is the defender of the traditions of the Prophets and their children? Where is the investigator of the blood of the Martyrs of Karbalaa? Where is he who shall get the upper hand over the perpetrators of crime and greed? Where is he who shall not rest until he answers the cries of help when called upon? Where is the foremost leader of the people – the just, the truthful and the wise? Where is the son of the chosen Prophet? The son of Ali Al-Murtaza! The son of Khadeejah, the resplendent! The son of Faatimah, the great! My father, my mother, and I turn to you for protection and sanctuary.
O son of the favourite Leaders! O Son of the distinguished nobles! O son of the rightly guided Guides! O Son of the most refined high-minded liberals! O Son of the select generous Guardians! O son of the polite and pure purifiers! O Son of the impartial judges! O Son of the openhanded hosts! O Son of the mature teachers! O Son of the brilliant fulfillers! O Son of the clear and precise arguments who penetrated deep (into the domain of mind)! O inheritor of the made known prophesy! O inheritor of the clear preaching! O inheritor of the evident signs! O inheritor of the exact science! O inheritor of the widely sought after culture and customs! O inheritor of the milestones of glory and greatness! O inheritor of the extraordinary events! O inheritor of the reason that had been put to experiment! O inheritor of the Right Path! O inheritor of the Message that made deep impression on mankind! O Son of him who is in the "Mother of the Book" kept with Allah, the Highest High, the All-wise.
O inheritor of the convincing proofs! O inheritor of the genuine evidence! O inheritor of the distinctly visible demonstration! O inheritor of the decisive information! O inheritor of the absolute joy and happiness! O inheritor of "T’aa-haa" and clear wisdom! O inheritor of "Yaa seen" and "Zaariyaat" O inheritor of "T’oor" and "A’adiyaat" O Son of him who "drew near and came down till he was two bows’ length or nearer."
(The Highest High came near and received him gladly). If I but knew the destination of your purposeful journey! To which isolated land did you go? Good, pleasant and satisfying? Or otherwise? Or in well guarded concealment? It breaks my heart (when) I look at all that has been created, but cannot see you, nor hear a whisper about your whereabouts, nor any secret communication! It is disheartening to know that you are attending to and watching over the disorder and confusion, and I, in the thick of violent turmoil, am far away, unable to give report of injustice.
I eagerly long for you who is out of sight, but has not forsaken us. I eagerly long for you who has departed and is invisible, but is not far from us.
I eagerly long for you who inspires love and deep affection, and the faithful men and women take delight in your memorable glory. So we are excited with a longing desire.
I eagerly long for you who is worthy of acceptance and lawful driving force of belief and conviction, never weary or annoyed. I eagerly long for you who is the root of praise and distinction, never can be uprooted.
I eagerly long for you who is always tender, gentle and comforting, never makes one’s affairs worse instead of better. I eagerly long for you who is just and equitable beyond a trace of doubt, does not take severe action until misbehaviour trespasses the limit.
O Master! How long and unto what is to be directed (my) request for friendly attention concerning you? And what is the message? It makes me sad to get favourable reply from anyone other than you, but to be duped and cheated in the end.
It casts a gloom upon me that you suffered hardships and the chicken hearted deserters left you alone. It is painful for me what took place for you from them and that which had happened.
Is there a helper with whom I may cooperate and take pains? Is there a restless with whom I may share when action is taken? Is there a faint twinkle of evidence to make me willingly take up the trouble? Do you O Son of Ahmed have means and ways to arrange our meeting? Can you once cleverly guide the course of time, so that we may obtain our wish? When shall we abridge the gap that separate us from the vision so that we may refer to the authority? How long shall we keep waiting for your pleasing satisfying essence and quality? Already the period of expectation has lasted too long! When shall we receive our share from you and have our minds set at rest? For we have fixed our eyes upon you and strive with perseverance. When shall we be happy, and see your beautiful form and fine aspect? Groups of cheerful willing disciplined helpers, in great numbers, gathering around you to carry out one work after the other! You fulfilling (every promise) and giving joy, heart and confidence (to the faithfuls); filling the earth with justice; making your enemies follow the law and accept the revolution; taking the wind out of the haughty and the boastful, and those who knew but denied the truth; breaking the back of the proud and the arrogant; uprooting the roots of the unjust; and we-singing the praise of Allah, the Lord of the worlds.
O my Allah! Thou disperses the clouds of sorrows and hardships. Unto Thee we turn to ask for help against the enemy; for Thou (alone) helps and guides. Thou (alone) puts into good order affairs of this world and shall make better the Hereafter. So come to help! O He Who is called to help the helpless, Thy servants, surrounded by calamities.
Show them the face of their Leader. O the Mightiest Almighty. Allow him to put an end to evil and corruption, and satisfy his Love (for the faithfuls) and dislike (for the sinners). O He Who, from the "Arsh directs and controls all creation, and unto Him is the return, final and ultimate.
O my Allah! We are Thy servants, longing for Thy friend (appointed authority), who reminds us of Thee, and Thy Prophet, who was created as a refuge and asylum for us, established as a foundation and spring of truthfulness for us, and was made the Leader-Guide of the faithfuls. Convey to him our heartfelt congratulations and welcome.
Make us feel more deeply for him. O Lord! Very Kindly, make his headquarters our place of domicile and dwelling abode, and fulfill Thy promise by returning him to us as our Leader Guide, so that he takes us to the eternal land of peace and bliss, where we shall rub elbows with Thy sincere servants who shed blood to pronounce the Faith.
O Allah send Thy blessings on Muhammad and on the children of Muhammad. Bless his ancestor Muhammad, the Messenger, the foremost Leader, and bless his progenitor, the succeeding Leader, and his great grandmother, the ever truthful, Faatimah daughter of Muhammad, and his chosen virtuous forefathers, and send blessings on him, superior, whole, conclusive, staying, numerous, and full, not ever bestowed (even) on any of Thy sincerely attached and pious friends from among Thy creation.
Bless him with blessings, (that) cannot be counted in numbers, cannot be "proximated" in space of time, cannot be consumed in terms of having nothing remaining.
O my Allah! Set up truth, destroy falsehood, show the right path to Thy friends, humiliate Thy enemies, and do it without interruption, (through him). O my Allah! Unite us with him.
Let us be friends with his ancestors. Give us courage to disperse those who oppose and try to prevent him, and make them stay in their shame and disgrace for ever.
Help us to discharge the duties made incumbent upon us by him, and make every effort to obey him, keep from that which is declared unlawful by him, rely upon him to get his approval.
Let us be with him when he makes peace, and frees mankind from fear, gives currency to love are kindness, brings bliss and happiness, spreads good and virtue, so that we may do our best to promote his cause through Thy mercy, and win victory for Thee. Accept our prayers, forgive our sins, fulfil our desires, give us means of livelihood, unrestricted, make less our hardships, meet our demands in full (through him).
Turn towards us Thy kindness and loving aspects, and bring us close to Thee. Turn the eyes of Thy mercy upon us, to bring to fullness Thy kind favours, and after that do not ever let them disappear in the name of Thy generosity, and give us the opportunity to quench our thirst from the spring of his great grandfather (Kawsar), (blessing of Allah be on him and on his children), using his cup, filled by him, fresh and pure, sufficient, wholesome, clear and cool, not leaving any desire thereafter, O the Most Merciful.
More...
Description:
Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. And blessings of Allah and peace be on our Chief Muhammad, His Prophet, and on his children. O my Allah! (All) praise is for Thee for that which Thou decided upon and resolved in the matter of Thy friends, whom Thou purified for Thyself and Thy religion. When wisdom and high rank from Thee, prostrated themselves in adoration before them (from the Bountiful Preserving Lord), for whom neither there was any decreased, nor dispersion thereafter, then Thou stipulated for them piety and righteousness. While they were in this mean and crooked world, free from its pomp, vanity and false enjoyments, Thy overreaching authority made known their identity; and equipped them with sincerity and perfection stood surety for them and communicated intimately with them, sent the news of their auspicious arrival in advance, and praised them in clear terms for the benefit of one and all.
Fell down on the ground in prostration Thy Angels before them, Thou chose them to reveal Thy Words, gave them Thy wisdom as a gift, set them up as the (only) medium to reach Thee, the only means to the eternal land of peace and happiness. One dwelled in Paradise until Thou sent him on (as the first Prophet).
One was made to cruise the "Ark", and had been rescued, and kept safe from destruction through Thy mercy.
One was chosen and prepared for Thy Mission, as (Thy) Friend, (who) made a request to Thee for a good report in (his) later generations, so Thou approved and complied with, exalted them and gave them authority.
One was spoken directly through the Tree, his brother was appointed his successor and helper. One was brought in without a father, was given clear proofs, and was supported with the Holy Spirit.
For each Thou prescribed a Divine law, and set up a traced out path, each was appointed a guardian-executor, (and each) fulfilled the duty after being kept safe and protected, in the term of establishing Thy religion, a witness and argument over Thy servants (mankind), Lest the truth staggered from its firm stand and foundation, and the falsehood conquered the hearts of the people, and might not say a single man: "If only Thou had sent a Messenger unto us as a Warner, to show us the path of wisdom and guidance, so that we might have followed Thy revelations before we were (thus) humbled and disgraced!" Then Thou made plans to bring out the wonderful advent of Muhammad, (Send blessing on him and on his children).
So Thou just as chose him master of Whosoever Thou created, made him (whom Thou Selected), pure, clean and the best, exalted and praised him (whom Thou elected), surpassed in generosity and liberality while bestowing high-mindedness and beneficence upon him (whom Thou took in confidence and relied upon); made him leader-in-chief of (all) thy Prophets, and sent him to the troubled world of men and jinn, among Thy servants, lowered and humbled before him the Easts and the Wests, under his total control was brought all affairs, exalted his soul in Thy heavens gave over to him the knowledge of what took place and what will happen, concerning facts and operation of creation.
Then invested him with awe and majesty, Jibraeel, Meekaaeel, and distinguished Angels stood around; him at his beck and call, gave Thy word to him that Thou would make his religion prevail over all religions, however much the idolaters may be averse.
Thereafter acknowledged his atonement and provided good and perfection for his children, allotted for him and his children the first sanctuary appointed for mankind, at Becca (Mecca), a blessed place, a guidance to the people, wherein are plain and clear signs; the place where Ibraahim stood up to pray, and whosoever enters it is safe.
Thou said: "Allah’s wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O "People of the House", and purify you with a thorough purification." Thereupon Thou settled conclusively fee (recompense) of Muhammad (Thy blessings be on him and on his children) love for them, in Thy Holy Book.
So Thou said: "Say (O Muhammad): I ask of you no fee (recompense) therefore, save love of (my) Kinsfolk." And Thou said: "Whatever recompense (return) I have asked for you, (it) is only for yourselves." And Thou said: "I ask of you no reward for this, save that, whoso will, chooses a way unto his Lord." Therefore they are the (only) means to (approach) Thee, the (only) medium to get Thy favours.
So Thou certainly did not let his hard work go waste, and gave authority to his successor, Ali ibne Abi Taalib, (Thy blessings be on them both, and on this children), a guide. At the time when he was made a warner and a guide for every people, said he (the Holy Prophet), their Guide, in a public meeting overflowing with people; "Of Whomsoever I am the Mawlaa (Lord, Master) Ali is his Mawlaa. O Allah! be a friend of him who is a friend of him, be an enemy of him who is an enemy of him, help that man who helps him, forsake that man who forsakes him" and said: "Of whosoever I am the Prophet Ali is his Chief."
And said: "I and Ali are (one basic root of) a tree, and the rest of mankind are like diverse plants, he proclaims the position (relationship) of Haaroon to Moosaa." Therefore he told him: "I am to you as Moosaa was to Haaroon, but certainly there is no Prophet after me."
His (Ali’s) life partner was his (Muhammad’s) daughter the chief of the women of the worlds. Lawful was for him (Ali), in "the mosque", that which was permitted to him (Muhammad), all doors were closed, except his door.
He (Muhammad) gave his knowledge and wisdom into his (Ali’s) keeping. He said: "I am the city (center) of knowledge and Ali is its gate.
Whoso desires to approach and dwell in the city of knowledge and wisdom should come through its door." Thereafter he said: "You are my brother, successor and inheritor, your flesh is my flesh, your blood is my blood, your truce is my truce, your fight is my fight, faith is blended, mixed and mingled (part and parcel) in your flesh and blood, just as it is compounded in my flesh and blood, you shall take charge of the reservoir of my inheritance, you are the fulfilment of my religion, you shall execute and keep alive my "way of life", your friends and followers shall speak with authority, command respect and hold the torch of good manners and refinements, their faces will be all around me in the eternal land of peace and bliss (Paradise), in my close company.
Were it not you O Ali, the faithfuls would not know the truth after me." After him (Muhammad) be (Ali) was the guide for the wanderers, a bright light in the blind darkness, the strong rope of Allah, and the right path, did not ever hold back kindness and compassion from the common people, nor ever made excuses or delay to give priority to the matters of religion, nor blew his own trumpet nor felt proud of his glory, did the same thing the Messenger used to do, (Blessing of Allah be on them both and on their children) put an end to misinterpretation, did not lose temper, for the sake of Allah, if any one turned to mud-slinging and name-calling.
He had thrown the proud tribal chiefs of Arabia into a fright, destroyed their heroes, attacked and dispersed their cavalries, because of which hatred and deep grudge took root in their hearts. Badr, Khaybar, and Hunain created jealousy and envy in them, therefore, united they joined hands to oppose him, and came out in great number to fight against him, till he destroyed all deserters, who had swerved from what was right, the shameless who deviated from true religion, while he was carrying out the important mission.
Killed him a malicious criminal, a contemporary, serving the interest and following the doctrine of earlier impudent villians. An unparalleled and outlandish approach was applied to the directions of the Messenger of Allah, (Blessings of Allah be on him and on his children), concerning the "Guides" (Imaams), one after the other. The narrow-minded obstinate "ummah" did not care for and had ill-feelings towards him.
Flocked together to pass up and deny his connection with his family, and pushed his children out of their way, but a handful of sincere faithfuls kept their promise and dutifully upheld the rights of his children; Some were slain, some were held prisoners, some were sent to distant foreign lands, and they met face to face (when came upon) their destiny (martyrdom).
That which is given to each (of them) as reward of good deeds is the best recompense, since the earth belongs to Allah, and He gives it for an inheritance to whom He wants from among His servants, and the (good) end is for the God-fearing wise; glory to our Lord! Verily the promise of our Lord must be fulfilled; Allah does not break His word, He is Almighty, Wise.
So be purified and refined by making known and remembering the choicest children of Muhammad and Ali, blessings of Allah be on them both, and on their children.
The heartbroken, in tears, make their hearts bleed, together with them, the deeply moved perceptive men of letters describe their wisdom and liberality, as they themselves used to do, eyes of sensitive and thoughtful people are full of overflowing tears, their voices choked up with emotion; they cry out to protest against the injustice done, they call up dumb and insensate souls to stir and take notice. Where is Hasan? Where is Husayn? Where are the children of Husayn? The whole good, one and all! The truth altogether! Where is the regular unbroken vital connection? Where is the on going sequence of desirable goodness? Where are the clear source and spring of Light (vision and insight)? Where are the lively vivid handsome faces? Where are the distinctly visible pioneers? Where are the "know all the answers" scholars who communicated and made clear the religion of Allah? The fundamentals of knowledge and wisdom! Where is the ‘Everlasting legacy of God"? (never ever is the "family of Guides" without One).
Where is the impenetrable defense who broke the back of the oppressive tyrants? Where is the "awaited saviour" who will set the have-nots and the depressed on their feet? Where is the "The Hope" who will put and end to tyranny and oppression? Where is the "preserved guaranty" who shall give new life to rule of law and refined way of life? Where is the "Chosen in preference good" who shall raise the spirits of the people and give currency to justice and fairplay? Where is the "hope-giving confidante" who shall make full use of the "Book" and define the sphere of action? Where is he who shall blot out dogma in the matter of religion and his (Muhammad’s) children? Where is he who shall break up meddlesome trouble and tampering? Where is he who shall pull down the foundations of confusion (polytheists) and hypocrisy? Where is he who shall stamp out corruption, vice, reaction and injustice? Where is he who shall trim the outgrowth of despair, longing and hardships? Where is he who shall erase the traces of unfairness and self-seeking conceit? Where is he who shall untie the twisted knotes of falsehood and disruption? Where is he who shall separate senselessness and insolence from the people? Where is he who shall tear up by the roots obstinacy, corruption and apostasy? Where is he who shall love dearly the favourites of Allah and take pains to tame and train the trangressors? Where is he who shall make people familiar with "words of wisdom"? Where is the ultimate (Divine) source of plenty and prosperity? Where is the "Divine aspect" the God-fearing may look up to? Where is the link that connects the cosmic complex? Where is the authority who shall communicate and make known the true point of view? Where is the author of the conception of peace, fairplay and welfare? Where is the defender of the traditions of the Prophets and their children? Where is the investigator of the blood of the Martyrs of Karbalaa? Where is he who shall get the upper hand over the perpetrators of crime and greed? Where is he who shall not rest until he answers the cries of help when called upon? Where is the foremost leader of the people – the just, the truthful and the wise? Where is the son of the chosen Prophet? The son of Ali Al-Murtaza! The son of Khadeejah, the resplendent! The son of Faatimah, the great! My father, my mother, and I turn to you for protection and sanctuary.
O son of the favourite Leaders! O Son of the distinguished nobles! O son of the rightly guided Guides! O Son of the most refined high-minded liberals! O Son of the select generous Guardians! O son of the polite and pure purifiers! O Son of the impartial judges! O Son of the openhanded hosts! O Son of the mature teachers! O Son of the brilliant fulfillers! O Son of the clear and precise arguments who penetrated deep (into the domain of mind)! O inheritor of the made known prophesy! O inheritor of the clear preaching! O inheritor of the evident signs! O inheritor of the exact science! O inheritor of the widely sought after culture and customs! O inheritor of the milestones of glory and greatness! O inheritor of the extraordinary events! O inheritor of the reason that had been put to experiment! O inheritor of the Right Path! O inheritor of the Message that made deep impression on mankind! O Son of him who is in the "Mother of the Book" kept with Allah, the Highest High, the All-wise.
O inheritor of the convincing proofs! O inheritor of the genuine evidence! O inheritor of the distinctly visible demonstration! O inheritor of the decisive information! O inheritor of the absolute joy and happiness! O inheritor of "T’aa-haa" and clear wisdom! O inheritor of "Yaa seen" and "Zaariyaat" O inheritor of "T’oor" and "A’adiyaat" O Son of him who "drew near and came down till he was two bows’ length or nearer."
(The Highest High came near and received him gladly). If I but knew the destination of your purposeful journey! To which isolated land did you go? Good, pleasant and satisfying? Or otherwise? Or in well guarded concealment? It breaks my heart (when) I look at all that has been created, but cannot see you, nor hear a whisper about your whereabouts, nor any secret communication! It is disheartening to know that you are attending to and watching over the disorder and confusion, and I, in the thick of violent turmoil, am far away, unable to give report of injustice.
I eagerly long for you who is out of sight, but has not forsaken us. I eagerly long for you who has departed and is invisible, but is not far from us.
I eagerly long for you who inspires love and deep affection, and the faithful men and women take delight in your memorable glory. So we are excited with a longing desire.
I eagerly long for you who is worthy of acceptance and lawful driving force of belief and conviction, never weary or annoyed. I eagerly long for you who is the root of praise and distinction, never can be uprooted.
I eagerly long for you who is always tender, gentle and comforting, never makes one’s affairs worse instead of better. I eagerly long for you who is just and equitable beyond a trace of doubt, does not take severe action until misbehaviour trespasses the limit.
O Master! How long and unto what is to be directed (my) request for friendly attention concerning you? And what is the message? It makes me sad to get favourable reply from anyone other than you, but to be duped and cheated in the end.
It casts a gloom upon me that you suffered hardships and the chicken hearted deserters left you alone. It is painful for me what took place for you from them and that which had happened.
Is there a helper with whom I may cooperate and take pains? Is there a restless with whom I may share when action is taken? Is there a faint twinkle of evidence to make me willingly take up the trouble? Do you O Son of Ahmed have means and ways to arrange our meeting? Can you once cleverly guide the course of time, so that we may obtain our wish? When shall we abridge the gap that separate us from the vision so that we may refer to the authority? How long shall we keep waiting for your pleasing satisfying essence and quality? Already the period of expectation has lasted too long! When shall we receive our share from you and have our minds set at rest? For we have fixed our eyes upon you and strive with perseverance. When shall we be happy, and see your beautiful form and fine aspect? Groups of cheerful willing disciplined helpers, in great numbers, gathering around you to carry out one work after the other! You fulfilling (every promise) and giving joy, heart and confidence (to the faithfuls); filling the earth with justice; making your enemies follow the law and accept the revolution; taking the wind out of the haughty and the boastful, and those who knew but denied the truth; breaking the back of the proud and the arrogant; uprooting the roots of the unjust; and we-singing the praise of Allah, the Lord of the worlds.
O my Allah! Thou disperses the clouds of sorrows and hardships. Unto Thee we turn to ask for help against the enemy; for Thou (alone) helps and guides. Thou (alone) puts into good order affairs of this world and shall make better the Hereafter. So come to help! O He Who is called to help the helpless, Thy servants, surrounded by calamities.
Show them the face of their Leader. O the Mightiest Almighty. Allow him to put an end to evil and corruption, and satisfy his Love (for the faithfuls) and dislike (for the sinners). O He Who, from the "Arsh directs and controls all creation, and unto Him is the return, final and ultimate.
O my Allah! We are Thy servants, longing for Thy friend (appointed authority), who reminds us of Thee, and Thy Prophet, who was created as a refuge and asylum for us, established as a foundation and spring of truthfulness for us, and was made the Leader-Guide of the faithfuls. Convey to him our heartfelt congratulations and welcome.
Make us feel more deeply for him. O Lord! Very Kindly, make his headquarters our place of domicile and dwelling abode, and fulfill Thy promise by returning him to us as our Leader Guide, so that he takes us to the eternal land of peace and bliss, where we shall rub elbows with Thy sincere servants who shed blood to pronounce the Faith.
O Allah send Thy blessings on Muhammad and on the children of Muhammad. Bless his ancestor Muhammad, the Messenger, the foremost Leader, and bless his progenitor, the succeeding Leader, and his great grandmother, the ever truthful, Faatimah daughter of Muhammad, and his chosen virtuous forefathers, and send blessings on him, superior, whole, conclusive, staying, numerous, and full, not ever bestowed (even) on any of Thy sincerely attached and pious friends from among Thy creation.
Bless him with blessings, (that) cannot be counted in numbers, cannot be "proximated" in space of time, cannot be consumed in terms of having nothing remaining.
O my Allah! Set up truth, destroy falsehood, show the right path to Thy friends, humiliate Thy enemies, and do it without interruption, (through him). O my Allah! Unite us with him.
Let us be friends with his ancestors. Give us courage to disperse those who oppose and try to prevent him, and make them stay in their shame and disgrace for ever.
Help us to discharge the duties made incumbent upon us by him, and make every effort to obey him, keep from that which is declared unlawful by him, rely upon him to get his approval.
Let us be with him when he makes peace, and frees mankind from fear, gives currency to love are kindness, brings bliss and happiness, spreads good and virtue, so that we may do our best to promote his cause through Thy mercy, and win victory for Thee. Accept our prayers, forgive our sins, fulfil our desires, give us means of livelihood, unrestricted, make less our hardships, meet our demands in full (through him).
Turn towards us Thy kindness and loving aspects, and bring us close to Thee. Turn the eyes of Thy mercy upon us, to bring to fullness Thy kind favours, and after that do not ever let them disappear in the name of Thy generosity, and give us the opportunity to quench our thirst from the spring of his great grandfather (Kawsar), (blessing of Allah be on him and on his children), using his cup, filled by him, fresh and pure, sufficient, wholesome, clear and cool, not leaving any desire thereafter, O the Most Merciful.
President Ahmadinejad Interview Sept 08 with Democracy Now - Part 2 - English
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez,...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
More...
Description:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
English Documentary on Imam Khomeini - All Language
Presstv - English Documentary on Arrival of Imam Khomeini
Dr. James B Thring, Secretary of London-based NGO, Ministry of Peace, who has come to Iran to take part in anniversary of Imam Khomeini\'s...
Presstv - English Documentary on Arrival of Imam Khomeini
Dr. James B Thring, Secretary of London-based NGO, Ministry of Peace, who has come to Iran to take part in anniversary of Imam Khomeini\'s departure, said Imam Khomeini aroused admiration of those seeking justice for Palestine when he spoke against dependence of Shah\'s regime on foreign powers supporting Israel.
He said that Imam Khomeini is admired for presenting revolutionary objectives through diplomatic, humanitarian and noble messages.
\"He set a fine example to the rest of the world of how to improve people\'s welfare with minimum disruption.\"
The British peace activist told IRNA reporter that the US and Israeli demands for criminal immunity worldwide are another affront to the global community.
\"Their crimes against humanity and war crimes in Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq and many other parts of the world are the worst of modern times.\"
He said that Imam Khomeini deserves even greater admiration than accorded to him outside Iran, because his perceptive criticism of Israel and the Zionist lobby were not broadcast widely.
\"He foresaw the destruction of not only Palestine, but the Arab states generally, well before the devastation of Iraq.\"
Dr. Thring said that he is lobbying to mull legal action by the United Nations against the Israeli and US leaders for the crimes against humanity they perpetrated in Palestine and Iraq.
Abdullah al-Hassan made the remarks on the threshold of the 20th anniversary of the demise of Imam Khomeini.
He contended that the thoughts of that politico-religious leader were based on Islamic unity.
The ideas prompted the Ummah to withstand US and Israeli plots to divide the Ummah into conflicting groups, he said.
He always supported the oppressed people in the world and encouraged them to confront arrogant powers, the Syrian thinker said.
Imam Khomeini initiated Qods Day to bring the Muslims together on the Palestine issue, he concluded.
More...
Description:
Presstv - English Documentary on Arrival of Imam Khomeini
Dr. James B Thring, Secretary of London-based NGO, Ministry of Peace, who has come to Iran to take part in anniversary of Imam Khomeini\'s departure, said Imam Khomeini aroused admiration of those seeking justice for Palestine when he spoke against dependence of Shah\'s regime on foreign powers supporting Israel.
He said that Imam Khomeini is admired for presenting revolutionary objectives through diplomatic, humanitarian and noble messages.
\"He set a fine example to the rest of the world of how to improve people\'s welfare with minimum disruption.\"
The British peace activist told IRNA reporter that the US and Israeli demands for criminal immunity worldwide are another affront to the global community.
\"Their crimes against humanity and war crimes in Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq and many other parts of the world are the worst of modern times.\"
He said that Imam Khomeini deserves even greater admiration than accorded to him outside Iran, because his perceptive criticism of Israel and the Zionist lobby were not broadcast widely.
\"He foresaw the destruction of not only Palestine, but the Arab states generally, well before the devastation of Iraq.\"
Dr. Thring said that he is lobbying to mull legal action by the United Nations against the Israeli and US leaders for the crimes against humanity they perpetrated in Palestine and Iraq.
Abdullah al-Hassan made the remarks on the threshold of the 20th anniversary of the demise of Imam Khomeini.
He contended that the thoughts of that politico-religious leader were based on Islamic unity.
The ideas prompted the Ummah to withstand US and Israeli plots to divide the Ummah into conflicting groups, he said.
He always supported the oppressed people in the world and encouraged them to confront arrogant powers, the Syrian thinker said.
Imam Khomeini initiated Qods Day to bring the Muslims together on the Palestine issue, he concluded.
[ENGLISH][22Sep11] President Ahmadinejad Speech at UN General Assembly
Address by H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad President of the Islamic Republic of Iran before the 66th Session of the United Nations General Assembly.
New York 22 September 2011
In the Name of...
Address by H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad President of the Islamic Republic of Iran before the 66th Session of the United Nations General Assembly.
New York 22 September 2011
In the Name of God, the Compassionate
The Merciful
All praise be to Allah, the lord of the Universe, and peace and blessing be upon our Master and prophet, Mohammad, and his pure household, his noble companions and on all divine messengers.
‘Oh, God, hasten the arrival of Imam al-Mahdi and grant him good health and victory, and make us his followers and all those who attest to his rightfulness.’
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am grateful to the Almighty Allah who granted me, once more, the opportunity to appear before this world assembly. I have the pleasure to express my sincere thanks to H.E. Joseph Deiss, president of the sixty-fifth session for his tremendous efforts during his tenure. I also would like to congratulate H.E Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser on his election as the president of sixty-sixth session of the United Nations and wish him all success.
Let me seize the moment to pay tribute to all those who lost their lives in the past year, particularly to the victims of tragic famine in Somalia and the devastating flood in Pakistan. I urge everyone to increase their assistance and aid to the affected populations in these countries.
Over the past years, I spoke about different global issues, and the need to introduce fundamental changes in the current international order.
- Today, considering the international developments, I will try to analyze the present situation from a different angle.
- As you all know the dominance and superiority of human beings over other creatures, lie in the very nature and the truth of humankind.
which is a divine gift and a manifestation of the divine spirit embodying:
- Faith in God, who is the ever-lasting creator and planner of the entire universe.
- Showing compassion to others, generosity, justice-seeking, and having integrity both in words and in deeds.
- The quest for dignity to reach the pinnacles of perfection, the aspiration to elevate one’s material and spiritual status, and the longing to realize liberty;
- Defying oppression, corruption, and discrimination in contrast to supporting the oppressed.
- Seeking happiness, and lasting prosperity and security for all.
- These are some of the manifestations of common divine and human attributes which can clearly be seen in the historical aspirations of human beings as reflected in the heritage of our search for art and literary works both in prose and poetry, and in the socio-cultural and political movements of human beings in the course of history.
- All divine prophets and social reformers invited human beings to tread on this righteous path.
- God has given dignity to humankind to elevate his status to assume his successor role on Earth.
Dear Colleagues and friends:
- It is vividly clear that despite all historical achievements, including creation of the United-Nations, that was a product of untiring struggles and efforts of free-minded and justice-seeking individuals as well as the international cooperation, human societies are yet far from fulfilling their noble desires and aspirations.
- Most nations of the world are unhappy with the current international circumstances.
- And despite the general longing and aspiration to promote peace, progress, and fraternity, wars, mass-murder, widespread poverty, and socioeconomic and political crises continue to infringe upon the rights and sovereignty of nations, leaving behind irreparable damage worldwide;
- Approximately, three billion people of the world live on less than 2.5 dollars a day, and over a billion people even live without having even one sufficient meal on a daily basis;
- Forty-percent of the poorest world populations only share five percent of the global income, while twenty percent of the richest people share seventy-five percent of the total global income.
- More than twenty thousand innocent and destitute children die every day in the world because of poverty.
- Eighty percent of financial resources in the United States are controlled by ten percent of its population, while only twenty percent of these resources belong to the ninety percent of the population.
- What are the causes and reasons behind these inequalities? How can bone remedy such injustice?
- Those who dominate and run centers of global economic power put the blame on people’s aspiration for religion and the pursuit of the path of divine prophets or the weakness of nations and the ill-performance of a number of groups or individuals. They claim that only their views, approaches or prescriptions can save the humanity and the world economy.
Dear Colleagues and friends
- Don’t you think that the root cause of the problems must be sought in the prevailing international order, or the way the world is governed?
I would like to draw your kind attention to the following questions:
- Who abducted forcefully tens of millions of people from their homes in Africa and other regions of the world during the dark period of slavery, making them a victim of their materialistic greed?
- Who imposed colonialism for over four centuries upon this world? Who occupied lands and massively plundered resources of other nations, destroyed talents, and alienated languages, cultures and identities of nations?
- Who triggered the first and second world wars, that left seventy millions killed and hundreds of millions injured or homeless. Who created the wars in Korean peninsula and in Vietnam?
- Who imposed, through deceits and hypocrisy, the Zionists and over sixty years of war, homelessness, terror and mass murder on the Palestinian people and on countries of the region?
- Who imposed and supported for decades military dictatorship and totalitarian regimes on Asian, African, and Latin American nations.
- Who used atomic bomb against defenseless people, and stockpiled thousands of warheads in their arsenals?
- Whose economies rely on waging wars and selling arms?
- Who provoked and encouraged Saddam Hussein to invade and impose an eight-year war on Iran, and who assisted and equipped him to deploy chemical weapons against our cities and our people.
- Who used the mysterious September 11 incident as a pretext to attack Afghanistan and Iraq - killing, injuring, and displacing millions in two countries- with the ultimate goal of bringing into its domination the Middle-East and its oil resources?
- Who abolished the Breton Woods system and printed trillions of dollars without the backing of gold reserves or equivalent currency? A move that triggered inflation worldwide and was intended to prey on the economic gains of other nations.
- What country’s military spending exceeds annually a thousand billion dollars, more than the military budgets of all countries of the world combined?
- Which governments are the most indebted ones in the world?
- Who dominates the policy-making establishments of the world economy?
- Who are responsible for the world economic recession, and are imposing its consequences on America, Europe and the world in general?
- Which governments are ever ready to drop thousands of bombs on other countries, but ponder and hesitate to send a bit of food aid to famine-stricken people in Somalia or in other places?
- Who are the ones dominating the Security Council which is ostensibly responsible to safeguard the international security?
- There exist tens of other similar questions and of course, the answers are clear.
- The majority of nations and governments of the world have had no role in the creation of the current global crises, and as a matter of fact were themselves the victims of such policies.
- It is as lucid as daylight that the same slave masters and colonial powers that once instigated the two world wars have caused widespread miseries and disorder with far-reaching effects across the globe since then.
Dear Colleagues and Friends,
- Do these arrogant powers really have the competence and ability to run or govern the world, or is it acceptable that they call themselves as the sole defender of freedom, democracy, and human rights, while they militarily attack and occupy other countries?
- Can the flower of democracy blossom from NATO’s missiles, bombs or, guns?
Ladies and Gentlemen;
- If some European countries still use the Holocaust, after six decades, as the excuse to pay fine or ransom to the Zionists, should it not be an obligation upon the slave masters or colonial powers to pay reparations to the affected nations?
- If the damage and losses of the period of slavery and colonialism were indeed compensated, what would happen to the manipulators and behind-the-scene political powers in the United States and in Europe? Will there remain any gaps between the North and the South?
- If only half of military expenditures of the United States and its allies in NATO is cut to help solve the economic problems in their own countries will they be witnessing any symptom of the economic crisis?
- What would happen, if the same amount is allocated to poor nations?
- What is the justification for the presence of hundreds of US military and intelligence bases in different parts of the world, including 268 bases in Germany, 124 in Japan, 87 in South Korea, 83 in Italy, 45 in the United-Kingdom, and 21 in Portugal? Does this mean anything other than military occupation?
- Don’t the bombs deployed in the said bases undermine the security of other nations?
Ladies and Gentlemen
- The main question is the quest for the root cause of such attitudes?
- The prime reason should be sought in the beliefs and tendencies of the establishment.
- Assemblies of people in contradiction with the inner human instincts and disposition, who also have no faith in God and in the path of the divine prophets, replace their lust for power and materialistic ends with heavenly values.
- To them, only power and wealth prevail, and every attempt must bring into focus these sinister goals.
- Oppressed nations have no hope to restore or protect their legitimate rights against these powers.
- These powers seek their progress, prosperity and dignity through the poverty, humiliation and annihilation of others.
- They consider themselves superior to others enjoying special privileges or concessions. They have no respect for others and easily violate the rights of all nations and governments.
- They proclaim themselves as the indisputable custodians of all governments and nations through intimidation, recourse to threat and force, and the abuse of international mechanisms. They simply break all the internationally-recognized and regulations.
- They insist on imposing their lifestyle and beliefs on others.
- They officially support racism.
- They weaken countries through military intervention, and destroy their infrastructures, in order to plunder their resources by making them all the more dependent.
- They sow the seeds of hate and hostility among nations and people of different pursuits, in order to prevent them from fulfilling their goals of development and progress.
- All cultures, identities, lives, values and wealth of nations, women, youth, families, families as well as the wealth of nations are sacrificed by their hegemonic tendencies and the inclination to enslave and captivate others.
- Hypocrisy and deceit are allowed to secure their interests and imperialistic goals. Drug- trafficking and killing of innocent human beings are also allowed in pursuit of such diabolic goals. Despite NATO’s presence in the occupied Afghanistan, there has been a dramatic increase in the production of illicit drugs there.
- They tolerate no question or criticism, and instead of presenting a reason for their violations, they always put themselves in the position of a claimant.
- By using their imperialistic media network which is under the influence of colonialism they threaten anyone who questions the Holocaust, and September 11 with sanctions and military action.
- Last year, when the need to form a fact-finding team to undertake a thorough investigation concerning the hidden elements involved in September 11 incident was brought up- an idea which is also endorsed by all independent governments and nations as well as by the majority in the United States-, my country and myself came under pressure and threats by the government of the United States.
- Instead of assigning a fact-finding team, they killed the main perpetrator and threw his body into the sea.
- Would it not have been reasonable to bring to justice and try openly the main perpetrator of the incident in order to identify the elements behind the safe space provided for the invading aircraft to attack the twin world trade towers?
- Why should it not have been allowed to bring him into trial to help recognize those who launched terrorist groups and brought wars and other miseries into the region?
- Is there any classified information that must be kept secret?
- They view Zionism as a sacred notion or ideology and any question concerning its very foundation and history is condemned by them as an unforgivable sin. However they endorse and allow sacrileges and insult against beliefs of other divine religions.
Dear Colleagues and Friends.
- Real freedom, justice, dignity, well being, and lasting security are the rights of all nations.
- These values can neither be achieved by reliance on the current inefficient system of world governance, nor through the intervention of the world arrogant powers and the gun barrels of NATO forces.
- These values could only be realized under independence and recognition of others’ right and through harmony and cooperation.
- Is there any way to address the problems and challenges besetting the world by using the prevailing international mechanisms or tools to help humanity achieve the long-standing aspiration of peace, security and equality?
- All those who tried to introduce reforms whilst preserving the existing norms and tendencies have failed. The valuable efforts made by the Non-Aligned movement and Group 77 and 15 as well as by some prominent individuals have failed to bring fundamental changes.
- Governance and management of the world entail fundamental reforms.
- What has to be done now?
Dear Colleagues and Friends
- Efforts must be made with a firm resolve and through collective cooperation to map out a new plan, on the basis of principles and the very foundation of human universal values such as Monotheism, justice, freedom, love and the quest for happiness.
- The idea of creation of the United Nations remains a great and historical achievement of mankind. Its importance must be appreciated and its capacities must be used to the extent possible for our noble goals.
- We should not allow the organization which is the reflection of the collective will and shared aspiration of the community of nations, to deviate from its main course and play into the hands of the world powers.
- Conducive ground must be prepared to ensure collective participation and involvement of nations in an effort to promote lasting peace and security.
- Shared and collective management of the world must be achieved in its true sense, and based on the underlying principles enshrined in the international law; and justice must serve as the criterion and the basis for all international decisions or actions.
- All of us should acknowledge the fact that there is no other way than the shared and collective management of the world in order to put an end to the present disorders, tyranny, and discriminations worldwide.
- This is indeed the sole way to prosperity and welfare of human society which is an established and vivid truth.
- While acknowledging the above truth, one should note that it is not enough and that we must have further faith in that and spare no effort toward its realization.
Dear Colleagues and Friends
- Shared and collective management of the world is the legitimate right of all nations, and we as their representatives, have an obligation to defend their rights. Although some powers continuously try to frustrate all international efforts, aimed at promoting collective cooperation, we must, however, strengthen our belief in achieving the perceived goal of establishing a shared and collective cooperation to run the world.
- The United Nations was created to make possible effective participation of all nations in international decision-making processes.
- We all know that this goal has not yet been fulfilled because of the absence of justice in the current management structures and mechanisms of the UN.
- The composition of the Security Council is unjust and inequitable. Therefore, changes and restructuring of the United Nations are considered as the basic demands of the nations that must be addressed by the General Assembly.
- During last year session, I emphasized the importance of this issue and called for the designation of this decade as the decade of shared and collective Global Management.
- I would like now to reiterate my proposal and I am sure that through international cooperation diligent and efforts of committed world leaders or governments and through insistence on justice and the support of all other nations, we can expedite the building of a common bright future.
- This movement is certainly on the rightful path of creation with the assurance of promising future for humanity.
- A future that will be built when humanity initiates to trend the path of the divine prophets and the righteous the under the leadership of Imam al-Mahdi, the Ultimate Savior of mankind and the inheritor to all divine messengers, leaders and to the pure generation of our great Prophet.
- Creation of a supreme and ideal society with the arrival of a perfect human being, who is a true and sincere lover of all human beings, is the guaranteed promise of Allah.
- He will come with Jesus Christ to lead the freedom and justice lovers to eradicate tyranny and discrimination, and promote knowledge, peace, justice freedom and love across the world. He will present to every single individual all the beauties of the world and all good things which bring happiness for humankind.
- Today nations have been awakened and with the increase in public awareness, they no longer succumb to oppressions and discriminations.
- The world is now witnessing more than ever, the widespread awakening in Islamic lands, in Asia, Europe, and America. These movements are ever expanding everyday their specter and influence to pursue the realization of justice, freedom and the creation of a better tomorrow.
- Our great nation stands ready to join hands with other nations to march on this beautiful path in harmony and in line with the shared aspirations of mankind.
- Let us salute love, freedom, justice, knowledge, and the bright future that awaits humankind.
More...
Description:
Address by H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad President of the Islamic Republic of Iran before the 66th Session of the United Nations General Assembly.
New York 22 September 2011
In the Name of God, the Compassionate
The Merciful
All praise be to Allah, the lord of the Universe, and peace and blessing be upon our Master and prophet, Mohammad, and his pure household, his noble companions and on all divine messengers.
‘Oh, God, hasten the arrival of Imam al-Mahdi and grant him good health and victory, and make us his followers and all those who attest to his rightfulness.’
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am grateful to the Almighty Allah who granted me, once more, the opportunity to appear before this world assembly. I have the pleasure to express my sincere thanks to H.E. Joseph Deiss, president of the sixty-fifth session for his tremendous efforts during his tenure. I also would like to congratulate H.E Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser on his election as the president of sixty-sixth session of the United Nations and wish him all success.
Let me seize the moment to pay tribute to all those who lost their lives in the past year, particularly to the victims of tragic famine in Somalia and the devastating flood in Pakistan. I urge everyone to increase their assistance and aid to the affected populations in these countries.
Over the past years, I spoke about different global issues, and the need to introduce fundamental changes in the current international order.
- Today, considering the international developments, I will try to analyze the present situation from a different angle.
- As you all know the dominance and superiority of human beings over other creatures, lie in the very nature and the truth of humankind.
which is a divine gift and a manifestation of the divine spirit embodying:
- Faith in God, who is the ever-lasting creator and planner of the entire universe.
- Showing compassion to others, generosity, justice-seeking, and having integrity both in words and in deeds.
- The quest for dignity to reach the pinnacles of perfection, the aspiration to elevate one’s material and spiritual status, and the longing to realize liberty;
- Defying oppression, corruption, and discrimination in contrast to supporting the oppressed.
- Seeking happiness, and lasting prosperity and security for all.
- These are some of the manifestations of common divine and human attributes which can clearly be seen in the historical aspirations of human beings as reflected in the heritage of our search for art and literary works both in prose and poetry, and in the socio-cultural and political movements of human beings in the course of history.
- All divine prophets and social reformers invited human beings to tread on this righteous path.
- God has given dignity to humankind to elevate his status to assume his successor role on Earth.
Dear Colleagues and friends:
- It is vividly clear that despite all historical achievements, including creation of the United-Nations, that was a product of untiring struggles and efforts of free-minded and justice-seeking individuals as well as the international cooperation, human societies are yet far from fulfilling their noble desires and aspirations.
- Most nations of the world are unhappy with the current international circumstances.
- And despite the general longing and aspiration to promote peace, progress, and fraternity, wars, mass-murder, widespread poverty, and socioeconomic and political crises continue to infringe upon the rights and sovereignty of nations, leaving behind irreparable damage worldwide;
- Approximately, three billion people of the world live on less than 2.5 dollars a day, and over a billion people even live without having even one sufficient meal on a daily basis;
- Forty-percent of the poorest world populations only share five percent of the global income, while twenty percent of the richest people share seventy-five percent of the total global income.
- More than twenty thousand innocent and destitute children die every day in the world because of poverty.
- Eighty percent of financial resources in the United States are controlled by ten percent of its population, while only twenty percent of these resources belong to the ninety percent of the population.
- What are the causes and reasons behind these inequalities? How can bone remedy such injustice?
- Those who dominate and run centers of global economic power put the blame on people’s aspiration for religion and the pursuit of the path of divine prophets or the weakness of nations and the ill-performance of a number of groups or individuals. They claim that only their views, approaches or prescriptions can save the humanity and the world economy.
Dear Colleagues and friends
- Don’t you think that the root cause of the problems must be sought in the prevailing international order, or the way the world is governed?
I would like to draw your kind attention to the following questions:
- Who abducted forcefully tens of millions of people from their homes in Africa and other regions of the world during the dark period of slavery, making them a victim of their materialistic greed?
- Who imposed colonialism for over four centuries upon this world? Who occupied lands and massively plundered resources of other nations, destroyed talents, and alienated languages, cultures and identities of nations?
- Who triggered the first and second world wars, that left seventy millions killed and hundreds of millions injured or homeless. Who created the wars in Korean peninsula and in Vietnam?
- Who imposed, through deceits and hypocrisy, the Zionists and over sixty years of war, homelessness, terror and mass murder on the Palestinian people and on countries of the region?
- Who imposed and supported for decades military dictatorship and totalitarian regimes on Asian, African, and Latin American nations.
- Who used atomic bomb against defenseless people, and stockpiled thousands of warheads in their arsenals?
- Whose economies rely on waging wars and selling arms?
- Who provoked and encouraged Saddam Hussein to invade and impose an eight-year war on Iran, and who assisted and equipped him to deploy chemical weapons against our cities and our people.
- Who used the mysterious September 11 incident as a pretext to attack Afghanistan and Iraq - killing, injuring, and displacing millions in two countries- with the ultimate goal of bringing into its domination the Middle-East and its oil resources?
- Who abolished the Breton Woods system and printed trillions of dollars without the backing of gold reserves or equivalent currency? A move that triggered inflation worldwide and was intended to prey on the economic gains of other nations.
- What country’s military spending exceeds annually a thousand billion dollars, more than the military budgets of all countries of the world combined?
- Which governments are the most indebted ones in the world?
- Who dominates the policy-making establishments of the world economy?
- Who are responsible for the world economic recession, and are imposing its consequences on America, Europe and the world in general?
- Which governments are ever ready to drop thousands of bombs on other countries, but ponder and hesitate to send a bit of food aid to famine-stricken people in Somalia or in other places?
- Who are the ones dominating the Security Council which is ostensibly responsible to safeguard the international security?
- There exist tens of other similar questions and of course, the answers are clear.
- The majority of nations and governments of the world have had no role in the creation of the current global crises, and as a matter of fact were themselves the victims of such policies.
- It is as lucid as daylight that the same slave masters and colonial powers that once instigated the two world wars have caused widespread miseries and disorder with far-reaching effects across the globe since then.
Dear Colleagues and Friends,
- Do these arrogant powers really have the competence and ability to run or govern the world, or is it acceptable that they call themselves as the sole defender of freedom, democracy, and human rights, while they militarily attack and occupy other countries?
- Can the flower of democracy blossom from NATO’s missiles, bombs or, guns?
Ladies and Gentlemen;
- If some European countries still use the Holocaust, after six decades, as the excuse to pay fine or ransom to the Zionists, should it not be an obligation upon the slave masters or colonial powers to pay reparations to the affected nations?
- If the damage and losses of the period of slavery and colonialism were indeed compensated, what would happen to the manipulators and behind-the-scene political powers in the United States and in Europe? Will there remain any gaps between the North and the South?
- If only half of military expenditures of the United States and its allies in NATO is cut to help solve the economic problems in their own countries will they be witnessing any symptom of the economic crisis?
- What would happen, if the same amount is allocated to poor nations?
- What is the justification for the presence of hundreds of US military and intelligence bases in different parts of the world, including 268 bases in Germany, 124 in Japan, 87 in South Korea, 83 in Italy, 45 in the United-Kingdom, and 21 in Portugal? Does this mean anything other than military occupation?
- Don’t the bombs deployed in the said bases undermine the security of other nations?
Ladies and Gentlemen
- The main question is the quest for the root cause of such attitudes?
- The prime reason should be sought in the beliefs and tendencies of the establishment.
- Assemblies of people in contradiction with the inner human instincts and disposition, who also have no faith in God and in the path of the divine prophets, replace their lust for power and materialistic ends with heavenly values.
- To them, only power and wealth prevail, and every attempt must bring into focus these sinister goals.
- Oppressed nations have no hope to restore or protect their legitimate rights against these powers.
- These powers seek their progress, prosperity and dignity through the poverty, humiliation and annihilation of others.
- They consider themselves superior to others enjoying special privileges or concessions. They have no respect for others and easily violate the rights of all nations and governments.
- They proclaim themselves as the indisputable custodians of all governments and nations through intimidation, recourse to threat and force, and the abuse of international mechanisms. They simply break all the internationally-recognized and regulations.
- They insist on imposing their lifestyle and beliefs on others.
- They officially support racism.
- They weaken countries through military intervention, and destroy their infrastructures, in order to plunder their resources by making them all the more dependent.
- They sow the seeds of hate and hostility among nations and people of different pursuits, in order to prevent them from fulfilling their goals of development and progress.
- All cultures, identities, lives, values and wealth of nations, women, youth, families, families as well as the wealth of nations are sacrificed by their hegemonic tendencies and the inclination to enslave and captivate others.
- Hypocrisy and deceit are allowed to secure their interests and imperialistic goals. Drug- trafficking and killing of innocent human beings are also allowed in pursuit of such diabolic goals. Despite NATO’s presence in the occupied Afghanistan, there has been a dramatic increase in the production of illicit drugs there.
- They tolerate no question or criticism, and instead of presenting a reason for their violations, they always put themselves in the position of a claimant.
- By using their imperialistic media network which is under the influence of colonialism they threaten anyone who questions the Holocaust, and September 11 with sanctions and military action.
- Last year, when the need to form a fact-finding team to undertake a thorough investigation concerning the hidden elements involved in September 11 incident was brought up- an idea which is also endorsed by all independent governments and nations as well as by the majority in the United States-, my country and myself came under pressure and threats by the government of the United States.
- Instead of assigning a fact-finding team, they killed the main perpetrator and threw his body into the sea.
- Would it not have been reasonable to bring to justice and try openly the main perpetrator of the incident in order to identify the elements behind the safe space provided for the invading aircraft to attack the twin world trade towers?
- Why should it not have been allowed to bring him into trial to help recognize those who launched terrorist groups and brought wars and other miseries into the region?
- Is there any classified information that must be kept secret?
- They view Zionism as a sacred notion or ideology and any question concerning its very foundation and history is condemned by them as an unforgivable sin. However they endorse and allow sacrileges and insult against beliefs of other divine religions.
Dear Colleagues and Friends.
- Real freedom, justice, dignity, well being, and lasting security are the rights of all nations.
- These values can neither be achieved by reliance on the current inefficient system of world governance, nor through the intervention of the world arrogant powers and the gun barrels of NATO forces.
- These values could only be realized under independence and recognition of others’ right and through harmony and cooperation.
- Is there any way to address the problems and challenges besetting the world by using the prevailing international mechanisms or tools to help humanity achieve the long-standing aspiration of peace, security and equality?
- All those who tried to introduce reforms whilst preserving the existing norms and tendencies have failed. The valuable efforts made by the Non-Aligned movement and Group 77 and 15 as well as by some prominent individuals have failed to bring fundamental changes.
- Governance and management of the world entail fundamental reforms.
- What has to be done now?
Dear Colleagues and Friends
- Efforts must be made with a firm resolve and through collective cooperation to map out a new plan, on the basis of principles and the very foundation of human universal values such as Monotheism, justice, freedom, love and the quest for happiness.
- The idea of creation of the United Nations remains a great and historical achievement of mankind. Its importance must be appreciated and its capacities must be used to the extent possible for our noble goals.
- We should not allow the organization which is the reflection of the collective will and shared aspiration of the community of nations, to deviate from its main course and play into the hands of the world powers.
- Conducive ground must be prepared to ensure collective participation and involvement of nations in an effort to promote lasting peace and security.
- Shared and collective management of the world must be achieved in its true sense, and based on the underlying principles enshrined in the international law; and justice must serve as the criterion and the basis for all international decisions or actions.
- All of us should acknowledge the fact that there is no other way than the shared and collective management of the world in order to put an end to the present disorders, tyranny, and discriminations worldwide.
- This is indeed the sole way to prosperity and welfare of human society which is an established and vivid truth.
- While acknowledging the above truth, one should note that it is not enough and that we must have further faith in that and spare no effort toward its realization.
Dear Colleagues and Friends
- Shared and collective management of the world is the legitimate right of all nations, and we as their representatives, have an obligation to defend their rights. Although some powers continuously try to frustrate all international efforts, aimed at promoting collective cooperation, we must, however, strengthen our belief in achieving the perceived goal of establishing a shared and collective cooperation to run the world.
- The United Nations was created to make possible effective participation of all nations in international decision-making processes.
- We all know that this goal has not yet been fulfilled because of the absence of justice in the current management structures and mechanisms of the UN.
- The composition of the Security Council is unjust and inequitable. Therefore, changes and restructuring of the United Nations are considered as the basic demands of the nations that must be addressed by the General Assembly.
- During last year session, I emphasized the importance of this issue and called for the designation of this decade as the decade of shared and collective Global Management.
- I would like now to reiterate my proposal and I am sure that through international cooperation diligent and efforts of committed world leaders or governments and through insistence on justice and the support of all other nations, we can expedite the building of a common bright future.
- This movement is certainly on the rightful path of creation with the assurance of promising future for humanity.
- A future that will be built when humanity initiates to trend the path of the divine prophets and the righteous the under the leadership of Imam al-Mahdi, the Ultimate Savior of mankind and the inheritor to all divine messengers, leaders and to the pure generation of our great Prophet.
- Creation of a supreme and ideal society with the arrival of a perfect human being, who is a true and sincere lover of all human beings, is the guaranteed promise of Allah.
- He will come with Jesus Christ to lead the freedom and justice lovers to eradicate tyranny and discrimination, and promote knowledge, peace, justice freedom and love across the world. He will present to every single individual all the beauties of the world and all good things which bring happiness for humankind.
- Today nations have been awakened and with the increase in public awareness, they no longer succumb to oppressions and discriminations.
- The world is now witnessing more than ever, the widespread awakening in Islamic lands, in Asia, Europe, and America. These movements are ever expanding everyday their specter and influence to pursue the realization of justice, freedom and the creation of a better tomorrow.
- Our great nation stands ready to join hands with other nations to march on this beautiful path in harmony and in line with the shared aspirations of mankind.
- Let us salute love, freedom, justice, knowledge, and the bright future that awaits humankind.
President Ahmadinejad Interview Sept 08 with Democracy Now - Part 1 - English
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez,...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
President Ahmadinejad was interviewed recently in New York by Democracy Now
More...
Description:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
President Ahmadinejad was interviewed recently in New York by Democracy Now
President Ahmadinejad Interview Sept 08 with Democracy Now - Part 3 - English
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez,...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
More...
Description:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record
In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities.
The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue.
The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran.
AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran.
Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more.
Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president.
AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic.
Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs.
We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place.
A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another.
But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number.
So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that?
AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now.
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed.
AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it.
Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that.
But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy.
AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program?
PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see.
Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here.
I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end.
It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward.
I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie.
AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran.
Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there?
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion.
Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad.
But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue.
AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad.
ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president
3:26
|
[Audio][07] Distortions of Ashura - by Martyr Ayatullah Murtada Mutahhari - English
One example of such fabrications is the story of a messenger who has brought a letter for Abu \\\\\\\'Abd Allah (\\\\\\\'a) and he awaits a reply. The Imam tells him to come after three...
One example of such fabrications is the story of a messenger who has brought a letter for Abu \\\\\\\'Abd Allah (\\\\\\\'a) and he awaits a reply. The Imam tells him to come after three days and collect the reply. After three days on inquiring he is told that the Imam was departing the same day. He says to himself, \\\\\\\"Now that he is setting out, let us go and watch the majesty and glamour of the prince of the Hijaz He goes and there he sees the Imam, together with other Hashimis among men, seated on splendid chairs. Then the camels are brought bearing the litters draped in silk and brocade. Then the ladies emerge and with much honor and ceremony they are escorted into these litters. This description continues in this vein until they make the digression to switch to the scene of the eleventh day of Muharram, to compare the glamour and honor of this day with the sorry state of the womenfolk on the latter day. Haji Nuri calls such descriptions into question. He says, \\\\\\\"It is history which says that when Imam Husayn left Madinah he recited this Qur\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'anic verse:
He left it in the state of fear and concern. (28:21)
That is, he likened his own departure to that of Moses, son of \\\\\\\'Imran, when he fled for the fear of the Pharaoh.
He said, \\\\\\\"It might be that my Lord will guide me to the right path.\\\\\\\"(28:22)
The Imam had departed with a most simple caravan. Does the greatness of Imam Husayn lie in his sitting, for instance, on golden chairs? Or does the greatness of his family and womenfolk lie in their using litters draped in silk and brocade, or their possessing fine horses and camels and a retinue of lackeys and servants?!
More...
Description:
One example of such fabrications is the story of a messenger who has brought a letter for Abu \\\\\\\'Abd Allah (\\\\\\\'a) and he awaits a reply. The Imam tells him to come after three days and collect the reply. After three days on inquiring he is told that the Imam was departing the same day. He says to himself, \\\\\\\"Now that he is setting out, let us go and watch the majesty and glamour of the prince of the Hijaz He goes and there he sees the Imam, together with other Hashimis among men, seated on splendid chairs. Then the camels are brought bearing the litters draped in silk and brocade. Then the ladies emerge and with much honor and ceremony they are escorted into these litters. This description continues in this vein until they make the digression to switch to the scene of the eleventh day of Muharram, to compare the glamour and honor of this day with the sorry state of the womenfolk on the latter day. Haji Nuri calls such descriptions into question. He says, \\\\\\\"It is history which says that when Imam Husayn left Madinah he recited this Qur\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'anic verse:
He left it in the state of fear and concern. (28:21)
That is, he likened his own departure to that of Moses, son of \\\\\\\'Imran, when he fled for the fear of the Pharaoh.
He said, \\\\\\\"It might be that my Lord will guide me to the right path.\\\\\\\"(28:22)
The Imam had departed with a most simple caravan. Does the greatness of Imam Husayn lie in his sitting, for instance, on golden chairs? Or does the greatness of his family and womenfolk lie in their using litters draped in silk and brocade, or their possessing fine horses and camels and a retinue of lackeys and servants?!
34:40
|
[Arabic] لقاء خاص مع الرئيس بشار الأسد - Bashar Asad Interview - 30 May 2013
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the...
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
More...
Description:
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
33:34
|
[English Translation] Interview Bashar Al-Asad - President Syria on current situation - 30 May 2013
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the...
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\\\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
More...
Description:
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Assalamu Alaikum. Bloodshed in Syria continues unabated. This is the only constant over which there is little disagreement between those loyal to the Syrian state and those opposed to it. However, there is no common ground over the other constants and details two years into the current crisis. At the time, a great deal was said about the imminent fall of the regime. Deadlines were set and missed; and all those bets were lost. Today, we are here in the heart of Damascus, enjoying the hospitality of a president who has become a source of consternation to many of his opponents who are still unable to understand the equations that have played havoc with their calculations and prevented his ouster from the Syrian political scene. This unpleasant and unexpected outcome for his opponents upset their schemes and plots because they didn’t take into account one self-evident question: what happens if the regime doesn’t fall? What if President Assad doesn’t leave the Syrian scene? Of course, there are no clear answers; and the result is more destruction, killing and bloodshed. Today there is talk of a critical juncture for Syria. The Syrian Army has moved from defense to attack, achieving one success after another. On a parallel level, stagnant diplomatic waters have been shaken by discussions over a Geneva 2 conference becoming a recurrent theme in the statements of all parties. There are many questions which need answers: political settlement, resorting to the military option to decide the outcome, the Israeli enemy’s direct interference with the course of events in the current crisis, the new equations on the Golan Heights, the relationship with opponents and friends. What is the Syrian leadership’s plan for a way out of a complex and dangerous crisis whose ramifications have started to spill over into neighboring countries? It is our great pleasure tonight to put these questions to H. E. President Bashar al-Assad. Assalamu Alaikum, Mr. President.
President Assad: Assalamu Alaikum. You are most welcome in Damascus.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we are in the heart of the People’s Palace, two and a half years into the Syrian crisis. At the time, the bet was that the president and his regime would be overthrown within weeks. How have you managed to foil the plots of your opponents and enemies? What is the secret behind this steadfastness?
President Assad: There are a number of factors are involved. One is the Syrian factor, which thwarted their intentions; the other factor is related to those who masterminded these scenarios and ended up defeating themselves because they do not know Syria or understand in detail the situation. They started with the calls of revolution, but a real revolution requires tangible elements; you cannot create a revolution simply by paying money. When this approach failed, they shifted to using sectarian slogans in order to create a division within our society. Even though they were able to infiltrate certain pockets in Syrian society, pockets of ignorance and lack of awareness that exist in any society, they were not able to create this sectarian division. Had they succeeded, Syria would have been divided up from the beginning. They also fell into their own trap by trying to promote the notion that this was a struggle to maintain power rather than a struggle for national sovereignty. No one would fight and martyr themselves in order to secure power for anyone else.
Al-Manar: In the battle for the homeland, it seems that the Syrian leadership, and after two and a half years, is making progress on the battlefield. And here if I might ask you, why have you chosen to move from defense to attack? And don’t you think that you have been late in taking the decision to go on the offensive, and consequently incurred heavy losses, if we take of Al-Qseir as an example.
President Assad: It is not a question of defense or attack. Every battle has its own tactics. From the beginning, we did not deal with each situation from a military perspective alone. We also factored in the social and political aspects as well - many Syrians were misled in the beginning and there were many friendly countries that didn’t understand the domestic dynamics. Your actions will differ according to how much consensus there is over a particular issue. There is no doubt that as events have unfolded Syrians have been able to better understand the situation and what is really at stake. This has helped the Armed Forces to better carry out their duties and achieve results. So, what is happening now is not a shift in tactic from defense to attack, but rather a shift in the balance of power in favor of the Armed Forces.
Al-Manar: How has this balance been tipped, Mr. President? Syria is being criticized for asking for the assistance of foreign fighters, and to be fully candid, it is said that Hezbollah fighters are extending assistance. In a previous interview, you said that there are 23 million Syrians; we do not need help from anyone else. What is Hezbollah doing in Syria?
President Assad: The main reason for tipping the balance is the change in people’s opinion in areas that used to incubate armed groups, not necessarily due to lack of patriotism on their part, but because they were deceived. They were led to believe that there was a revolution against the failings of the state. This has changed; many individuals have left these terrorist groups and have returned to their normal lives. As to what is being said about Hezbollah and the participation of foreign fighters alongside the Syrian Army, this is a hugely important issue and has several factors. Each of these factors should be clearly understood. Hezbollah, the battle at Al-Qseir and the recent Israeli airstrike – these three factors cannot be looked at in isolation of the other, they are all a part of the same issue. Let’s be frank. In recent weeks, and particularly after Mr. Hasan Nasrallah’s speech, Arab and foreign media have said that Hezbollah fighters are fighting in Syria and defending the Syrian state, or to use their words “the regime.” Logically speaking, if Hezbollah or the resistance wanted to defend Syria by sending fighters, how many could they send - a few hundred, a thousand or two? We are talking about a battle in which hundreds of thousands of Syrian troops are involved against tens of thousands of terrorists, if not more because of the constant flow of fighters from neighboring and foreign countries that support those terrorists. So clearly, the number of fighters Hezbollah might contribute in order to defend the Syrian state in its battle, would be a drop in the ocean compared to the number of Syrian soldiers fighting the terrorists. When also taking into account the vast expanse of Syria, these numbers will neither protect a state nor ‘regime.’ This is from one perspective. From another, if they say they are defending the state, why now? Battles started after Ramadan in 2011 and escalated into 2012, the summer of 2012 to be precise. They started the battle to “liberate Damascus” and set a zero hour for the first time, the second time and a third time; the four generals were assassinated, a number of individuals fled Syria, and many people believed that was the time the state would collapse. It didn’t. Nevertheless, during all of these times, Hezbollah never intervened, so why would it intervene now? More importantly, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah fighting in Damascus and Aleppo? The more significant battles are in Damascus and in Aleppo, not in Al-Qseir. Al-Qseir is a small town in Homs, why haven’t we seen Hezbollah in the city of Homs? Clearly, all these assumptions are inaccurate. They say Al-Qseir is a strategic border town, but all the borders are strategic for the terrorists in order to smuggle in their fighters and weapons. So, all these propositions have nothing to do with Hezbollah. If we take into account the moans and groans of the Arab media, the statements made by Arab and foreign officials – even Ban Ki-moon expressed concern over Hezbollah in Al-Qseir – all of this is for the objective of suppressing and stifling the resistance. It has nothing to do with defending the Syrian state. The Syrian army has made significant achievements in Damascus, Aleppo, rural Damascus and many other areas; however, we haven’t heard the same moaning as we have heard in Al-Qseir.
Al-Manar: But, Mr. President, the nature of the battle that you and Hezbollah are waging in Al-Qseir seems, to your critics, to take the shape of a safe corridor connecting the coastal region with Damascus. Consequently, if Syria were to be divided, or if geographical changes were to be enforced, this would pave the way for an Alawite state. So, what is the nature of this battle, and how is it connected with the conflict with Israel.
President Assad: First, the Syrian and Lebanese coastal areas are not connected through Al-Qseir. Geographically this is not possible. Second, nobody would fight a battle in order to move towards separation. If you opt for separation, you move towards that objective without waging battles all over the country in order to be pushed into a particular corner. The nature of the battle does not indicate that we are heading for division, but rather the opposite, we are ensuring we remain a united country. Our forefathers rejected the idea of division when the French proposed this during their occupation of Syria because at the time they were very aware of its consequences. Is it possible or even fathomable that generations later, we their children, are less aware or mindful? Once again, the battle in Al-Qseir and all the bemoaning is related to Israel. The timing of the battle in Al-Qseir was synchronized with the Israeli airstrike. Their objective is to stifle the resistance. This is the same old campaign taking on a different form. Now what’s important is not al-Qseir as a town, but the borders; they want to stifle the resistance from land and from the sea. Here the question begs itself - some have said that the resistance should face the enemy and consequently remain in the south. This was said on May 7, 2008, when some of Israel’s agents in Lebanon tried to tamper with the communications system of the resistance; they claimed that the resistance turned its weapons inwards. They said the same thing about the Syrian Army; that the Syrian Army should fight on the borders with Israel. We have said very clearly that our Army will fight the enemy wherever it is. When the enemy is in the north, we move north; the same applies if the enemy comes from the east or the west. This is also the case for Hezbollah. So the question is why is Hezbollah deployed on the borders inside Lebanon or inside Syria? The answer is that our battle is a battle against the Israeli enemy and its proxies inside Syria or inside Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if I might ask about Israel’s involvement in the Syrian crisis through the recent airstrike against Damascus. Israel immediately attached certain messages to this airstrike by saying it doesn’t want escalation or doesn’t intend to interfere in the Syrian crisis. The question is: what does Israel want and what type of interference?
President Assad: This is exactly my point. Everything that is happening at the moment is aimed, first and foremost, at stifling the resistance. Israel’s support of the terrorists was for two purposes. The first is to stifle the resistance; the second is to strike the Syrian air defense systems. It is not interested in anything else.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, since Israel’s objectives are clear, the Syrian state was criticized for its muted response. Everyone was expecting a Syrian response, and the Syrian government stated that it reserves the right to respond at the appropriate time and place. Why didn’t the response come immediately? And is it enough for a senior source to say that missiles have been directed at the Israeli enemy and that any attack will be retaliated immediately without resorting to Army command?
President Assad: We have informed all the Arab and foreign parties - mostly foreign - that contacted us, that we will respond the next time. Of course, there has been more than one response. There have been several Israeli attempted violations to which there was immediate retaliation. But these short-term responses have no real value; they are only of a political nature. If we want to respond to Israel, the response will be of strategic significance.
Al-Manar: How? By opening the Golan front, for instance?
President Assad: This depends on public opinion, whether there is a consensus in support of the resistance or not. That’s the question. Al-Manar: How is the situation in Syria now?
President Assad: In fact, there is clear popular pressure to open the Golan front to resistance. This enthusiasm is also on the Arab level; we have received many Arab delegations wanting to know how young people might be enrolled to come and fight Israel. Of course, resistance is not easy. It is not merely a question of opening the front geographically. It is a political, ideological, and social issue, with the net result being military action.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, if we take into account the incident on the Golan Heights and Syria’s retaliation on the Israeli military vehicle that crossed the combat line, does this mean that the rules of engagement have changed? And if the rules of the game have changed, what is the new equation, so to speak?
President Assad: Real change in the rules of engagement happens when there is a popular condition pushing for resistance. Any other change is short-term, unless we are heading towards war. Any response of any kind might only appear to be a change to the rules of engagement, but I don’t think it really is. The real change is when the people move towards resistance; this is the really dramatic change.
Al-Manar: Don’t you think that this is a little late? After 40 years of quiet and a state of truce on the Golan Heights, now there is talk of a movement on that front, about new equations and about new rules of the game?
President Assad: They always talk about Syria opening the front or closing the front. A state does not create resistance. Resistance can only be called so, when it is popular and spontaneous, it cannot be created. The state can either support or oppose the resistance, - or create obstacles, as is the case with some Arab countries. I believe that a state that opposes the will of its people for resistance is reckless. The issue is not that Syria has decided, after 40 years, to move in this direction. The public’s state of mind is that our National Army is carrying out its duties to protect and liberate our land. Had there not been an army, as was the situation in Lebanon when the army and the state were divided during the civil war, there would have been resistance a long time ago. Today, in the current circumstances, there are a number of factors pushing in that direction. First, there are repeated Israeli aggressions that constitute a major factor in creating this desire and required incentive. Second, the army’s engagement in battles in more than one place throughout Syria has created a sentiment on the part of many civilians that it is their duty to move in this direction in order to support the Armed Forces on the Golan.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would not hesitate to attack Syria if it detected that weapons are being conveyed to Hezbollah in Lebanon. If Israel carried out its threats, I want a direct answer from you: what would Syria do?
President Assad: As I have said, we have informed the relevant states that we will respond in kind. Of course, it is difficult to specify the military means that would be used, that is for our military command to decide. We plan for different scenarios, depending on the circumstances and the timing of the strike that would determine which method or weapons.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, after the airstrike that targeted Damascus, there was talk about the S300 missiles and that this missile system will tip the balance. Based on this argument, Netanyahu visited Moscow. My direct question is this: are these missiles on their way to Damascus? Is Syria now in possession of these missiles?
President Assad: It is not our policy to talk publically about military issues in terms of what we possess or what we receive. As far as Russia is concerned, the contracts have nothing to do with the crisis. We have negotiated with them on different kinds of weapons for years, and Russia is committed to honoring these contracts. What I want to say is that neither Netanyahu’s visit nor the crisis and the conditions surrounding it have influenced arms imports. All of our agreements with Russia will be implemented, some have been implemented during the past period and, together with the Russians, we will continue to implement these contracts in the future.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, we have talked about the steadfastness of the Syrian leadership and the Syrian state. We have discussed the progress being achieved on the battlefield, and strengthening the alliance between Syria and the resistance. These are all within the same front. From another perspective, there is diplomatic activity stirring waters that have been stagnant for two and a half years. Before we talk about this and about the Geneva conference and the red lines that Syria has drawn, there was a simple proposition or a simple solution suggested by the former head of the coalition, Muaz al-Khatib. He said that the president, together with 500 other dignitaries would be allowed to leave the country within 20 days, and the crisis would be over. Why don’t you meet this request and put an end to the crisis?
President Assad: I have always talked about the basic principle: that the Syrian people alone have the right to decide whether the president should remain or leave. So, anybody speaking on this subject should state which part of the Syrian people they represent and who granted them the authority to speak on their behalf. As for this initiative, I haven’t actually read it, but I was very happy that they allowed me 20 days and 500 people! I don’t know who proposed the initiative; I don’t care much about names.
Al-Manar: He actually said that you would be given 20 days, 500 people, and no guarantees. You’ll be allowed to leave but with no guarantee whatsoever on whether legal action would be taken against you or not. Mr. President, this brings us to the negotiations, I am referring to Geneva 2. The Syrian government and leadership have announced initial agreement to take part in this conference. If this conference is held, there will be a table with the Syrian flag on one side and the flag of the opposition groups on the other. How can you convince the Syrian people after two and a half years of crisis that you will sit face to face at the same negotiating table with these groups?
President Assad: First of all, regarding the flag, it is meaningless without the people it represents. When we put a flag on a table or anywhere else, we talk about the people represented by that flag. This question can be put to those who raise flags they call Syrian but are different from the official Syrian flag. So, this flag has no value when it does not represent the people. Secondly, we will attend this conference as the official delegation and legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. But, whom do they represent? When the conference is over, we return to Syria, we return home to our people. But when the conference is over, whom do they return to - five-star hotels? Or to the foreign ministries of the states that they represent – which doesn’t include Syria of course - in order to submit their reports? Or do they return to the intelligence services of those countries? So, when we attend this conference, we should know very clearly the positions of some of those sitting at the table - and I say some because the conference format is not clear yet and as such we do not have details as to how the patriotic Syrian opposition will be considered or the other opposition parties in Syria. As for the opposition groups abroad and their flag, we know that we are attending the conference not to negotiate with them, but rather with the states that back them; it will appear as though we are negotiating with the slaves, but essentially we are negotiating with their masters. This is the truth, we shouldn’t deceive ourselves.
Al-Manar: Are you, in the Syrian leadership, convinced that these negotiations will be held next month?
President Assad: We expect them to happen, unless they are obstructed by other states. As far as we are concerned in Syria, we have announced a couple of days ago that we agree in principle to attend.
Al-Manar: When you say in principle, it seems that you are considering other options.
President Assad: In principle, we are in favour of the conference as a notion, but there are no details yet. For example, will there be conditions placed before the conference? If so, these conditions may be unacceptable and we would not attend. So the idea of the conference, of a meeting, in principle is a good one. We will have to wait and see.
Al-Manar: Let’s talk, Mr. President, about the conditions put by the Syrian leadership. What are Syria’s conditions?
President Assad: Simply put, our only condition is that anything agreed upon in any meeting inside or outside the country, including the conference, is subject to the approval of the Syrian people through a popular referendum. This is the only condition. Anything else doesn’t have any value. That is why we are comfortable with going to the conference. We have no complexes. Either side can propose anything, but nothing can be implemented without the approval of the Syrian people. And as long as we are the legitimate representatives of the people, we have nothing to fear.
Al-Manar: Let’s be clear, Mr. President. There is a lot of ambiguity in Geneva 1 and Geneva 2 about the transitional period and the role of President Bashar al-Assad in that transitional period. Are you prepared to hand over all your authorities to this transitional government? And how do you understand this ambiguous term?
President Assad: This is what I made clear in the initiative I proposed in January this year. They say they want a transitional government in which the president has no role. In Syria we have a presidential system, where the President is head of the republic and the Prime Minister heads the government. They want a government with broad authorities. The Syrian constitution gives the government full authorities. The president is the commander-in-chief of the Army and Armed Forces and the head of the Supreme Judicial Council. All the other institutions report directly to the government. Changing the authorities of the president is subject to changing the constitution; the president cannot just relinquish his authorities, he doesn\\\'t have the constitutional right. Changing the constitution requires a popular referendum. When they want to propose such issues, they might be discussed in the conference, and when we agree on something - if we agree, we return home and put it to a popular referendum and then move on. But for them to ask for the amendment of the constitution in advance, this cannot be done neither by the president nor by the government.
Al-Manar: Frankly, Mr. President, all the international positions taken against you and all your political opponents said that they don’t want a role for al-Assad in Syria’s future. This is what the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal said and this is what the Turks and the Qataris said, and also the Syrian opposition. Will President Assad be nominated for the forthcoming presidential elections in 2014?
President Assad: What I know is that Saud al-Faisal is a specialist in American affairs, I don’t know if he knows anything about Syrian affairs. If he wants to learn, that’s fine! As to the desires of others, I repeat what I have said earlier: the only desires relevant are those of the Syrian people. With regards to the nomination, some parties have said that it is preferable that the president shouldn’t be nominated for the 2014 elections. This issue will be determined closer to the time; it is still too early to discuss this. When the time comes, and I feel, through my meetings and interactions with the Syrian people, that there is a need and public desire for me to nominate myself, I will not hesitate. However, if I feel that the Syrian people do not want me to lead them, then naturally I will not put myself forward. They are wasting their time on such talk.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, you mentioned the Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal. This makes me ask about Syria’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, with Qatar, with Turkey, particularly if we take into account that their recent position in the Arab ministerial committee was relatively moderate. They did not directly and publically call for the ouster of President Assad. Do you feel any change or any support on the part of these countries for a political solution to the Syrian crisis? And is Syria prepared to deal once more with the Arab League, taking into account that the Syrian government asked for an apology from the Arab League?
President Assad: Concerning the Arab states, we see brief changes in their rhetoric but not in their actions. The countries that support the terrorists have not changed; they are still supporting terrorism to the same extent. Turkey also has not made any positive steps. As for Qatar, their role is also the same, the role of the funder - the bank funding the terrorists and supporting them through Turkey. So, overall, no change. As for the Arab League, in Syria we have never pinned our hopes on the Arab League. Even in the past decades, we were barely able to dismantle the mines set for us in the different meetings, whether in the summits or in meetings of the foreign ministers. So in light of this and its recent actions, can we really expect it to play a role? We are open to everybody, we never close our doors. But we should also be realistic and face the truth that they are unable to offer anything, particularly since a significant number of the Arab states are not independent. They receive their orders from the outside. Some of them are sympathetic to us in their hearts, but they cannot act on their feelings because they are not in possession of their decisions. So, no, we do not pin any hopes on the Arab League.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, this leads us to ask: if the Arab environment is as such, and taking into account the developments on the ground and the steadfastness, the Geneva conference and the negotiations, the basic question is: what if the political negotiations fail? What are the consequences of the failure of political negotiations?
President Assad: This is quite possible, because there are states that are obstructing the meeting in principle, and they are going only to avoid embarrassment. They are opposed to any dialogue whether inside or outside Syria. Even the Russians, in several statements, have dampened expectations from this conference. But we should also be accurate in defining this dialogue, particularly in relation to what is happening on the ground. Most of the factions engaged in talking about what is happening in Syria have no influence on the ground; they don’t even have direct relationships with the terrorists. In some instances these terrorists are directly linked with the states that are backing them, in other cases, they are mere gangs paid to carry out terrorist activities. So, the failure of the conference will not significantly change the reality inside Syria, because these states will not stop supporting the terrorists - conference or no conference, and the gangs will not stop their subversive activities. So it has no impact on them.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, the events in Syria are spilling over to neighboring countries. We see what’s happening in Iraq, the explosions in Al-Rihaniye in Turkey and also in Lebanon. In Ersal, Tripoli, Hezbollah taking part in the fighting in Al-Qseir. How does Syria approach the situation in Lebanon, and do you think the Lebanese policy of dissociation is still applied or accepted?
President Assad: Let me pose some questions based on the reality in Syria and in Lebanon about the policy of dissociation in order not to be accused of making a value judgment on whether this policy is right or wrong. Let’s start with some simple questions: Has Lebanon been able to prevent Lebanese interference in Syria? Has it been able to prevent the smuggling of terrorists or weapons into Syria or providing a safe haven for them in Lebanon? It hasn’t; in fact, everyone knows that Lebanon has contributed negatively to the Syrian crisis. Most recently, has Lebanon been able to protect itself against the consequences of the Syrian crisis, most markedly in Tripoli and the missiles that have been falling over different areas of Beirut or its surroundings? It hasn’t. So what kind of dissociation are we talking about? For Lebanon to dissociate itself from the crisis is one thing, and for the government to dissociate itself is another. When the government dissociates itself from a certain issue that affects the interests of the Lebanese people, it is in fact dissociating itself from the Lebanese citizens. I’m not criticizing the Lebanese government - I’m talking about general principles. I don’t want it to be said that I’m criticizing this government. If the Syrian government were to dissociate itself from issues that are of concern to the Syrian people, it would also fail. So in response to your question with regards to Lebanon’s policy of dissociation, we don’t believe this is realistically possible. When my neighbor’s house is on fire, I cannot say that it’s none of my business because sooner or later the fire will spread to my house.
Al-Manar: Mr. President, what would you say to the supporters of the axis of resistance? We are celebrating the anniversary of the victory of the resistance and the liberation of south Lebanon, in an atmosphere of promises of victory, which Mr. Hasan Nasrallah has talked about. You are saying with great confidence that you will emerge triumphant from this crisis. What would you say to all this audience? Are we about to reach the end of this dark tunnel?
President Assad: I believe that the greatest victory achieved by the Arab resistance movements in the past years and decades is primarily an intellectual victory. This resistance wouldn’t have been able to succeed militarily if they hadn’t been able to succeed and stand fast against a campaign aimed at distorting concepts and principles in this region. Before the civil war in Lebanon, some people used to say that Lebanon’s strength lies in its weakness; this is similar to saying that a man’s intelligence lies in his stupidity, or that honor is maintained through corruption. This is an illogical contradiction. The victories of the resistance at different junctures proved that this concept is not true, and it showed that Lebanon’s weakness lies in its weakness and Lebanon’s strength lies in its strength. Lebanon’s strength is in its resistance and these resistance fighters you referred to. Today, more than ever before, we are in need of these ideas, of this mindset, of this steadfastness and of these actions carried out by the resistance fighters. The events in the Arab world during the past years have distorted concepts to the extent that some Arabs have forgotten that the real enemy is still Israel and have instead created internal, sectarian, regional or national enemies. Today we pin our hopes on these resistance fighters to remind the Arab people, through their achievements, that our enemy is still the same. As for my confidence in victory, if we weren’t so confident we wouldn’t have been able to stand fast or to continue this battle after two years of a global attack. This is not a tripartite attack like the one in 1956; it is in fact a global war waged against Syria and the resistance. We have absolute confidence in our victory, and I assure them that Syria will always remain, even more so than before, supportive of the resistance and resistance fighters everywhere in the Arab world.
Al-Manar: In conclusion, it has been my great honor to conduct this interview with Your Excellency, President Bashar al-Assad of the Syrian Arab Republic. Thank you very much. President Assad: You are welcome. I would like to congratulate Al-Manar channel, the channel of resistance, on the anniversary of the liberation and to congratulate the Lebanese people and every resistance fighter in Lebanon.
Al-Manar: Thank you.
4:00
|
Germany Headscarf Martyr - Egypt mourns headscarf martyr - English
Marwa Sherbini is being hailed as the shahida, or martyr, of the Hijab
The body of a Muslim woman, killed in a German courtroom by a man convicted of insulting her religion, has been taken back to...
Marwa Sherbini is being hailed as the shahida, or martyr, of the Hijab
The body of a Muslim woman, killed in a German courtroom by a man convicted of insulting her religion, has been taken back to her native Egypt for burial.
Dr. Marwa Sherbini was three-months pregnant when she was murdered in court by her molester. Her murder has sparked off angry protests around the Muslim world.
Dr. Marwa Sherbini, 31, was stabbed 18 times by Axel W, who is now under arrest in Dresden for suspected murder.
Husband Elwi Okaz is also in a critical condition in hospital, after being injured as he tried to save his wife.
Ms Sherbini had sued her killer after he called her a "terrorist" because of her headscarf.
The case has attracted much attention in Egypt and the Muslim world.
German prosecutors have said the 28-year-old attacker, identified only as Axel W, was driven by a deep hatred of foreigners and Muslims.
'Martyr'
Medics were unable to save Ms Sherbini who was three months pregnant with her second child. Her three-year-old son was with the family in court when she was killed.
Egypt funeral for stabbing victim
Egyptian woman killed in a knife attack in a Dresden courtroom is laid
Axel W and Ms Sherbini and family were in court for his appeal against a fine of 750 euros ($1,050) for insulting her in 2008, apparently because she was wearing the Muslim headscarf or Hijab.
Newspapers in Egypt have expressed outrage at the case, asking how it was allowed to happen and dubbing Ms Sherbini "the martyr of the Hijab".
Senior Egyptian officials and German diplomatic staff attended the funeral in Alexandria along with hundreds of mourners.
Media reports say Mr Okaz was injured both by the attacker and when a policeman opened fire in the courtroom.
http://intermultira cialissues. suite101. com/article. cfm/killing_ of_pregnant_ muslim_woman_ in_german_ court#ixzz0KVKCI aS3&D
"People are looking for victims and Muslims are sometimes seen as a viable option"
Sulaiman Wilms,
European Muslim Union
For eight long minutes, the 28-year old German man of Russian origins continued to stab Marwa Sherbini. For eight long minutes, she suffered the stabs in full view of the panel of judges inside the Dresden courtroom. When the German police finally arrived on the scene, they shot her husband who was desperately trying to save her. The image of middle-easterners as potential terrorists, an image propagated by the media for years now, led them to the wrong conclusion that Elwy Okaz, genetic researcher at Max Planck Institute, must have been the perpetrator of the violence.
Marwa Sherbini’s Four-Year Old Son Watched his Mother Being Butchered
Four-year old Mustapha was witness to the massacre of his mother and the injury of his father. After the incident, he was left in the custody of German Authorities until his aunt arrived to take him home back to Egypt, suffering from severe shock. He will need rehabilitation to be able to cope with the trauma he experienced. In all probability, the tragedy will leave a permanent psychological scar on his whole life.
Marwa’s Body Arrived in Egypt
Marwa Sherbini probably never imagined that this was how she would return home after her years with her husband in Germany. Hosts of grieving mourners stood at 8pm on 5th July, 2009, as the body of the Egyptian pharmacist arrived at Cairo Airport. The dominant feeling was one of deep anger. Her funeral in her native city of Alexandria the following afternoon was marked by masses of people who probably never knew her. Among the mourners were young students from her old school, the EGC, who came to pay their last respects to her
Media Silence Regarding the Murder of the Muslim Woman in the Courtroom
The official stand of the German authorities has been one of muted regret. European media in general, and German media in particular, gave the brutal attack no prominence at all, regarding it as an isolated incident and presenting the attacker as a man who is mentally disturbed. The question that immediately comes to mind is where Marwa Sherbini went wrong. She sought justice and had no doubt in her mind that she would get it. The cruel irony was that she was murdered in the very place that should have protected her and afforded her the highest degree of safety and justice. She trusted the propaganda that Europe was a place of freedom and equality for all, regardless of gender, race or religious persuasion. She did not realize that in Europe some human beings are more equal than others. She had paid for her misconception with her very life.
http://intermultira cialissues. suite101. com/article. cfm/killing_ of_pregnant_ muslim_woman_ in_german_ court#ixzz0KVKpL CPz&D
For eight long minutes, the 28-year old German man of Russian origins continued to stab Marwa Sherbini. For eight long minutes, she suffered the stabs in full view of the panel of judges inside the Dresden courtroom. When the German police finally arrived on the scene, they shot her husband who was desperately trying to save her. The image of middle-easterners as potential terrorists, an image propagated by the media for years now, led them to the wrong conclusion that Elwy Okaz, genetic researcher at Max Planck Institute, must have been the perpetrator of the violence.
Marwa Sherbini’s Four-Year Old Son Watched his Mother Being Butchered
Four-year old Mustapha was witness to the massacre of his mother and the injury of his father. After the incident, he was left in the custody of German Authorities until his aunt arrived to take him home back to Egypt, suffering from severe shock. He will need rehabilitation to be able to cope with the trauma he experienced. In all probability, the tragedy will leave a permanent psychological scar on his whole life.
Marwa’s Body Arrived in Egypt
Marwa Sherbini probably never imagined that this was how she would return home after her years with her husband in Germany. Hosts of grieving mourners stood at 8pm on 5th July, 2009, as the body of the Egyptian pharmacist arrived at Cairo Airport. The dominant feeling was one of deep anger. Her funeral in her native city of Alexandria the following afternoon was marked by masses of people who probably never knew her. Among the mourners were young students from her old school, the EGC, who came to pay their last respects to her
Media Silence Regarding the Murder of the Muslim Woman in the Courtroom
The official stand of the German authorities has been one of muted regret. European media in general, and German media in particular, gave the brutal attack no prominence at all, regarding it as an isolated incident and presenting the attacker as a man who is mentally disturbed. The question that immediately comes to mind is where Marwa Sherbini went wrong. She sought justice and had no doubt in her mind that she would get it. The cruel irony was that she was murdered in the very place that should have protected her and afforded her the highest degree of safety and justice. She trusted the propaganda that Europe was a place of freedom and equality for all, regardless of gender, race or religious persuasion. She did not realize that in Europe some human beings are more equal than others. She had paid for her misconception with her very life.
http://intermultira cialissues. suite101. com/article. cfm/killing_ of_pregnant_ muslim_woman_ in_german_ court#ixzz0KVKpL CPz&D
Egypt cleric seeks stiff penalty for Sherbini killer
Tantawi says man who killed 'veil martyr' in Germany should receive maximum punishment.
ALEXANDRIA - A man who stabbed a pregnant Egyptian woman to death in Germany should be punished to the utmost extent of the law, Egypt's top cleric said on Monday as the woman was buried in her hometown.
"The man who killed Marwa Sherbini, the Egyptian citizen in Germany, and wounded her husband Elwi Ali Okaz should receive the maximum punishment," Grand Imam Sheikh Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi told the official MENA agency.
"The killer is a terrorist who should receive severe punishment for what he has done, something that contradicts all the values of humanity, decency and religion," he said.
Sherbini, 32, was killed in a court in the northern German city of Dresden on Wednesday shortly before she was to give evidence in an appeal lodged by her attacker.
The 28-year-old attacker, identified only as Axel W. had been convicted and fined after calling her a "terrorist" for wearing the Islamic headscarf.
According to the Egyptian press, Sherbini was three months pregnant when she was killed. She was laid to rest in her hometown of Alexandria in northern Egypt on Monday.
Her husband, a researcher in genetic engineering who was reportedly shot by German police while trying to save his wife, is still in critical condition in hospital having also been stabbed by the assailant.
Tantawi told MENA he hoped the killing of Sherbini, whom he described as a "martyr," would not negatively affect the dialogue between the West and Islam because it was "an isolated event."
More...
Description:
Marwa Sherbini is being hailed as the shahida, or martyr, of the Hijab
The body of a Muslim woman, killed in a German courtroom by a man convicted of insulting her religion, has been taken back to her native Egypt for burial.
Dr. Marwa Sherbini was three-months pregnant when she was murdered in court by her molester. Her murder has sparked off angry protests around the Muslim world.
Dr. Marwa Sherbini, 31, was stabbed 18 times by Axel W, who is now under arrest in Dresden for suspected murder.
Husband Elwi Okaz is also in a critical condition in hospital, after being injured as he tried to save his wife.
Ms Sherbini had sued her killer after he called her a "terrorist" because of her headscarf.
The case has attracted much attention in Egypt and the Muslim world.
German prosecutors have said the 28-year-old attacker, identified only as Axel W, was driven by a deep hatred of foreigners and Muslims.
'Martyr'
Medics were unable to save Ms Sherbini who was three months pregnant with her second child. Her three-year-old son was with the family in court when she was killed.
Egypt funeral for stabbing victim
Egyptian woman killed in a knife attack in a Dresden courtroom is laid
Axel W and Ms Sherbini and family were in court for his appeal against a fine of 750 euros ($1,050) for insulting her in 2008, apparently because she was wearing the Muslim headscarf or Hijab.
Newspapers in Egypt have expressed outrage at the case, asking how it was allowed to happen and dubbing Ms Sherbini "the martyr of the Hijab".
Senior Egyptian officials and German diplomatic staff attended the funeral in Alexandria along with hundreds of mourners.
Media reports say Mr Okaz was injured both by the attacker and when a policeman opened fire in the courtroom.
http://intermultira cialissues. suite101. com/article. cfm/killing_ of_pregnant_ muslim_woman_ in_german_ court#ixzz0KVKCI aS3&D
"People are looking for victims and Muslims are sometimes seen as a viable option"
Sulaiman Wilms,
European Muslim Union
For eight long minutes, the 28-year old German man of Russian origins continued to stab Marwa Sherbini. For eight long minutes, she suffered the stabs in full view of the panel of judges inside the Dresden courtroom. When the German police finally arrived on the scene, they shot her husband who was desperately trying to save her. The image of middle-easterners as potential terrorists, an image propagated by the media for years now, led them to the wrong conclusion that Elwy Okaz, genetic researcher at Max Planck Institute, must have been the perpetrator of the violence.
Marwa Sherbini’s Four-Year Old Son Watched his Mother Being Butchered
Four-year old Mustapha was witness to the massacre of his mother and the injury of his father. After the incident, he was left in the custody of German Authorities until his aunt arrived to take him home back to Egypt, suffering from severe shock. He will need rehabilitation to be able to cope with the trauma he experienced. In all probability, the tragedy will leave a permanent psychological scar on his whole life.
Marwa’s Body Arrived in Egypt
Marwa Sherbini probably never imagined that this was how she would return home after her years with her husband in Germany. Hosts of grieving mourners stood at 8pm on 5th July, 2009, as the body of the Egyptian pharmacist arrived at Cairo Airport. The dominant feeling was one of deep anger. Her funeral in her native city of Alexandria the following afternoon was marked by masses of people who probably never knew her. Among the mourners were young students from her old school, the EGC, who came to pay their last respects to her
Media Silence Regarding the Murder of the Muslim Woman in the Courtroom
The official stand of the German authorities has been one of muted regret. European media in general, and German media in particular, gave the brutal attack no prominence at all, regarding it as an isolated incident and presenting the attacker as a man who is mentally disturbed. The question that immediately comes to mind is where Marwa Sherbini went wrong. She sought justice and had no doubt in her mind that she would get it. The cruel irony was that she was murdered in the very place that should have protected her and afforded her the highest degree of safety and justice. She trusted the propaganda that Europe was a place of freedom and equality for all, regardless of gender, race or religious persuasion. She did not realize that in Europe some human beings are more equal than others. She had paid for her misconception with her very life.
http://intermultira cialissues. suite101. com/article. cfm/killing_ of_pregnant_ muslim_woman_ in_german_ court#ixzz0KVKpL CPz&D
For eight long minutes, the 28-year old German man of Russian origins continued to stab Marwa Sherbini. For eight long minutes, she suffered the stabs in full view of the panel of judges inside the Dresden courtroom. When the German police finally arrived on the scene, they shot her husband who was desperately trying to save her. The image of middle-easterners as potential terrorists, an image propagated by the media for years now, led them to the wrong conclusion that Elwy Okaz, genetic researcher at Max Planck Institute, must have been the perpetrator of the violence.
Marwa Sherbini’s Four-Year Old Son Watched his Mother Being Butchered
Four-year old Mustapha was witness to the massacre of his mother and the injury of his father. After the incident, he was left in the custody of German Authorities until his aunt arrived to take him home back to Egypt, suffering from severe shock. He will need rehabilitation to be able to cope with the trauma he experienced. In all probability, the tragedy will leave a permanent psychological scar on his whole life.
Marwa’s Body Arrived in Egypt
Marwa Sherbini probably never imagined that this was how she would return home after her years with her husband in Germany. Hosts of grieving mourners stood at 8pm on 5th July, 2009, as the body of the Egyptian pharmacist arrived at Cairo Airport. The dominant feeling was one of deep anger. Her funeral in her native city of Alexandria the following afternoon was marked by masses of people who probably never knew her. Among the mourners were young students from her old school, the EGC, who came to pay their last respects to her
Media Silence Regarding the Murder of the Muslim Woman in the Courtroom
The official stand of the German authorities has been one of muted regret. European media in general, and German media in particular, gave the brutal attack no prominence at all, regarding it as an isolated incident and presenting the attacker as a man who is mentally disturbed. The question that immediately comes to mind is where Marwa Sherbini went wrong. She sought justice and had no doubt in her mind that she would get it. The cruel irony was that she was murdered in the very place that should have protected her and afforded her the highest degree of safety and justice. She trusted the propaganda that Europe was a place of freedom and equality for all, regardless of gender, race or religious persuasion. She did not realize that in Europe some human beings are more equal than others. She had paid for her misconception with her very life.
http://intermultira cialissues. suite101. com/article. cfm/killing_ of_pregnant_ muslim_woman_ in_german_ court#ixzz0KVKpL CPz&D
Egypt cleric seeks stiff penalty for Sherbini killer
Tantawi says man who killed 'veil martyr' in Germany should receive maximum punishment.
ALEXANDRIA - A man who stabbed a pregnant Egyptian woman to death in Germany should be punished to the utmost extent of the law, Egypt's top cleric said on Monday as the woman was buried in her hometown.
"The man who killed Marwa Sherbini, the Egyptian citizen in Germany, and wounded her husband Elwi Ali Okaz should receive the maximum punishment," Grand Imam Sheikh Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi told the official MENA agency.
"The killer is a terrorist who should receive severe punishment for what he has done, something that contradicts all the values of humanity, decency and religion," he said.
Sherbini, 32, was killed in a court in the northern German city of Dresden on Wednesday shortly before she was to give evidence in an appeal lodged by her attacker.
The 28-year-old attacker, identified only as Axel W. had been convicted and fined after calling her a "terrorist" for wearing the Islamic headscarf.
According to the Egyptian press, Sherbini was three months pregnant when she was killed. She was laid to rest in her hometown of Alexandria in northern Egypt on Monday.
Her husband, a researcher in genetic engineering who was reportedly shot by German police while trying to save his wife, is still in critical condition in hospital having also been stabbed by the assailant.
Tantawi told MENA he hoped the killing of Sherbini, whom he described as a "martyr," would not negatively affect the dialogue between the West and Islam because it was "an isolated event."
0:47
|
France Passes Anti-Burqa/Niqab (Full Face Veil) Law - English
French lawmakers approve burqa ban
French lawmakers have ratified a legislation to prohibit women from wearing face-covering veils despite right activist saying such a law violates personal and...
French lawmakers approve burqa ban
French lawmakers have ratified a legislation to prohibit women from wearing face-covering veils despite right activist saying such a law violates personal and religious freedoms.
The Senate voted 246 to 1 in favor of the bill, which has already cleared the lower chamber, the National Assembly, reported AFP.
The law will come into effect if the Constitutional Council does not question its legality.
Muslims argue that the legislation is going to discriminates against France's Muslim population, which is already facing rising level of Islamophobia.
Once in place, the law will allow authorities to arrest and fine those women who defy the ban.
A woman who continues wearing veils will receive a fine of EUR 150 (USD 195) or a course of citizenship lessons. A man who forces a woman to go veiled will be fined EUR 30,000 and imprisonment.
France is home to the largest Muslim population among the 27 European Union member states. Nearly 10 percent of the 62 million people living in French is Muslim.
In June, members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) unanimously voted against any general ban against burqa or niqab in Europe, saying Muslim women should be free to choose their clothing.
Article Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/142540.html
More...
Description:
French lawmakers approve burqa ban
French lawmakers have ratified a legislation to prohibit women from wearing face-covering veils despite right activist saying such a law violates personal and religious freedoms.
The Senate voted 246 to 1 in favor of the bill, which has already cleared the lower chamber, the National Assembly, reported AFP.
The law will come into effect if the Constitutional Council does not question its legality.
Muslims argue that the legislation is going to discriminates against France's Muslim population, which is already facing rising level of Islamophobia.
Once in place, the law will allow authorities to arrest and fine those women who defy the ban.
A woman who continues wearing veils will receive a fine of EUR 150 (USD 195) or a course of citizenship lessons. A man who forces a woman to go veiled will be fined EUR 30,000 and imprisonment.
France is home to the largest Muslim population among the 27 European Union member states. Nearly 10 percent of the 62 million people living in French is Muslim.
In June, members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) unanimously voted against any general ban against burqa or niqab in Europe, saying Muslim women should be free to choose their clothing.
Article Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/142540.html
CHOCOLATE LAVA CAKE - English
Ingredients
250 Grams of dark chocolate
1 Cup of fine sugar
175 Grams of unsalted butter
4 Eggs
1 Cup of sifted self raising flour
1 Cup of almond meal
1 Teaspoon of baking powder
Half a...
Ingredients
250 Grams of dark chocolate
1 Cup of fine sugar
175 Grams of unsalted butter
4 Eggs
1 Cup of sifted self raising flour
1 Cup of almond meal
1 Teaspoon of baking powder
Half a cup of milk
1-2 Flakes to garnish
More...
Description:
Ingredients
250 Grams of dark chocolate
1 Cup of fine sugar
175 Grams of unsalted butter
4 Eggs
1 Cup of sifted self raising flour
1 Cup of almond meal
1 Teaspoon of baking powder
Half a cup of milk
1-2 Flakes to garnish
3:42
|
*RECIPE* 10 Minute Microwave Chocolate Fudge Cake - English
10 Minute Microwave Chocolate Fudge Cake is a super fast, easy to make dessert. A moist chocolate cake smothered with a delectable chocolate sauce. Takes about 10 minutes total to make - give it a...
10 Minute Microwave Chocolate Fudge Cake is a super fast, easy to make dessert. A moist chocolate cake smothered with a delectable chocolate sauce. Takes about 10 minutes total to make - give it a go!
===============
INGREDIENT LIST:
===============
CAKE:
1 Cup of Caster Sugar (Super Fine White Sugar)
2 Cups of Self Raising Flour
1/4 Cup of Cocoa Powder
2 Eggs
3/4 Cup of Milk
125g of Butter (melted)
SAUCE:
180g of Dark Chocolate
1/3 Cup of Whipping Cream
All measurements and temperatures are in Australian Metric.
More...
Description:
10 Minute Microwave Chocolate Fudge Cake is a super fast, easy to make dessert. A moist chocolate cake smothered with a delectable chocolate sauce. Takes about 10 minutes total to make - give it a go!
===============
INGREDIENT LIST:
===============
CAKE:
1 Cup of Caster Sugar (Super Fine White Sugar)
2 Cups of Self Raising Flour
1/4 Cup of Cocoa Powder
2 Eggs
3/4 Cup of Milk
125g of Butter (melted)
SAUCE:
180g of Dark Chocolate
1/3 Cup of Whipping Cream
All measurements and temperatures are in Australian Metric.
21:50
|
Fine Prints - Discussion on Lebanon - English
A great discussion on Lebanese post election situation.
The Lebanese Army has condemned recent Israeli deployments inside Lebanon's borders, saying that it will follow up the move through...
A great discussion on Lebanese post election situation.
The Lebanese Army has condemned recent Israeli deployments inside Lebanon's borders, saying that it will follow up the move through international bodies.
The army said in a statement on Friday that the recent erection of an observation post and a military facility by Israel on the outskirts of the Kfar Shouba Hills of Lebanon is against the international resolutions and also against the United Nations' frontier line between Lebanon and Israel.
Responding to the Israeli violation of Lebanese territory Lebanon called the action “provocative” and deployed its own army units in the area on Friday.
"In a clear violation of a restricted area of Lebanese territory, and in an attempt to impose a new reality on the ground, the Israeli enemy on Wednesday set up an observation post at the edge of Kfar Shouba and a military position overlooking Baathaeel pond, violating the imaginary line that (UNIFIL) delineated anew, which it considers to be the Israeli withdrawal line," said the statement, making reference to the Blue Line designated by the UN in 2000.
"Given this provocative stance, Lebanese Army units in the region deployed patrols along the border," it added. The army said it was following up on Israel's violation with UNIFIL officials in order "to resolve this urgent situation", The Daily Star reported.
Israel seized control of the Farms in 1967, when it also captured the Syrian Golan Heights.
UN Resolution 1701 was adopted in August 2006 following Israel's 33-day war against Lebanon. The resolution binds Israel to pull its forces out of the village of Ghajar and the Kfar Shouba Hills.
More...
Description:
A great discussion on Lebanese post election situation.
The Lebanese Army has condemned recent Israeli deployments inside Lebanon's borders, saying that it will follow up the move through international bodies.
The army said in a statement on Friday that the recent erection of an observation post and a military facility by Israel on the outskirts of the Kfar Shouba Hills of Lebanon is against the international resolutions and also against the United Nations' frontier line between Lebanon and Israel.
Responding to the Israeli violation of Lebanese territory Lebanon called the action “provocative” and deployed its own army units in the area on Friday.
"In a clear violation of a restricted area of Lebanese territory, and in an attempt to impose a new reality on the ground, the Israeli enemy on Wednesday set up an observation post at the edge of Kfar Shouba and a military position overlooking Baathaeel pond, violating the imaginary line that (UNIFIL) delineated anew, which it considers to be the Israeli withdrawal line," said the statement, making reference to the Blue Line designated by the UN in 2000.
"Given this provocative stance, Lebanese Army units in the region deployed patrols along the border," it added. The army said it was following up on Israel's violation with UNIFIL officials in order "to resolve this urgent situation", The Daily Star reported.
Israel seized control of the Farms in 1967, when it also captured the Syrian Golan Heights.
UN Resolution 1701 was adopted in August 2006 following Israel's 33-day war against Lebanon. The resolution binds Israel to pull its forces out of the village of Ghajar and the Kfar Shouba Hills.
48:59
|
The Latest on Irans Nuclear Program - Press TV - English
An Analysis of on-line mainstream media. A scrutiny of news through alternative eyes. Press TV. Fine Print. 12 Dec 2007.
An Analysis of on-line mainstream media. A scrutiny of news through alternative eyes. Press TV. Fine Print. 12 Dec 2007.
48:14
|
11:00
|
Kids CArtoon - TAYO - Lets All Get Along - English
Tayo and Rogi have a fight about who\'s going to wash first and they leave for work without making up. Meanwhile, a new truck causes a severe traffic jam when he drops the chickens he was...
Tayo and Rogi have a fight about who\'s going to wash first and they leave for work without making up. Meanwhile, a new truck causes a severe traffic jam when he drops the chickens he was transporting on a street downtown. Tayo and Rogi feel awkward when they get stuck in traffic next to each other. They both want to make up, but don\'t have the courage to do so. All of a sudden, a chicken appears before them. Rookie asks them to catch the chicken and they go after the chicken together. Tayo and Rogi succeed in catching the chicken with their fine team work and they promise never to fight again.
More...
Description:
Tayo and Rogi have a fight about who\'s going to wash first and they leave for work without making up. Meanwhile, a new truck causes a severe traffic jam when he drops the chickens he was transporting on a street downtown. Tayo and Rogi feel awkward when they get stuck in traffic next to each other. They both want to make up, but don\'t have the courage to do so. All of a sudden, a chicken appears before them. Rookie asks them to catch the chicken and they go after the chicken together. Tayo and Rogi succeed in catching the chicken with their fine team work and they promise never to fight again.
2:20
|
Defying France full veil ban - April 10, 2011 - English
After more than a year of controversy, the ban on full face veil in France has just come into effect.
But some women are already vowing to defy the restriction, Al Jazeera's Tim Friend reports...
After more than a year of controversy, the ban on full face veil in France has just come into effect.
But some women are already vowing to defy the restriction, Al Jazeera's Tim Friend reports from Paris.
As the extreme right wing gains increasing popularity in France, President Sarkozy has been accused of trying to win back votes ahead of next year's presidential election by deliberately stigmatising Muslims.
The government vehemently denies this, and argues that the full veil is a symbol of male oppression.
More...
Description:
After more than a year of controversy, the ban on full face veil in France has just come into effect.
But some women are already vowing to defy the restriction, Al Jazeera's Tim Friend reports from Paris.
As the extreme right wing gains increasing popularity in France, President Sarkozy has been accused of trying to win back votes ahead of next year's presidential election by deliberately stigmatising Muslims.
The government vehemently denies this, and argues that the full veil is a symbol of male oppression.
49:30
|
The Israel Lobby and U.S Foreign Policy - Press TV - English
An Analysis of on-line mainstream media. A scrutiny of news through alternative eyes. Press TV. Fine Print. 21 Nov 2007
An Analysis of on-line mainstream media. A scrutiny of news through alternative eyes. Press TV. Fine Print. 21 Nov 2007
48:05
|
NIE Report and its Aftermath - Press TV - English
An Analysis of on-line mainstream media. A scrutiny of news through alternative eyes. Press TV. Fine Print. 10 Dec 2007
An Analysis of on-line mainstream media. A scrutiny of news through alternative eyes. Press TV. Fine Print. 10 Dec 2007
2:10
|
Comedy: How Many Green Movement on 25 Bahman? Let us Count - All Languages
Let's count how many of these thugs were protesting, which CNN and BBC described as tens of thousands! Iranians answer the green gun toting thugs that murdered Sane Jaleh during their 25 bahman...
Let's count how many of these thugs were protesting, which CNN and BBC described as tens of thousands! Iranians answer the green gun toting thugs that murdered Sane Jaleh during their 25 bahman peaceful protest. Jaleh was shot with a pistol like Neda Agha Soltan, he was known to be an excellent student at the Fine Arts University and a member of the Basij, involved with community work, his teachers describe him as quiet, innocent and pure. Another victim of Washington's 450 million injection in Green Murder mafia.
More...
Description:
Let's count how many of these thugs were protesting, which CNN and BBC described as tens of thousands! Iranians answer the green gun toting thugs that murdered Sane Jaleh during their 25 bahman peaceful protest. Jaleh was shot with a pistol like Neda Agha Soltan, he was known to be an excellent student at the Fine Arts University and a member of the Basij, involved with community work, his teachers describe him as quiet, innocent and pure. Another victim of Washington's 450 million injection in Green Murder mafia.
47:44
|
6:14
|
[Clip] Do you have problems, Don’t come to Arbaeen | Agha Alireza Panahian 2019 Farsi Sub English
Do you have problems Don’t come to Arbaeen!
Agha AliReza Panahian
We should pay attention to what God is expecting in these calm and quiet tests. Some of the tests are with a great commotion,...
Do you have problems Don’t come to Arbaeen!
Agha AliReza Panahian
We should pay attention to what God is expecting in these calm and quiet tests. Some of the tests are with a great commotion, and they clarify our duty. Some of the tests are very quiet. A person may be deceived and suddenly lose opportunities.
In many cases, the tests for reaching to the highest degrees of closeness to God, are very delicate and quiet. The people of Kufa said, “What should we do now? What will happen? We can’t leave Imam Husayn (‘a) alone. We invited him ourselves. Let’s wait until he comes.” Then they realized that Imam Husayn (‘a) won’t come. Hurr and his troops had stopped them. And Ubaydullah was preparing an army.
They were thinking about what to do. People like Sulayman bin Surad were thinking. Then suddenly what happened? They brought the pure heads into the city. They blamed themselves, “We didn’t know such a tragedy would come about!”
Thousands of people formed the Tawwabin (repenters) uprising. All of them knew that they were going to be killed, and they were killed. There was no use for what they did in history, and they didn’t gain the advantage of being in Karbala or Ashura either.
What? You expected Imam Husayn (‘a) to pass through Hurr’s blockade himself, come into the city of Kufa, nock on your doors one by one, and say, “Come help me. They want to cut my head off. If you don’t come, this and that will happen.” What explanation did you expect from Imam Husayn (‘a) for you to come?
Believe me, Arbaeen is one of the quiet tests. Some of the tests are very quiet. A person may be deceived and suddenly lose opportunities. Believe me, Arbaeen is one of the quiet tests. Arbaeen seems noisy, but it’s also quiet, because one might think, “Is it obligatory for me to struggle for Arbaeen?” I don’t know. What should I say? During these analyses, some lose this great opportunity. During these analyses, some lost the opportunity of helping Husayn (‘a).
But, there was one person sitting in Imam Husayn’s (\\\'a) meeting on the night before Ashura. People informed him, “The cursed Ubaydullah has arrested your son.” Being arrested at that time meant being executed. They had to rescue him somehow. Imam Husayn (‘a) looked at the father and said, “Go save your son. I don’t want you to be here when you have this problem.”
The Imam gave him some money and supplies and said, “Use these to gain your son\\\'s freedom.” If you have problems, don’t come to Arbaeen. If you were in Imam Husayn’s (\\\'a) tent on the night of Ashura, he would have said, “Go fix your problems.” Even if you were there on the night of Ashura!
What did that father do? He looked at AliAkbar, the Imam’s son, and at the Imam (‘a). He said, “Your young son is going to be martyred here tomorrow. Now I should go after my own son? May my son be sacrificed for your son!” He started pleading, “Don’t drive me out of your tent because of this. I don’t want to go after my problems. I want to be for you!” He pleaded so much that the Imam (‘a) said, “Fine, stay.”
The tests are not always noisy or clear in clarifying our duties! Some opportunities come and go quickly like lightning. Some opportunities don’t shake you and say, “Wake up. Get up. Move!” They don’t seize you by the collar. A person asks, “I have some jobs to do. There is Arbaeen too. I don’t know if I should leave my work, or not.”
I say, “I don’t know. What should I say?!” I tell them I don’t know. If it was Imam Husayn (‘a), he would say, “Go, for sure. Go do your work my dear.” How much did you want to spend for Arbaeen? And you say you’re waiting for your Imam (‘a.j.) to reappear for you to rescue the world with him?! You didn’t spend that much for the dignity of Aba Abdillah al-Husayn’s (‘s) gathering in Karbala in the Arbaeen meeting place. You are waiting for the Imam (‘a.j.) to come for you to give your life? We consider Arbaeen to be a quiet test.
More...
Description:
Do you have problems Don’t come to Arbaeen!
Agha AliReza Panahian
We should pay attention to what God is expecting in these calm and quiet tests. Some of the tests are with a great commotion, and they clarify our duty. Some of the tests are very quiet. A person may be deceived and suddenly lose opportunities.
In many cases, the tests for reaching to the highest degrees of closeness to God, are very delicate and quiet. The people of Kufa said, “What should we do now? What will happen? We can’t leave Imam Husayn (‘a) alone. We invited him ourselves. Let’s wait until he comes.” Then they realized that Imam Husayn (‘a) won’t come. Hurr and his troops had stopped them. And Ubaydullah was preparing an army.
They were thinking about what to do. People like Sulayman bin Surad were thinking. Then suddenly what happened? They brought the pure heads into the city. They blamed themselves, “We didn’t know such a tragedy would come about!”
Thousands of people formed the Tawwabin (repenters) uprising. All of them knew that they were going to be killed, and they were killed. There was no use for what they did in history, and they didn’t gain the advantage of being in Karbala or Ashura either.
What? You expected Imam Husayn (‘a) to pass through Hurr’s blockade himself, come into the city of Kufa, nock on your doors one by one, and say, “Come help me. They want to cut my head off. If you don’t come, this and that will happen.” What explanation did you expect from Imam Husayn (‘a) for you to come?
Believe me, Arbaeen is one of the quiet tests. Some of the tests are very quiet. A person may be deceived and suddenly lose opportunities. Believe me, Arbaeen is one of the quiet tests. Arbaeen seems noisy, but it’s also quiet, because one might think, “Is it obligatory for me to struggle for Arbaeen?” I don’t know. What should I say? During these analyses, some lose this great opportunity. During these analyses, some lost the opportunity of helping Husayn (‘a).
But, there was one person sitting in Imam Husayn’s (\\\'a) meeting on the night before Ashura. People informed him, “The cursed Ubaydullah has arrested your son.” Being arrested at that time meant being executed. They had to rescue him somehow. Imam Husayn (‘a) looked at the father and said, “Go save your son. I don’t want you to be here when you have this problem.”
The Imam gave him some money and supplies and said, “Use these to gain your son\\\'s freedom.” If you have problems, don’t come to Arbaeen. If you were in Imam Husayn’s (\\\'a) tent on the night of Ashura, he would have said, “Go fix your problems.” Even if you were there on the night of Ashura!
What did that father do? He looked at AliAkbar, the Imam’s son, and at the Imam (‘a). He said, “Your young son is going to be martyred here tomorrow. Now I should go after my own son? May my son be sacrificed for your son!” He started pleading, “Don’t drive me out of your tent because of this. I don’t want to go after my problems. I want to be for you!” He pleaded so much that the Imam (‘a) said, “Fine, stay.”
The tests are not always noisy or clear in clarifying our duties! Some opportunities come and go quickly like lightning. Some opportunities don’t shake you and say, “Wake up. Get up. Move!” They don’t seize you by the collar. A person asks, “I have some jobs to do. There is Arbaeen too. I don’t know if I should leave my work, or not.”
I say, “I don’t know. What should I say?!” I tell them I don’t know. If it was Imam Husayn (‘a), he would say, “Go, for sure. Go do your work my dear.” How much did you want to spend for Arbaeen? And you say you’re waiting for your Imam (‘a.j.) to reappear for you to rescue the world with him?! You didn’t spend that much for the dignity of Aba Abdillah al-Husayn’s (‘s) gathering in Karbala in the Arbaeen meeting place. You are waiting for the Imam (‘a.j.) to come for you to give your life? We consider Arbaeen to be a quiet test.
1:46
|