13:15
|
The Outstanding Personality of Ayatollah Sistani | Shaykh Muzaffer Hyder | English
Shaykh Muzaffer Hyder raises a question: do we actually know Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Sistani? In addition to being one of the most pious, righteous, and qualified Islamic scholar and Marja\\\', the...
Shaykh Muzaffer Hyder raises a question: do we actually know Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Sistani? In addition to being one of the most pious, righteous, and qualified Islamic scholar and Marja\\\', the Grand Ayatollah is perhaps the most powerful individual throughout Iraq, whose influence extends across the world, yet many of his followers in the West and in the East are under the illusion that our great Marja\\\' is averse to any kind of political involvement. This, however, is far from the truth: from pushing for democratic elections in Iraq to opposing the clear aggressions of the American Regime and urging his followers to support Palestine, Ayatollah Sistani is close to our hearts. It is hard for anyone not to love this humble and devout servant of Allah.
#AyatollahSistani #Revolution #Islam #Politics #Quran #Ahlulbayt #Ayatollah #Sistani #BaqirSadr #ImamKhamenei #Khamenei #Unity #Palestine #Jerusalem #israel #America #USA #NATO #Iraq #Iran #Elections
More...
Description:
Shaykh Muzaffer Hyder raises a question: do we actually know Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Sistani? In addition to being one of the most pious, righteous, and qualified Islamic scholar and Marja\\\', the Grand Ayatollah is perhaps the most powerful individual throughout Iraq, whose influence extends across the world, yet many of his followers in the West and in the East are under the illusion that our great Marja\\\' is averse to any kind of political involvement. This, however, is far from the truth: from pushing for democratic elections in Iraq to opposing the clear aggressions of the American Regime and urging his followers to support Palestine, Ayatollah Sistani is close to our hearts. It is hard for anyone not to love this humble and devout servant of Allah.
#AyatollahSistani #Revolution #Islam #Politics #Quran #Ahlulbayt #Ayatollah #Sistani #BaqirSadr #ImamKhamenei #Khamenei #Unity #Palestine #Jerusalem #israel #America #USA #NATO #Iraq #Iran #Elections
Video Tags:
islamicpulse,
production,
personality,
ayatollah
sistani,
shaykh
muzaffer
hyder,
question,
pious,
righteous,
qualified,
islamic
scholar,
marja,
grand
ayatollah,
powerful,
individual,
iraq,
influence,
world,
followers,
east,
west,
political
involvement,
truth,
democratic
elections,
aggressions,
american
regime,
palestine,
hearts,
devout,
servant
of
Allah,
39:50
|
4:28
|
Martyrs Welcome The Dangers | Haj Qasem and Ayatollah Khamenei | Farsi Sub English
Why do martyrs welcome the dangers? Some say that it\\\'s the vigor and excitement of young age that compels them to go to the battlefield. But then we see that many of our great martyrs were...
Why do martyrs welcome the dangers? Some say that it\\\'s the vigor and excitement of young age that compels them to go to the battlefield. But then we see that many of our great martyrs were 40-50-60 years old, what compels them to welcome and embrace danger?
This clip is a documentary regarding Shaheed Baadpa in the words of the Shaheed himself and Shaheed Haj Qasem.
In this clip, Imam Khamenei also poses an interesting question. He asks why is it that these men who are passed their age of adolescence end up going to the battlefield?
The Leader, Imam Khamenei, answers.
More...
Description:
Why do martyrs welcome the dangers? Some say that it\\\'s the vigor and excitement of young age that compels them to go to the battlefield. But then we see that many of our great martyrs were 40-50-60 years old, what compels them to welcome and embrace danger?
This clip is a documentary regarding Shaheed Baadpa in the words of the Shaheed himself and Shaheed Haj Qasem.
In this clip, Imam Khamenei also poses an interesting question. He asks why is it that these men who are passed their age of adolescence end up going to the battlefield?
The Leader, Imam Khamenei, answers.
Video Tags:
purestream,
media,
production,
Dangers,
Martyrs,
Haj
Qasem,
Ayatollah
Khamenei,
Imam
Sayyid
Ali
Khamenei,
clip,
Shaheed
Baadpa,
Shaheed
Haj
Qasem,
question,
men,
battlefield,
adolescence,
Leader,
6:23
|
If the Quran was a Human Being | UNPLUGGED | English
The phenomenal series based on the book of Imam Khamenei, “An Outline of Islamic Thought In the Quran”, continues with a fresh new look. Sayyid Haydar Hasanayn raises a question that is bound...
The phenomenal series based on the book of Imam Khamenei, “An Outline of Islamic Thought In the Quran”, continues with a fresh new look. Sayyid Haydar Hasanayn raises a question that is bound to get us pondering: so get your thinking caps on and get UNPLUGGED!
#Unplugged #Islam #Quran #Ahlulbayt #ImamKhamenei #KhameneiTheGreat
More...
Description:
The phenomenal series based on the book of Imam Khamenei, “An Outline of Islamic Thought In the Quran”, continues with a fresh new look. Sayyid Haydar Hasanayn raises a question that is bound to get us pondering: so get your thinking caps on and get UNPLUGGED!
#Unplugged #Islam #Quran #Ahlulbayt #ImamKhamenei #KhameneiTheGreat
Video Tags:
islamicpulse,
production,
Quran,
Human
Being,
English,
Islamic
Thought
Quran,
Islamic
Thought,
Imam
Khamenei,
Sayyid
Haydar
Hasanayn,
question,
UNPLUGGED,
35:46
|
3:45
|
Why not send ISLAM from the Beginning? | Sister Spade | English
Islam is the complete and perfect religion for all of humanity. But the question is: why didn’t Allah send this perfect religion right from the start? Why didn’t Prophet Adam, the first man,...
Islam is the complete and perfect religion for all of humanity. But the question is: why didn’t Allah send this perfect religion right from the start? Why didn’t Prophet Adam, the first man, present Islam for the masses at the start of the human race? Why is Islam such a recent phenomenon in the grand scheme of things? Sister Nasreen explains…
#SisterSpade #Islam #Quran #Ahlulbayt
More...
Description:
Islam is the complete and perfect religion for all of humanity. But the question is: why didn’t Allah send this perfect religion right from the start? Why didn’t Prophet Adam, the first man, present Islam for the masses at the start of the human race? Why is Islam such a recent phenomenon in the grand scheme of things? Sister Nasreen explains…
#SisterSpade #Islam #Quran #Ahlulbayt
Video Tags:
islamicpulse,
production,
Islam,
Beginning,
question,
why
didn’t
Allah,
Allah,
Prophet
Adam,
perfect
religion,
present
Islam,
start,
human,
grand,
SisterSpade,
Quran,
ahlulbayt,
Sister
Nasreen,
phenomenon,
Why
didn’t
Prophet,
Allah
send
this
perfect
religion,
10:25
|
How to Keep Your Focus During Salah? | Today I Thought | English
As we all know, Salat is the pillar of Islam and it is of utmost important in our spiritual journey, from beginning to end.
Yet, sometimes one of the most difficult and frustrating things to do...
As we all know, Salat is the pillar of Islam and it is of utmost important in our spiritual journey, from beginning to end.
Yet, sometimes one of the most difficult and frustrating things to do is to focus deeply during our Salat, on our Salat.
Sister Zainab Barakat gives us some down-to-earth pointers on how to focus on our Salat.
And she answers an important question; what role does the information we take in throughout our day, has to play in all this?
#TodayIThought #Islam #Quran #Religion #Ahlulbayt #Akhlaq #Salat #Namaz #Worship #Focus
More...
Description:
As we all know, Salat is the pillar of Islam and it is of utmost important in our spiritual journey, from beginning to end.
Yet, sometimes one of the most difficult and frustrating things to do is to focus deeply during our Salat, on our Salat.
Sister Zainab Barakat gives us some down-to-earth pointers on how to focus on our Salat.
And she answers an important question; what role does the information we take in throughout our day, has to play in all this?
#TodayIThought #Islam #Quran #Religion #Ahlulbayt #Akhlaq #Salat #Namaz #Worship #Focus
Video Tags:
islamicpulse,
production,
TodayIThought,
Salat,
important,
Sister
Zainab
Barakat,
Namaz,
important
question,
Focus,
Worship,
Namaz,
Akhlaq,
Ahlulbayt,
Religion,
Quran,
Islam,
During,
Salah,
2:56
|
What Is The Basiji Culture? | Imam Khamenei | Farsi Sub English
What is Basij and who is a true Basiji?
Who are some people that were a part of the Basij?
Who was the founder of the Basij?
And who was the peak of the Basiji culture?
And finally,...
What is Basij and who is a true Basiji?
Who are some people that were a part of the Basij?
Who was the founder of the Basij?
And who was the peak of the Basiji culture?
And finally, what is the Basiji culture?
The Leader of the Muslim Ummah, Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei, speaks and answers the question, "What Is The Basiji Culture?"
More...
Description:
What is Basij and who is a true Basiji?
Who are some people that were a part of the Basij?
Who was the founder of the Basij?
And who was the peak of the Basiji culture?
And finally, what is the Basiji culture?
The Leader of the Muslim Ummah, Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei, speaks and answers the question, "What Is The Basiji Culture?"
Video Tags:
Pure
Stream
Media,
Media,
Basiji,
Imam
Khamenei,
Basij,
Culture,
Founder,
Leader,
Muslim
Ummah,
Question,
Peak,
Imam
Khomeini,
Quran,
Martyrs,
Shaheed
Soleimani,
Sayyad
Shirazi,
Hemmat,
Babaei,
Shiroodi,
Hamedani,
Fakhrizadeh,
Kazemi
Ashtiyani,
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.
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.
78:51
|
[FULL] Ahmadinejad"s Press conference in New York Sept 2010 - English
Press conference by Iranian President Dr. Ahmadinejad in New York SEPT 2010 - English.
In response to a question of a journalist saying that it was heard there have been some negotiations...
Press conference by Iranian President Dr. Ahmadinejad in New York SEPT 2010 - English.
In response to a question of a journalist saying that it was heard there have been some negotiations between the representative of Iran and US, the president stressed: "In this travel there has been no negotiation between the representatives of the two countries.
In response to a question that Mr. Obama posed some words regarding the talks with Iran "What is your view on them?" Dr. Ahmadinejad on the last day of his travel to New York said; The Islamic Republic of Iran has not cut his relations with US, and in this regard we have no responsibility.
The president continued: "As I mentioned before, apart from the Zionistic regime, we want to have relations with other countries .If US plans to talk he must change his rhetoric and this dialog must be under equal and fair conditions.
On another question he pointed out: "Based on the previously planned programs a representative will talk with one of the 5+1 members under the agreed contexts in October.
The president added the 5+1 group has cut his talk unilaterally and issued a resolution against our country, this is not the first time it has done such things, and when they run short logic, they precede such actions.
On a question regarding the compromise negotiations and Palestine's issue and the position of Iran towards this case, the president mentioned: "This is the people of Palestine to decide for themselves in which no other country has right to interfere. He said that the destiny of Palestine must be determined by the people of Palestine. The nation of Palestine must decide about the kind of their government in a referendum. Experiences show that when Palestinians hasn't participated in decision-makings, the negotiation results were not successful.
On another question quoting from some reports that there have been negotiations between Iran and US ,Dr.Ahmadinejad stressed: "There were No Negotiations between Iran and US representatives ,of course our relations with the nation of US is always available .In this travel I have had meetings with four groups of the US people .On a question regarding the claims of journalists denoting double regulations in Iran and imprisonment of some journalists and freedom of religions ,the president remarked : "The defiant of government are freely living in Iran. They slander and disagree and they are completely free ,of course maybe one or two journalists left the country but there are tens of thousands of journalists working freely in Iran, and hundreds of newspapers are being published.
The president added: "The opposing heads issue declarations to the government of Iran and express their disagreements freely.
On the freedom of religions in Iran, The president said: "The constitution in Iran ascertained the legal religions and these religions under the context of the same regulation can be practiced, of course if a person wants to advertise through illegal methods, regulations will stop him.
More...
Description:
Press conference by Iranian President Dr. Ahmadinejad in New York SEPT 2010 - English.
In response to a question of a journalist saying that it was heard there have been some negotiations between the representative of Iran and US, the president stressed: "In this travel there has been no negotiation between the representatives of the two countries.
In response to a question that Mr. Obama posed some words regarding the talks with Iran "What is your view on them?" Dr. Ahmadinejad on the last day of his travel to New York said; The Islamic Republic of Iran has not cut his relations with US, and in this regard we have no responsibility.
The president continued: "As I mentioned before, apart from the Zionistic regime, we want to have relations with other countries .If US plans to talk he must change his rhetoric and this dialog must be under equal and fair conditions.
On another question he pointed out: "Based on the previously planned programs a representative will talk with one of the 5+1 members under the agreed contexts in October.
The president added the 5+1 group has cut his talk unilaterally and issued a resolution against our country, this is not the first time it has done such things, and when they run short logic, they precede such actions.
On a question regarding the compromise negotiations and Palestine's issue and the position of Iran towards this case, the president mentioned: "This is the people of Palestine to decide for themselves in which no other country has right to interfere. He said that the destiny of Palestine must be determined by the people of Palestine. The nation of Palestine must decide about the kind of their government in a referendum. Experiences show that when Palestinians hasn't participated in decision-makings, the negotiation results were not successful.
On another question quoting from some reports that there have been negotiations between Iran and US ,Dr.Ahmadinejad stressed: "There were No Negotiations between Iran and US representatives ,of course our relations with the nation of US is always available .In this travel I have had meetings with four groups of the US people .On a question regarding the claims of journalists denoting double regulations in Iran and imprisonment of some journalists and freedom of religions ,the president remarked : "The defiant of government are freely living in Iran. They slander and disagree and they are completely free ,of course maybe one or two journalists left the country but there are tens of thousands of journalists working freely in Iran, and hundreds of newspapers are being published.
The president added: "The opposing heads issue declarations to the government of Iran and express their disagreements freely.
On the freedom of religions in Iran, The president said: "The constitution in Iran ascertained the legal religions and these religions under the context of the same regulation can be practiced, of course if a person wants to advertise through illegal methods, regulations will stop him.
31:46
|
Is Islam A Religion of Politics? | IP Talk Show
Welcome to the Islamic Pulse Talk Show.
In this episode we're answering the fundamental question, "Is Islam A Religion of Politics?".
Why is this question such an important question that...
Welcome to the Islamic Pulse Talk Show.
In this episode we're answering the fundamental question, "Is Islam A Religion of Politics?".
Why is this question such an important question that needs answering?
What is one of the objectives for the Almighty Allah to send divinely appointed Prophets (A) to the Earth?
What does it mean when it is said that Islam is a comprehensive religion and it includes all aspects of life?
What kind of view of Islam do the people have that don't have a deep understanding of Islam?
What are some examples of Islam's nurturing of and encouraging social life?
What are some interesting points about the congregational Friday prayers known as the Jum'ah Prayers and its relation to the discussion at hand?
What role does the Masjid play in the original and Pure Muhammadan Islam of the Messenger of Allah (S)?
Where can the roots of the separation of politics from Islam ultimately be traced back to?
What is the concept of a 'spiritual Wilayah' and a 'social Wilayah'; and where were they united?
Why is it said that an Islam without politics is a 'weak' Islam?
What did Imam Khomeini (R) mean when he said that before the Islamic Revolution, Islam was like a dead horse?
What is the source of all the progress that is being seen in the Islamic Republic of Iran?
If the other divinely appointed Imams (A) had the opportunity to establish a government, would they?
What is an interesting story about an Englishman in a Muslim country, and how is it related to our discussion and our mourning ceremonies in the month of Muharram and Safar?
What is a profound statement of Imam Husayn (A) that shows us that his eminence's stand was for all of humanity and for all of time?
And in the end, "Is Islam A Religion of Politics?
To answer these questions and many more, we humbly invited Shaykh Hurr Shabbiri from the United Kingdom, to sit down with us and speak a little bit about the answer to the age-old question, "Is Islam A Religion of Politics?".
Unfortunate that after so many years, we are still answering this age-old question, whose answer is all so fundamentally crystal clear.
#IslamicPulse #IPTalkShow #Allah #Muslims #Shia #Islam #Quran #Politics #PoliticalIslam #Secularism #Resistance #Taghut #Falsehood #Truth #Justice #ImamKhamenei #Imam #ImamKhomeini #Wilayate #AhlulBayt #Imamate #Wilayah #WilayatAlFaqih #Khamenei #JihadeTabyiin #AwaitedOne #Mahdi #Media #SoftWar #IslamicRepublic #Revolution #Resistance #IslamicRevolution #IslamicAwareness
More...
Description:
Welcome to the Islamic Pulse Talk Show.
In this episode we're answering the fundamental question, "Is Islam A Religion of Politics?".
Why is this question such an important question that needs answering?
What is one of the objectives for the Almighty Allah to send divinely appointed Prophets (A) to the Earth?
What does it mean when it is said that Islam is a comprehensive religion and it includes all aspects of life?
What kind of view of Islam do the people have that don't have a deep understanding of Islam?
What are some examples of Islam's nurturing of and encouraging social life?
What are some interesting points about the congregational Friday prayers known as the Jum'ah Prayers and its relation to the discussion at hand?
What role does the Masjid play in the original and Pure Muhammadan Islam of the Messenger of Allah (S)?
Where can the roots of the separation of politics from Islam ultimately be traced back to?
What is the concept of a 'spiritual Wilayah' and a 'social Wilayah'; and where were they united?
Why is it said that an Islam without politics is a 'weak' Islam?
What did Imam Khomeini (R) mean when he said that before the Islamic Revolution, Islam was like a dead horse?
What is the source of all the progress that is being seen in the Islamic Republic of Iran?
If the other divinely appointed Imams (A) had the opportunity to establish a government, would they?
What is an interesting story about an Englishman in a Muslim country, and how is it related to our discussion and our mourning ceremonies in the month of Muharram and Safar?
What is a profound statement of Imam Husayn (A) that shows us that his eminence's stand was for all of humanity and for all of time?
And in the end, "Is Islam A Religion of Politics?
To answer these questions and many more, we humbly invited Shaykh Hurr Shabbiri from the United Kingdom, to sit down with us and speak a little bit about the answer to the age-old question, "Is Islam A Religion of Politics?".
Unfortunate that after so many years, we are still answering this age-old question, whose answer is all so fundamentally crystal clear.
#IslamicPulse #IPTalkShow #Allah #Muslims #Shia #Islam #Quran #Politics #PoliticalIslam #Secularism #Resistance #Taghut #Falsehood #Truth #Justice #ImamKhamenei #Imam #ImamKhomeini #Wilayate #AhlulBayt #Imamate #Wilayah #WilayatAlFaqih #Khamenei #JihadeTabyiin #AwaitedOne #Mahdi #Media #SoftWar #IslamicRepublic #Revolution #Resistance #IslamicRevolution #IslamicAwareness
Video Tags:
Islamicpulse,
Production,
Media,
IslamicPulse,
IPTalkShow,
Allah,
Muslims,
Shia,
Islam,
Quran,
Politics,
Political
Islam,
Secularism,
Resistance,
Taghut,
Falsehood,
Truth
#Justice,
ImamKhamenei,
Imam,
ImamKhomeini,
Wilayate,
AhlulBayt,
Imamate,
Wilayah,
WilayatAlFaqih,
Khamenei,
Jihade
Tabyiin,
Awaited
One,
Mahdi,
Media,
Soft
War,
Islamic
Republic,
Revolution,
Resistance,
Islamic
Revolution,
Islamic
Awareness,
Islam,
Religion,
Politics,
IP,
Talk
Show
Mohammad Javad Larijani Interview with MSNBC - He Just Shut Up CFR Officials - 17 Nov 2011 - English
Iran's Secretary General of the High Council for Human Rights, Mohammad Javad Larijani has said that the recent claims by the International Atomic Energy Agency against Tehran are “laughable.”...
Iran's Secretary General of the High Council for Human Rights, Mohammad Javad Larijani has said that the recent claims by the International Atomic Energy Agency against Tehran are “laughable.”
In his November 8 report on Iran's nuclear program, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano claimed that Iran had engaged in activities related to developing nuclear weapons before 2003, adding that these activities “may still be ongoing.”
Based on the report, which Iran has called "unfounded and unbalanced," the IAEA Board of Governors on Friday passed a new resolution on the Islamic Republic's nuclear activities.
The resolution voices "deep and increasing concern" over Tehran's nuclear program and also calls for Iran and the IAEA to intensify dialogue to resolve the dispute over the issue.
Larijani made the remarks in a heated television debate aired on the American channel MSNBC.
US president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Dr. Richard Haass, Mike Barnicle and John Mitchun were the other guests on the television debate.
What follows is a rough transcription of the interview:
MSNBC: Let's go to the heart of the matter when it comes to Iran, the headlines of the past week, the IAEA report found evidence of nuclear weapons program in Iran and you are quoted as saying that is “quite laughable.” Why sir?
Larijani: The reason is very simple. There is no single evidence in that. These allegations which is aired again is based on a document which was put to us four years ago based on a laptop somewhere found by United States authorities.
And at that time, four years ago, it has been discussed with the agency and the conclusion was that none of these allegations could be verified.
So by a letter it has been closed- the whole issue. Then again it has been renewed and [let me] just give you an example. A good part of this so-called document which is on the laptop, for example lecture notes that somebody presented in Brussels or at some universities. Some of them are parts of some textbook as put together with pictures, formulas, so it is totally inconclusive.
MSNBC: Let's back up. Before I send this to Richard Haass- are you saying it doesn't exist? There is no nuclear program?
Larijani: Well we have a very extensive nuclear program but not to the direction of producing arms. Our nuclear project is very extensive, very advanced. We are number one in the Middle East but we are not pursuing the nuclear armament for two basic reasons.
Number one there is a Fatwa by Ayatollah Khamenei, the leader and it is against the Islamic jurisprudence to build and use mass destructing weapons. It is Haram we call it, unlawful.
And secondly, it doesn't add to our security. It is more liability than asset for us. Our military muscle is strong enough to repel or to deter any imminent threat and this is basically very important achievement.
MSNBC: Richard Haass, put this into perspective for us. What the reports were saying and what this gentleman is saying.
Haass: Well quite frankly it is impossible to take the Iranian denial seriously. They are preposterous. The International Atomic Energy Agency taking information from all the member states in the United Nations have put together a comprehensive and extraordinarily damning report.
And what there is, is a pattern, not a single incident, a pattern over years of Iranian program to move in the direction of developing nuclear weapons.
We see a procurement mechanism to gain access to all sorts of equipment, we see all sorts of undeclared efforts to produce nuclear material now up to 20 percent well on its way to what it needs to produce a weapon, most important there is now serious evidence about the Iranian testing of the implosive device that would actually be the heart of the nuclear weapon.
So the idea that the Iranians have all these underground and undeclared facilities, that they have been misleading the International Atomic Energy Agency for years, the idea they're doing this- this oil rich country in order to produce electricity? If you believe that you seriously have to believe in the tooth fairy.
MSNBC: Sir this doesn't sound like preposterous, little pieces of information that were roaming together randomly.
Larijani: Well the whole scenes of allegation is produced and initiated by the United States. It seems there is a good machinery to produce perpetual allegation against Iran, it is not only one case.
I am telling you exactly that there are no secret programs in our nuclear program and development. Iran's transparency is far ahead of United States, far ahead of UK, far ahead of France and incomparable to Israel which is a renegade state in the sense of NPT.
Barnicle: So you allow inspectors to just come into Iran.
Larijani: The inspectors are coming to Iran periodically, the cameras are there 24 hours. This is quite obvious.
Haass: But the whole concept the way this works, just when you talk about inspectors, let's just be clear, I am sure if everyone watching this will understand, the entire international nuclear inspection effort depends upon the willingness of the country in question to cooperate fully.
This is a gentlemen's agreement. They declare their facilities that are involved in the nuclear business then the inspectors come in and look at them. If they do not declare facilities the inspectors don't give a chance and the problem is this is a gentlemen's agreement in a world where not every country is a gentleman.
So Iran quite frankly has undeclared facilities and undeclared programs which the inspectors had not had access to and the reason we only know about it is that member states, not simply the United States sir, but many, many member states of the United Nations have provided independent information to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which by the way you know and I know is not controlled by the United States.
We have fundamental differences with this agency over the years including over Iraq. We had fundamental differences and we've also had differences over Iran where we the United States felt, this agency was not being nearly tough enough. So now they have come in with an extraordinarily damning report and Iranian officials can dismiss it.
MSNBC: So if this is a gentlemen's agreement, the gentlemen certainly don't agree and sir, you seem very confident and almost as if it's funny it's interesting because we interviewed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about this about a year ago, off camera, and he too seemed very comfortable about his position which is similar to yours.
And if you are so comfortable with your position about the lack of nuclear armament and the facilities that the IAEA is talking about, why not let inspectors completely come in? Open the door let them come in and see what you have.
Larijani: Well the mechanism that the gentleman addressed is not complete because first of all there is no single secret installment or activity which is concealed from the agency.
Secondly, two years ago we asked the agency tell us all the questions you have and he managed to put to us six groups of questions. The questions were raised by themselves not dictated by us. So one by one groups of inspectors came to Iran and we cleared them up and there is official letters from them this group has been finished then we moved to another one.
Well it doesn't make sense that every morning somebody says we guess there is some secret things done there. There should be foundation for this allegation. What do you mean the door should be open? They should ask where do you want to inspect? Did they want to inspect my bedroom or other places? I mean it doesn't make sense.
Barnicle: A few moments ago when you mentioned the nuclear programs of other nations I detected a definite edge in your voice when you mentioned the state of Israel. Do you fear an attack from the state of Israel on your nuclear facilities?
Larijani: Well I am beyond the fear. What is the difference between us and Israel? Israel has a bomb, not a member of NPT; it doesn't disclose anything to agency, nothing wrong with it. You see what the double standard is in here.
We are member of NPT, they periodically come to Iran, their cameras are there, we don't have the weapon then the whole pressure is put on us. No, not at all. We don't fear any attack from anyone. We take it serious in our calculation but we don't fear. There is a difference between that.
Mitchum: Given your tone again Sir when you talk about Israel, just a second ago why shouldn't we suspect that there would be ambitions for Iran to join the club of which Israel is a part with the nuclear arms?
Larijani: We are very advanced in the nuclear technology which is a matter of pride for us and that gentleman mentioned that we have plenty of gas and oil with all good calculations, the age of this is up to 20-25 period, 25 years from now.
It means that if we don't have it, then we should beg in front of the Western countries to light our houses and we know how bad they are treating us in this area. We are right now very happy that we have the first power plant, we know how to make the fuel. We already have more than 25 percent share of sodalite and erudite they don't give us a bit of this fuel that we need, even the twenty percent that we needed for Tehran.
Haass: It's important to keep in mind we are not talking about an established democracy that treats its own people with respect, we are talking about a country also that is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. So this is obvious and understandable concern about what Iran is doing.
Larijani: In terms of record I think United States of America is the largest and the greatest country supporting terrorism. The records of terrorist activity which is supported by the tax money of these people is enormous, I can go one by one.
Barnicle: Wait a minute. This is a free country. And part of our gift is we have the liberty and the freedom to say anything and to sound foolish, to sound absurd, to sound smart. That's absurd saying that America is the biggest terrorist nation in the world.
My question to you Sir is, you seem like a really nice guy, alright, why doesn't your country be a better neighbor?
Larijani: We have fantastic relations with all of our neighbors...
Barnicle: Really? [laughing]
Larijani: Definitely, but the policy of demonizing Iran, a very important policy which is pursued in the region- well it has its own benefit.
Barnicle But it's just in little things, like the American tourists cross the border, supposedly cross the border, you grab them, you scoop them, you hold them for months on end. Why?
Larijani: This is a very simple question I answered before; suppose the security of your people...
Barnicle You're here...
Larijani: No, I'm here with visa- It's quite different. [Suppose] The security of the United States' people, on a patrol with Mexico elsewhere they pick 3 Iranians and ask them why are you here? They say well we are just walking in the desert.
Well, with the whole hostility and suspicion which is between the two countries, you are in here to blow up somewhere definitely they will be put into jail for years if not in Guantanamo, they bring them somewhere else.
It took a lot of time that we convince- I was working on this case because they were like me from ... Berkeley. I talked with their families, managed to contact between them and their families when they were arrested- for their families to come to Iran to take the suspicion away.
This is very natural for security of people to suspect a cross bordering which is in the most volatile regional area of Iran- in which there is daily shooting over there.
Barnicle Ok. They're going to blow up the desert. What is the root? What do you think is the root of Iranian paranoia towards the United States and towards many of its neighbors?
What is the root of this paranoia? Is it the fear that we find out about your nuclear program?
Larijani: We don't have any paranoia about our neighbors. We are very suspicious of American paranoia with us. The question is what is wrong with Iran that this persistent hostility...
Barnicle: You have a track record of international terrorism.
Larijani: This is not true. We are ourselves the victim of international terrorism- terrorism in the area. Let me ask you, who was helping Al-Qaida and Taliban for years while we were at war with them in Afghanistan? The United States of America.
The money from the United States was pouring to Al-Qaida and Taliban- the idea was we should curb Iran by another religious front. Is it correct?
Haass: No it's not correct. The United States did support the Mujahidin; obviously in order to get rid of the Soviet... to say that the United States supported Al-Qaida is again preposterous- the fact is that Iran is supporting terrorism in Lebanon, it's supporting groups like Hezbollah, groups like Hamas; it is involved in Iraq; it is involved in Afghanistan.
Iran has basically become a regional power that is trying to destabilize many countries, trying to make them in some ways heavily influenced by Tehran and that is simply a fact of life- which again is one of the reasons the world is so concerned about Iranian nuclear program.
How do we know Iran will not become even more aggressive? How do we know that nuclear materials will not end in the hands of a group like Hezbollah? What do we see about Iran's track record that would lead us to believe that Iran in any way would be responsible with nuclear material?
This is a genuine concern and if you dismiss it as laughable Sir you are seriously underestimating not simply the American, not simply the Israeli, but I would suggest the world's concern over the direction your government is heading.
Larijani: The disastrous thing is the blind policy of the United States in supporting carte blanche renegade Israel which is the source of all tension in the region. If you call Hezbollah and Hamas terrorist groups- they are fighting to be given the permission to live. What about Israel?
Israel is involved in government sponsored terrorism. Kills anybody who thinks that it's not correct and deprives millions of people from basic tenures of life. 60 years of atrocity in that area is supported carte blanche by the US, this is even against the basic interests of that nation- they don't know it.
Mitchum:Sir do you recognize the right of Israel to exist?
Larijani: We recognize the rights of Jews, Christians and Muslims to live together in peace and tranquility- to create a racist regime in the middle of a land put the others out is like creating a small colony for the blacks and leave the rest for the whites.
Mitchum: Thank you for the answer.
Barnicle: The answer is no.
Larijani: No, the answer is not no. We respect any decision by Palestinians. We are not in a position to tell them what kind of state they [should] have. But they should be given the chance to decide.
MSNBC:This has been fascinating and a great picture window into the choices that Americans make when they're choosing their president and also a sense of what our Secretary of State and what our diplomats have to confront in dealing with when they're going out into the world and working with other countries.
It is extremely complicated and often conversations feel like they're going in circles because it's very hard to develop a common understanding or even a place where you can start engaging and I think this was an example of that. Mohammad Javad Larijani, thank you for coming on the show this morning.
More...
Description:
Iran's Secretary General of the High Council for Human Rights, Mohammad Javad Larijani has said that the recent claims by the International Atomic Energy Agency against Tehran are “laughable.”
In his November 8 report on Iran's nuclear program, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano claimed that Iran had engaged in activities related to developing nuclear weapons before 2003, adding that these activities “may still be ongoing.”
Based on the report, which Iran has called "unfounded and unbalanced," the IAEA Board of Governors on Friday passed a new resolution on the Islamic Republic's nuclear activities.
The resolution voices "deep and increasing concern" over Tehran's nuclear program and also calls for Iran and the IAEA to intensify dialogue to resolve the dispute over the issue.
Larijani made the remarks in a heated television debate aired on the American channel MSNBC.
US president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Dr. Richard Haass, Mike Barnicle and John Mitchun were the other guests on the television debate.
What follows is a rough transcription of the interview:
MSNBC: Let's go to the heart of the matter when it comes to Iran, the headlines of the past week, the IAEA report found evidence of nuclear weapons program in Iran and you are quoted as saying that is “quite laughable.” Why sir?
Larijani: The reason is very simple. There is no single evidence in that. These allegations which is aired again is based on a document which was put to us four years ago based on a laptop somewhere found by United States authorities.
And at that time, four years ago, it has been discussed with the agency and the conclusion was that none of these allegations could be verified.
So by a letter it has been closed- the whole issue. Then again it has been renewed and [let me] just give you an example. A good part of this so-called document which is on the laptop, for example lecture notes that somebody presented in Brussels or at some universities. Some of them are parts of some textbook as put together with pictures, formulas, so it is totally inconclusive.
MSNBC: Let's back up. Before I send this to Richard Haass- are you saying it doesn't exist? There is no nuclear program?
Larijani: Well we have a very extensive nuclear program but not to the direction of producing arms. Our nuclear project is very extensive, very advanced. We are number one in the Middle East but we are not pursuing the nuclear armament for two basic reasons.
Number one there is a Fatwa by Ayatollah Khamenei, the leader and it is against the Islamic jurisprudence to build and use mass destructing weapons. It is Haram we call it, unlawful.
And secondly, it doesn't add to our security. It is more liability than asset for us. Our military muscle is strong enough to repel or to deter any imminent threat and this is basically very important achievement.
MSNBC: Richard Haass, put this into perspective for us. What the reports were saying and what this gentleman is saying.
Haass: Well quite frankly it is impossible to take the Iranian denial seriously. They are preposterous. The International Atomic Energy Agency taking information from all the member states in the United Nations have put together a comprehensive and extraordinarily damning report.
And what there is, is a pattern, not a single incident, a pattern over years of Iranian program to move in the direction of developing nuclear weapons.
We see a procurement mechanism to gain access to all sorts of equipment, we see all sorts of undeclared efforts to produce nuclear material now up to 20 percent well on its way to what it needs to produce a weapon, most important there is now serious evidence about the Iranian testing of the implosive device that would actually be the heart of the nuclear weapon.
So the idea that the Iranians have all these underground and undeclared facilities, that they have been misleading the International Atomic Energy Agency for years, the idea they're doing this- this oil rich country in order to produce electricity? If you believe that you seriously have to believe in the tooth fairy.
MSNBC: Sir this doesn't sound like preposterous, little pieces of information that were roaming together randomly.
Larijani: Well the whole scenes of allegation is produced and initiated by the United States. It seems there is a good machinery to produce perpetual allegation against Iran, it is not only one case.
I am telling you exactly that there are no secret programs in our nuclear program and development. Iran's transparency is far ahead of United States, far ahead of UK, far ahead of France and incomparable to Israel which is a renegade state in the sense of NPT.
Barnicle: So you allow inspectors to just come into Iran.
Larijani: The inspectors are coming to Iran periodically, the cameras are there 24 hours. This is quite obvious.
Haass: But the whole concept the way this works, just when you talk about inspectors, let's just be clear, I am sure if everyone watching this will understand, the entire international nuclear inspection effort depends upon the willingness of the country in question to cooperate fully.
This is a gentlemen's agreement. They declare their facilities that are involved in the nuclear business then the inspectors come in and look at them. If they do not declare facilities the inspectors don't give a chance and the problem is this is a gentlemen's agreement in a world where not every country is a gentleman.
So Iran quite frankly has undeclared facilities and undeclared programs which the inspectors had not had access to and the reason we only know about it is that member states, not simply the United States sir, but many, many member states of the United Nations have provided independent information to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which by the way you know and I know is not controlled by the United States.
We have fundamental differences with this agency over the years including over Iraq. We had fundamental differences and we've also had differences over Iran where we the United States felt, this agency was not being nearly tough enough. So now they have come in with an extraordinarily damning report and Iranian officials can dismiss it.
MSNBC: So if this is a gentlemen's agreement, the gentlemen certainly don't agree and sir, you seem very confident and almost as if it's funny it's interesting because we interviewed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about this about a year ago, off camera, and he too seemed very comfortable about his position which is similar to yours.
And if you are so comfortable with your position about the lack of nuclear armament and the facilities that the IAEA is talking about, why not let inspectors completely come in? Open the door let them come in and see what you have.
Larijani: Well the mechanism that the gentleman addressed is not complete because first of all there is no single secret installment or activity which is concealed from the agency.
Secondly, two years ago we asked the agency tell us all the questions you have and he managed to put to us six groups of questions. The questions were raised by themselves not dictated by us. So one by one groups of inspectors came to Iran and we cleared them up and there is official letters from them this group has been finished then we moved to another one.
Well it doesn't make sense that every morning somebody says we guess there is some secret things done there. There should be foundation for this allegation. What do you mean the door should be open? They should ask where do you want to inspect? Did they want to inspect my bedroom or other places? I mean it doesn't make sense.
Barnicle: A few moments ago when you mentioned the nuclear programs of other nations I detected a definite edge in your voice when you mentioned the state of Israel. Do you fear an attack from the state of Israel on your nuclear facilities?
Larijani: Well I am beyond the fear. What is the difference between us and Israel? Israel has a bomb, not a member of NPT; it doesn't disclose anything to agency, nothing wrong with it. You see what the double standard is in here.
We are member of NPT, they periodically come to Iran, their cameras are there, we don't have the weapon then the whole pressure is put on us. No, not at all. We don't fear any attack from anyone. We take it serious in our calculation but we don't fear. There is a difference between that.
Mitchum: Given your tone again Sir when you talk about Israel, just a second ago why shouldn't we suspect that there would be ambitions for Iran to join the club of which Israel is a part with the nuclear arms?
Larijani: We are very advanced in the nuclear technology which is a matter of pride for us and that gentleman mentioned that we have plenty of gas and oil with all good calculations, the age of this is up to 20-25 period, 25 years from now.
It means that if we don't have it, then we should beg in front of the Western countries to light our houses and we know how bad they are treating us in this area. We are right now very happy that we have the first power plant, we know how to make the fuel. We already have more than 25 percent share of sodalite and erudite they don't give us a bit of this fuel that we need, even the twenty percent that we needed for Tehran.
Haass: It's important to keep in mind we are not talking about an established democracy that treats its own people with respect, we are talking about a country also that is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. So this is obvious and understandable concern about what Iran is doing.
Larijani: In terms of record I think United States of America is the largest and the greatest country supporting terrorism. The records of terrorist activity which is supported by the tax money of these people is enormous, I can go one by one.
Barnicle: Wait a minute. This is a free country. And part of our gift is we have the liberty and the freedom to say anything and to sound foolish, to sound absurd, to sound smart. That's absurd saying that America is the biggest terrorist nation in the world.
My question to you Sir is, you seem like a really nice guy, alright, why doesn't your country be a better neighbor?
Larijani: We have fantastic relations with all of our neighbors...
Barnicle: Really? [laughing]
Larijani: Definitely, but the policy of demonizing Iran, a very important policy which is pursued in the region- well it has its own benefit.
Barnicle But it's just in little things, like the American tourists cross the border, supposedly cross the border, you grab them, you scoop them, you hold them for months on end. Why?
Larijani: This is a very simple question I answered before; suppose the security of your people...
Barnicle You're here...
Larijani: No, I'm here with visa- It's quite different. [Suppose] The security of the United States' people, on a patrol with Mexico elsewhere they pick 3 Iranians and ask them why are you here? They say well we are just walking in the desert.
Well, with the whole hostility and suspicion which is between the two countries, you are in here to blow up somewhere definitely they will be put into jail for years if not in Guantanamo, they bring them somewhere else.
It took a lot of time that we convince- I was working on this case because they were like me from ... Berkeley. I talked with their families, managed to contact between them and their families when they were arrested- for their families to come to Iran to take the suspicion away.
This is very natural for security of people to suspect a cross bordering which is in the most volatile regional area of Iran- in which there is daily shooting over there.
Barnicle Ok. They're going to blow up the desert. What is the root? What do you think is the root of Iranian paranoia towards the United States and towards many of its neighbors?
What is the root of this paranoia? Is it the fear that we find out about your nuclear program?
Larijani: We don't have any paranoia about our neighbors. We are very suspicious of American paranoia with us. The question is what is wrong with Iran that this persistent hostility...
Barnicle: You have a track record of international terrorism.
Larijani: This is not true. We are ourselves the victim of international terrorism- terrorism in the area. Let me ask you, who was helping Al-Qaida and Taliban for years while we were at war with them in Afghanistan? The United States of America.
The money from the United States was pouring to Al-Qaida and Taliban- the idea was we should curb Iran by another religious front. Is it correct?
Haass: No it's not correct. The United States did support the Mujahidin; obviously in order to get rid of the Soviet... to say that the United States supported Al-Qaida is again preposterous- the fact is that Iran is supporting terrorism in Lebanon, it's supporting groups like Hezbollah, groups like Hamas; it is involved in Iraq; it is involved in Afghanistan.
Iran has basically become a regional power that is trying to destabilize many countries, trying to make them in some ways heavily influenced by Tehran and that is simply a fact of life- which again is one of the reasons the world is so concerned about Iranian nuclear program.
How do we know Iran will not become even more aggressive? How do we know that nuclear materials will not end in the hands of a group like Hezbollah? What do we see about Iran's track record that would lead us to believe that Iran in any way would be responsible with nuclear material?
This is a genuine concern and if you dismiss it as laughable Sir you are seriously underestimating not simply the American, not simply the Israeli, but I would suggest the world's concern over the direction your government is heading.
Larijani: The disastrous thing is the blind policy of the United States in supporting carte blanche renegade Israel which is the source of all tension in the region. If you call Hezbollah and Hamas terrorist groups- they are fighting to be given the permission to live. What about Israel?
Israel is involved in government sponsored terrorism. Kills anybody who thinks that it's not correct and deprives millions of people from basic tenures of life. 60 years of atrocity in that area is supported carte blanche by the US, this is even against the basic interests of that nation- they don't know it.
Mitchum:Sir do you recognize the right of Israel to exist?
Larijani: We recognize the rights of Jews, Christians and Muslims to live together in peace and tranquility- to create a racist regime in the middle of a land put the others out is like creating a small colony for the blacks and leave the rest for the whites.
Mitchum: Thank you for the answer.
Barnicle: The answer is no.
Larijani: No, the answer is not no. We respect any decision by Palestinians. We are not in a position to tell them what kind of state they [should] have. But they should be given the chance to decide.
MSNBC:This has been fascinating and a great picture window into the choices that Americans make when they're choosing their president and also a sense of what our Secretary of State and what our diplomats have to confront in dealing with when they're going out into the world and working with other countries.
It is extremely complicated and often conversations feel like they're going in circles because it's very hard to develop a common understanding or even a place where you can start engaging and I think this was an example of that. Mohammad Javad Larijani, thank you for coming on the show this morning.
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 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
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
[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.
6:29
|
[Clip] What does God look like? | Alireza Panahian Oct.7,2019 Farsi Sub English
What does God look like
“Have you seen God?” Who likes to see God, sense Him, and live with Him? Where is God so that I can see Him, find Him, smell Him, and fall in love with Him? No one...
What does God look like
“Have you seen God?” Who likes to see God, sense Him, and live with Him? Where is God so that I can see Him, find Him, smell Him, and fall in love with Him? No one says to believe in a God Who can’t be seen. No one says to fall in love with a God Who can’t be seen. Is it possible to fall in love with such a God? What should I love? Whoever wants to see God, he can only see Him in one situation. Look at God as the examiner in your life.
There is no need for you to see an object or imagine Him in your imagination. Just pay attention to this fact that God is testing you. As soon as a problem occurs, ask God, “God, is it a test?” Talk to Him! He is talking to you through the language of testing. I swear to God you’ll understand His behaviour. You’ll understand His smiling and frowning. You will understand His pouting and reconciliation. You’ll understand from which of your actions He has become happy. You’ll understand why He loves you. You’ll understand how much He loves you. Then, when you start praying, you’ll understand to Whom you are talking! There is Someone in front of you!
God says, “You don’t need to see Me. I work with you. Understand that whatever happens to you from morning until night is Me talking to you in the language of incidents.” As soon as someone is kind to you, say, “God, You wanted someone to be kind to me?”
If you look, you’ll understand the reason. In the beginning you won’t. You’ll say, “God, You wanted someone to be kind to me? Why? I don’t understand. But You tested me!” When someone frowns at you, say, “God, You wanted someone to frown at me? Had I become rude? Was I arrogant?” He’ll easily talk to you. He’ll talk to you even better than your friends do. He’ll become your companion. You’ll start loving Him.
Actually, I didn’t ask you a question. And, you didn’t say anything about it. I don’t know how I’m talking, or I should say who I’m talking to. My friends, answer a question. Do you believe that each incident, which happens around us from morning until night, is accidental? Yes? Please, everyone answer. Does everyone say no? Is it accidental? Were they all designed by God? “Yes!” All of them? Do you believe that? Why were they designed? To have fun? For us to circle around ourselves? Are all of them tests, or not? “Yes!” What good answers you give!
Now, another question. Do we look at all of the incidents, which happen from morning until night, as tests? Good! May I be sacrificed for you. You’re seeing it yourself. Then he says, “Sir, what should I do to pay attention to God in praying?” “My dear, you can’t pay attention to God.”
He says, “I’m constantly distracted.” Have you ever seen God? Have you lived with Him for even two days? They have even stated the number in the traditions. If you live like this for forty days, everything around you will talk to you. The ground and the sky will talk to you!
Living with God means that you understand the language of God’s tests. Look what He wants from you at each moment. Look! What does He want from you now? He brings up an incident. Suddenly your wife gets upset and grumbles. Look at God and ask, “Is my capacity supposed to be tested?” Your friend invites you to sin. Look at God, “God, is it a test? I can’t tolerate it.” Cry right then. Say, “God, I swear to Husayn (‘a) I can’t tolerate it. Don’t send these friends. Send other friends. Send friends who take me to Medina and Karbala.” Say this a few times. The next week one of your friends will come and tell you, “I’m going to Karbala. Will you come with me?” Look at God and say, “God, how quickly You hear me!”
Have you ever seen God? Have you lived with Him for two days? They have even stated the number in the traditions. If you live like this for forty days, everything around you will talk to you. The ground and the sky will talk to you!
More...
Description:
What does God look like
“Have you seen God?” Who likes to see God, sense Him, and live with Him? Where is God so that I can see Him, find Him, smell Him, and fall in love with Him? No one says to believe in a God Who can’t be seen. No one says to fall in love with a God Who can’t be seen. Is it possible to fall in love with such a God? What should I love? Whoever wants to see God, he can only see Him in one situation. Look at God as the examiner in your life.
There is no need for you to see an object or imagine Him in your imagination. Just pay attention to this fact that God is testing you. As soon as a problem occurs, ask God, “God, is it a test?” Talk to Him! He is talking to you through the language of testing. I swear to God you’ll understand His behaviour. You’ll understand His smiling and frowning. You will understand His pouting and reconciliation. You’ll understand from which of your actions He has become happy. You’ll understand why He loves you. You’ll understand how much He loves you. Then, when you start praying, you’ll understand to Whom you are talking! There is Someone in front of you!
God says, “You don’t need to see Me. I work with you. Understand that whatever happens to you from morning until night is Me talking to you in the language of incidents.” As soon as someone is kind to you, say, “God, You wanted someone to be kind to me?”
If you look, you’ll understand the reason. In the beginning you won’t. You’ll say, “God, You wanted someone to be kind to me? Why? I don’t understand. But You tested me!” When someone frowns at you, say, “God, You wanted someone to frown at me? Had I become rude? Was I arrogant?” He’ll easily talk to you. He’ll talk to you even better than your friends do. He’ll become your companion. You’ll start loving Him.
Actually, I didn’t ask you a question. And, you didn’t say anything about it. I don’t know how I’m talking, or I should say who I’m talking to. My friends, answer a question. Do you believe that each incident, which happens around us from morning until night, is accidental? Yes? Please, everyone answer. Does everyone say no? Is it accidental? Were they all designed by God? “Yes!” All of them? Do you believe that? Why were they designed? To have fun? For us to circle around ourselves? Are all of them tests, or not? “Yes!” What good answers you give!
Now, another question. Do we look at all of the incidents, which happen from morning until night, as tests? Good! May I be sacrificed for you. You’re seeing it yourself. Then he says, “Sir, what should I do to pay attention to God in praying?” “My dear, you can’t pay attention to God.”
He says, “I’m constantly distracted.” Have you ever seen God? Have you lived with Him for even two days? They have even stated the number in the traditions. If you live like this for forty days, everything around you will talk to you. The ground and the sky will talk to you!
Living with God means that you understand the language of God’s tests. Look what He wants from you at each moment. Look! What does He want from you now? He brings up an incident. Suddenly your wife gets upset and grumbles. Look at God and ask, “Is my capacity supposed to be tested?” Your friend invites you to sin. Look at God, “God, is it a test? I can’t tolerate it.” Cry right then. Say, “God, I swear to Husayn (‘a) I can’t tolerate it. Don’t send these friends. Send other friends. Send friends who take me to Medina and Karbala.” Say this a few times. The next week one of your friends will come and tell you, “I’m going to Karbala. Will you come with me?” Look at God and say, “God, how quickly You hear me!”
Have you ever seen God? Have you lived with Him for two days? They have even stated the number in the traditions. If you live like this for forty days, everything around you will talk to you. The ground and the sky will talk to you!
19:58
|
Bibi Yahoo's Top 10 Fears | Keepin' It Real | English
Everybody loves a good Top 10 Fears; and most especially when it's a person who's in the limelight.
And it's even better, when it's the holy month of Ramadhan and we're talking about al-Quds...
Everybody loves a good Top 10 Fears; and most especially when it's a person who's in the limelight.
And it's even better, when it's the holy month of Ramadhan and we're talking about al-Quds Day; well kind of.
So in this episode of Keepin' It Real, we fantasized about what it would be like if we listed "Bibi Yahoo's Top 10 Fears" in ode of the International al-Quds Day.
But before our Top 10, please try to keep in mind that with all the different current events going on in the world, we all really need a funny, relaxed, refreshing, and yet eye-opening commentary on it all.
So Sayyid Shahryar stepped up to the plate to hit a home run and humbly shed a little insight into all that's going on around the world; past, present, and perhaps even future.
So, back to our Top 10. This is so exciting, because we've never done this before, and we might never do it again!
First of all, who in the wide world is 'Bibi Yahoo'?
And in a Top 10 list, is 10 supposed to be the best/worst/whatever, or is number 1? (good question)
What are just a few of the names that a famous israeli PM has gone by throughout his 70-plus year life?
So cutting to the chase (if that's a term) what is the number 10, of the Top 10 Fears of Bibi Yahoo?
And don't worry, we won't ask the aforementioned question another 9 times? (sorry for the question mark)
What are some of the ultra-extremist and borderline terroristic statements of present-day israeli governmental officials?
What is a 'settler rampage' and according to the United Nations, approximately how many have occurred in Gregorian Calendar year 2021?
What happens when oppressed people go from having stones to having weapons?
What does the Karish gas field incident have to do with what we're talking about?
Please pay close attention to the Top 10's numbers 6 and 5.....
What do the recent protests by israelis living in israel tell us about the current state of the israeli regime in israel?
Who is the King of Jordan, and who is the Custodian of the Christian and Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem, and why in the world are both of these people so quiet when it comes to Palestine?
And finally, what are another 13 Top 10 that we wanted to include, but couldn't due to brevity of lifespan?
And another finally, what is Bibi Yahoo's Number 1 Top 10 Fear... and please don't fast forward to the end, because there's no fun in that, and it's cheating; just stay calm and wait for it?
Well, we truly hope you all had an eventful International al-Quds Day, wherever you are!
And may you all have a blessed rest of the holy month of Ramadhan, wherever you are!
And remember, Palestine Will Be Free, From the River to the Sea, wherever you are!
Hey, we're just "Keepin' It Real", wherever you are!
#IslamicPulse #KeepinItReal #KIR #NewsCommentary #Islam #Allah #Quran #AhlulBayt #GlobalArrogance #IslamicRevolution #Revolution #Quds #AlQuds #QudsDay #Palestine #BDS #FreePalestine #FlyTheFlag #BoycottApartheid #AlQuds2023 #AlQuds_The_Axis #QudsDay #Resistance #Zionism #DeathToisrael #Taghut #Falsehood #ArrogantPowers #Truth #Justice #IslamicRepublic #Khamenei #ImamKhamenei #ImamKhomeini #Yemen #YemenWar #Hamas #Hezbollah #AnsarAllah #IslamicResistance #Evil #Freedom #Slavery #Humanity #God #Ramadan #Ramadhan #RamadanKareem #RamadanMubarak #Sawm #Ramadan2023 #Ramadan1444 #Fasting #Wilayate #Qadr #Imamate #Wilayah #WilayatAlFaqih #JihadeTabyiin #AwaitedOne #Mahdi #Media #SoftWar #IslamicAwareness #America #UK #Britain #UN #West #France #Germany #ProxyWar #Funny #Laugh #Smile
More...
Description:
Everybody loves a good Top 10 Fears; and most especially when it's a person who's in the limelight.
And it's even better, when it's the holy month of Ramadhan and we're talking about al-Quds Day; well kind of.
So in this episode of Keepin' It Real, we fantasized about what it would be like if we listed "Bibi Yahoo's Top 10 Fears" in ode of the International al-Quds Day.
But before our Top 10, please try to keep in mind that with all the different current events going on in the world, we all really need a funny, relaxed, refreshing, and yet eye-opening commentary on it all.
So Sayyid Shahryar stepped up to the plate to hit a home run and humbly shed a little insight into all that's going on around the world; past, present, and perhaps even future.
So, back to our Top 10. This is so exciting, because we've never done this before, and we might never do it again!
First of all, who in the wide world is 'Bibi Yahoo'?
And in a Top 10 list, is 10 supposed to be the best/worst/whatever, or is number 1? (good question)
What are just a few of the names that a famous israeli PM has gone by throughout his 70-plus year life?
So cutting to the chase (if that's a term) what is the number 10, of the Top 10 Fears of Bibi Yahoo?
And don't worry, we won't ask the aforementioned question another 9 times? (sorry for the question mark)
What are some of the ultra-extremist and borderline terroristic statements of present-day israeli governmental officials?
What is a 'settler rampage' and according to the United Nations, approximately how many have occurred in Gregorian Calendar year 2021?
What happens when oppressed people go from having stones to having weapons?
What does the Karish gas field incident have to do with what we're talking about?
Please pay close attention to the Top 10's numbers 6 and 5.....
What do the recent protests by israelis living in israel tell us about the current state of the israeli regime in israel?
Who is the King of Jordan, and who is the Custodian of the Christian and Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem, and why in the world are both of these people so quiet when it comes to Palestine?
And finally, what are another 13 Top 10 that we wanted to include, but couldn't due to brevity of lifespan?
And another finally, what is Bibi Yahoo's Number 1 Top 10 Fear... and please don't fast forward to the end, because there's no fun in that, and it's cheating; just stay calm and wait for it?
Well, we truly hope you all had an eventful International al-Quds Day, wherever you are!
And may you all have a blessed rest of the holy month of Ramadhan, wherever you are!
And remember, Palestine Will Be Free, From the River to the Sea, wherever you are!
Hey, we're just "Keepin' It Real", wherever you are!
#IslamicPulse #KeepinItReal #KIR #NewsCommentary #Islam #Allah #Quran #AhlulBayt #GlobalArrogance #IslamicRevolution #Revolution #Quds #AlQuds #QudsDay #Palestine #BDS #FreePalestine #FlyTheFlag #BoycottApartheid #AlQuds2023 #AlQuds_The_Axis #QudsDay #Resistance #Zionism #DeathToisrael #Taghut #Falsehood #ArrogantPowers #Truth #Justice #IslamicRepublic #Khamenei #ImamKhamenei #ImamKhomeini #Yemen #YemenWar #Hamas #Hezbollah #AnsarAllah #IslamicResistance #Evil #Freedom #Slavery #Humanity #God #Ramadan #Ramadhan #RamadanKareem #RamadanMubarak #Sawm #Ramadan2023 #Ramadan1444 #Fasting #Wilayate #Qadr #Imamate #Wilayah #WilayatAlFaqih #JihadeTabyiin #AwaitedOne #Mahdi #Media #SoftWar #IslamicAwareness #America #UK #Britain #UN #West #France #Germany #ProxyWar #Funny #Laugh #Smile
Video Tags:
Islamicpulse,
Production,
Media,
Bibi
Yahoo,
10
Fears,
Fears,
Top
10,
Keepin'
It
Real,
Ramadhan,
Ramadan,
Ramazan,
Quds,
Quds
day,
Al
Quds,
world,
Sayyid
Shahryar,
Islam,
Allah,
Global
Arrogance,
Islamic
Revolution,
Palestine,
Free
Palestine,
Resistance,
Islamic
Resistance,
Zionism,
Death
To
israel,
D2i,
IslamicRepublic,
Truth,
Imam
Khamenei,
Yemen,
Hamas,
Hezbollah,
Ansar
Allah,
Evil,
Freedom,
Slavery,
Humanity,
America,
UK,
Britain,
UN,
West,
France,
Germany,
Proxy
War,
Funny,
Laugh,
Smile,
Dua Tawassul - My Favorite Recitation - ARABIC with ENGLISH subtitles-By Aba Thar Al-Hawaigi
Dua Tawassul is a supplication recited by the Followers of the Family of the Prophet of Islam -Ahlulbayt- in which they ask Allah-the Exalted-for the intercession of those pure people whom He has...
Dua Tawassul is a supplication recited by the Followers of the Family of the Prophet of Islam -Ahlulbayt- in which they ask Allah-the Exalted-for the intercession of those pure people whom He has spoken of in the Quran - when Allah says -None shall have the power of intercession but such a one as has received permission -or promise- from -Allah- Most Gracious - 19.87 - Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth 2.255 - no intercession avail except for those for whom permission has been granted by -God- 20.109 - And those whom they call upon besides Him have no authority for intercession. BUT he who bears witness of the truth and they know -him- 43.86 - And how many an angel is there in the heavens whose intercession does not avail at all except after Allah has given permission to whom He pleases and chooses - 53.26 Question - Does Allah -swt- allow us to use others as a Wasila -means of approach- to him. Yes - Allah -swt- tells us in the Quran that the sole reason for creating Man and Jinn is so that they worship Him. We are here to worship Allah who also says in the Quran -Fear Allah and find a wasila to him 5.35. The definition of wasila is -a means of approach- so worship is not direct - it is attained via a means of approach - a guide. Remember Allah -swt- is not telling you to create a wasila - he is telling you to find it. So it exists - it is down to you to find it. For mankind that wasila can only be through a fellow human being - we have no contact with jinns and therefore they cannot act as a wasila. Angels likewise cannot act as a wasila to Allah -swt- as they have no contact with us until the time of death. The wasila will have to be a human being- because the earth is inhabited by humans and as Allah says when explaining the appointment of Prophets -If there were angels on the earth I would send them an angel as a Prophet from heaven -Surat al Isra verse 95 Question - Is this Dua authentic - Shaykh Tusi says - in his book Misbah - that Imam Hassan bin Ali Al Askari a.s. wrote this duaa for Abu Muhammad who requested him to teach him the proper way of reciting salawat. Allama Majlisi has mentioned this duaa on the authority of Ibn babawayh who confidently says that there is no difficulty or problem that this duaa does not solve. The merciful Allah is beseeched in the name of and for the sake of the Holy prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt. It is known as the Dua which fulfills all legitimate desires in a short amount of time. By Aba Thar Al-Hawaigi
More...
Description:
Dua Tawassul is a supplication recited by the Followers of the Family of the Prophet of Islam -Ahlulbayt- in which they ask Allah-the Exalted-for the intercession of those pure people whom He has spoken of in the Quran - when Allah says -None shall have the power of intercession but such a one as has received permission -or promise- from -Allah- Most Gracious - 19.87 - Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth 2.255 - no intercession avail except for those for whom permission has been granted by -God- 20.109 - And those whom they call upon besides Him have no authority for intercession. BUT he who bears witness of the truth and they know -him- 43.86 - And how many an angel is there in the heavens whose intercession does not avail at all except after Allah has given permission to whom He pleases and chooses - 53.26 Question - Does Allah -swt- allow us to use others as a Wasila -means of approach- to him. Yes - Allah -swt- tells us in the Quran that the sole reason for creating Man and Jinn is so that they worship Him. We are here to worship Allah who also says in the Quran -Fear Allah and find a wasila to him 5.35. The definition of wasila is -a means of approach- so worship is not direct - it is attained via a means of approach - a guide. Remember Allah -swt- is not telling you to create a wasila - he is telling you to find it. So it exists - it is down to you to find it. For mankind that wasila can only be through a fellow human being - we have no contact with jinns and therefore they cannot act as a wasila. Angels likewise cannot act as a wasila to Allah -swt- as they have no contact with us until the time of death. The wasila will have to be a human being- because the earth is inhabited by humans and as Allah says when explaining the appointment of Prophets -If there were angels on the earth I would send them an angel as a Prophet from heaven -Surat al Isra verse 95 Question - Is this Dua authentic - Shaykh Tusi says - in his book Misbah - that Imam Hassan bin Ali Al Askari a.s. wrote this duaa for Abu Muhammad who requested him to teach him the proper way of reciting salawat. Allama Majlisi has mentioned this duaa on the authority of Ibn babawayh who confidently says that there is no difficulty or problem that this duaa does not solve. The merciful Allah is beseeched in the name of and for the sake of the Holy prophet and his Ahl ul Bayt. It is known as the Dua which fulfills all legitimate desires in a short amount of time. By Aba Thar Al-Hawaigi
Is Bush an Idiot - English
Is the President of the United States George W Bush an idiot Scarborough Country asks the forbidden question They look at his inability to speak correctly not at his inability to lead correctly...
Is the President of the United States George W Bush an idiot Scarborough Country asks the forbidden question They look at his inability to speak correctly not at his inability to lead correctly however Of course the real question is is the America is full of idiots because they nominated the idiot and continue to blindly follow his crap they elected the stupid and have not begun demanding better
More...
Description:
Is the President of the United States George W Bush an idiot Scarborough Country asks the forbidden question They look at his inability to speak correctly not at his inability to lead correctly however Of course the real question is is the America is full of idiots because they nominated the idiot and continue to blindly follow his crap they elected the stupid and have not begun demanding better
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."
جانم فدائے رہبر How Leader of the Muslim Ummah moves hearts - All Languages
Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Sayyed Ali Khamenei was born in Mashad, the holiest city, in the north-eastern province of Khorasan, in 1939. Both his parents belonged to clergy\'s families and...
Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Sayyed Ali Khamenei was born in Mashad, the holiest city, in the north-eastern province of Khorasan, in 1939. Both his parents belonged to clergy\'s families and spent the year 1964, he achieved the highest degrees in his theological studies at the Theological Academy of Qum but continued his studies at the Theological Academy at Mashad up to the age of twenty-nine.
Political Activities before Victory of The Islamic Revolution
During the rule of the deposed shah, Ay. Khamenei was a favourite pupil of Imam Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic Revolution, he was also considered to be one of the most eminent and dependable leaders of the movement of the Iranian Muslims, this movement entered a new phase in 1962 after Imam Khomini`s pronouncements against the Shah regime.
Responsibilities After the Victory
In the course of these struggles, Ay. Khamenei was arrested many times and spent three years in prison between 1964 and 1978. He was also exiled to a place with worst climate condition for almost a year.
In 1978, upon return from exile and the height of the revolutionary of the Iranian Muslims, he, together with a few close associates led the struggle of the people in Khorasan.
Later, in the same year when Leader of the Revolution was temporarily in Paris, he was selected as a member of the government of the Islamic Republic of IRAN. He was entrusted with the responsibility of representing the Revolutionary Council in the Army as well as Deputy for Revolutionary Affairs at the National Ministry of Defence and some time later. He was appointed to the post of the Revolutionary guards.
At about this time, Imam Khomeini chose him to lead the Friday congregational Prayers in Tehran and in 1980 he was elected to Islamic Consultative Assembly by the people of Tehran. After the formation of the Supreme Council of Defence, Ay. Khamenei joined it as the representative of Imam Khomeini.
Ay. Khamenei was one of the founding members of the Islamic Republic Party in IRAN and held the post of the Secretary-General of the Party.
Ay. Khamenei was the victim of an assassination attempt on 27th June 1981. having delivered an important speech at the consultative assembly, which ended in the dismissal of Bani-Sader from the Presidency of IRAN, he was addressing the faithful at poor residential area in Tehran, after leading the congregational prayer, when a time-bomb exploded nearby which injured him in the hand, chest and face. He was immediately transferred to a hospital by the deboted people of Tehran and he miraculously survived; his right hand, however, is not still functioning properly.
Presidency
In the 1981, following the martyrdom of the second President of the Islamic republic of Iran, he becomes a candidate and, in September of the same year, he was elected the Third President of the Islamic Republic of Iran with %95 of the votes cast in his favour by the Iranian people (the total number of votes was 16,847,717). He was reelected as president in 1985 for a second four-year term.
Ay. Khamenei heads the Supreme Council of Defence and the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution.
Since the beginning of the imposed war, he has often visited various war fronts and has often inspected the frontline in order to help remove any shortcoming or to advise on organizational matters.
Leadership
In 4th June 1989, One day after demise of Imam Khomeimi, Assembly of Experts closed Ayatollah Khamenei to lead the Islamic Revolution of IRAN.Since 1994, Ayatollah Khamenei has been introduced as the Religious authority in religious authority for Shi`ait people in the world by the Ulama from different countries.
Family
Mr. Khamenei is married and has six children.
Works & Books
He has a good command of the Arabic and Turkish and English language and, in addition to writing, he is a good judge of literary and poetic works. He has translated and written numerous books on Islam and history. His translations include \" Future of the Islamic lands,\" \" A Thdictment against the Western Civilization,\" and \" Imam Hassan`s Peace Treaty.\" From among his writings, one may mention: \" The Role of Muslims in the Independence struggle of India.\" General Pattern of Islamic Thought in the Quran,\" The Question of Patience,\" On the Inner Depth of prayers,\" \"Understanding Islam properly,\" \"Imam Al-Sadegh`s Life,\" and a collection of lectures on the question of Imamate. He was also a co-writer of the famous pamphlet \" Our Positions,\" which helped the political, social and philosophical advancement of Islamic Republic Party. Other contributors were martyred Ayatollah Beheshti, martyred Hojjatol-Eslam Bahonar and Hojjatol-Eslam Hashemi Rafsanjani.
More...
Description:
Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Sayyed Ali Khamenei was born in Mashad, the holiest city, in the north-eastern province of Khorasan, in 1939. Both his parents belonged to clergy\'s families and spent the year 1964, he achieved the highest degrees in his theological studies at the Theological Academy of Qum but continued his studies at the Theological Academy at Mashad up to the age of twenty-nine.
Political Activities before Victory of The Islamic Revolution
During the rule of the deposed shah, Ay. Khamenei was a favourite pupil of Imam Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic Revolution, he was also considered to be one of the most eminent and dependable leaders of the movement of the Iranian Muslims, this movement entered a new phase in 1962 after Imam Khomini`s pronouncements against the Shah regime.
Responsibilities After the Victory
In the course of these struggles, Ay. Khamenei was arrested many times and spent three years in prison between 1964 and 1978. He was also exiled to a place with worst climate condition for almost a year.
In 1978, upon return from exile and the height of the revolutionary of the Iranian Muslims, he, together with a few close associates led the struggle of the people in Khorasan.
Later, in the same year when Leader of the Revolution was temporarily in Paris, he was selected as a member of the government of the Islamic Republic of IRAN. He was entrusted with the responsibility of representing the Revolutionary Council in the Army as well as Deputy for Revolutionary Affairs at the National Ministry of Defence and some time later. He was appointed to the post of the Revolutionary guards.
At about this time, Imam Khomeini chose him to lead the Friday congregational Prayers in Tehran and in 1980 he was elected to Islamic Consultative Assembly by the people of Tehran. After the formation of the Supreme Council of Defence, Ay. Khamenei joined it as the representative of Imam Khomeini.
Ay. Khamenei was one of the founding members of the Islamic Republic Party in IRAN and held the post of the Secretary-General of the Party.
Ay. Khamenei was the victim of an assassination attempt on 27th June 1981. having delivered an important speech at the consultative assembly, which ended in the dismissal of Bani-Sader from the Presidency of IRAN, he was addressing the faithful at poor residential area in Tehran, after leading the congregational prayer, when a time-bomb exploded nearby which injured him in the hand, chest and face. He was immediately transferred to a hospital by the deboted people of Tehran and he miraculously survived; his right hand, however, is not still functioning properly.
Presidency
In the 1981, following the martyrdom of the second President of the Islamic republic of Iran, he becomes a candidate and, in September of the same year, he was elected the Third President of the Islamic Republic of Iran with %95 of the votes cast in his favour by the Iranian people (the total number of votes was 16,847,717). He was reelected as president in 1985 for a second four-year term.
Ay. Khamenei heads the Supreme Council of Defence and the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution.
Since the beginning of the imposed war, he has often visited various war fronts and has often inspected the frontline in order to help remove any shortcoming or to advise on organizational matters.
Leadership
In 4th June 1989, One day after demise of Imam Khomeimi, Assembly of Experts closed Ayatollah Khamenei to lead the Islamic Revolution of IRAN.Since 1994, Ayatollah Khamenei has been introduced as the Religious authority in religious authority for Shi`ait people in the world by the Ulama from different countries.
Family
Mr. Khamenei is married and has six children.
Works & Books
He has a good command of the Arabic and Turkish and English language and, in addition to writing, he is a good judge of literary and poetic works. He has translated and written numerous books on Islam and history. His translations include \" Future of the Islamic lands,\" \" A Thdictment against the Western Civilization,\" and \" Imam Hassan`s Peace Treaty.\" From among his writings, one may mention: \" The Role of Muslims in the Independence struggle of India.\" General Pattern of Islamic Thought in the Quran,\" The Question of Patience,\" On the Inner Depth of prayers,\" \"Understanding Islam properly,\" \"Imam Al-Sadegh`s Life,\" and a collection of lectures on the question of Imamate. He was also a co-writer of the famous pamphlet \" Our Positions,\" which helped the political, social and philosophical advancement of Islamic Republic Party. Other contributors were martyred Ayatollah Beheshti, martyred Hojjatol-Eslam Bahonar and Hojjatol-Eslam Hashemi Rafsanjani.
15:21
|
[Learning] This is How a Leader Speaks !!! - Iranian President vs. Musharraf - English
"Business of a Great Leader Resemble in his Answers when he Speaks" starring a coward man named Musharraf, who 1st degrades his own country when asked a question portraying Pakistan as a...
"Business of a Great Leader Resemble in his Answers when he Speaks" starring a coward man named Musharraf, who 1st degrades his own country when asked a question portraying Pakistan as a country of barbarians and animals where things happen in probably an animalistic way then on a second question about whether or not he'll catch Bin Laden (who doesn't even exist) on US Orders, is more than happy to do so, and render any services US shall require.
I would like to seriously contend, that THIS IS HOW A GREAT LEADER SPEAKS ... A man, who cannot stand the TRUTH is not worthy of being called a Leader like the man named Musharraf. He is one coward about whom Israeli Foreign Minister said on record, and I quote ..
"Being a Proud and Staunch Jewish, Never in my Life I could even dream I would be praying for the life of a Muslim, but now I do .. for Musharraf"
This shows the state of slavery that man has pushed his nation into, no matter how confidently he can answer the journalists, because it doesn't matter. Being able to Answer confidently, when you're not even standing with the truth is no metric to measure LEADERSHIP.
A True Leader is one who stands for a CAUSE, not for others' causes .. He is the one who Stands for Truth, because even if you are in the Minority of ONE, Truth.. shall Still be the Truth ...
More...
Description:
"Business of a Great Leader Resemble in his Answers when he Speaks" starring a coward man named Musharraf, who 1st degrades his own country when asked a question portraying Pakistan as a country of barbarians and animals where things happen in probably an animalistic way then on a second question about whether or not he'll catch Bin Laden (who doesn't even exist) on US Orders, is more than happy to do so, and render any services US shall require.
I would like to seriously contend, that THIS IS HOW A GREAT LEADER SPEAKS ... A man, who cannot stand the TRUTH is not worthy of being called a Leader like the man named Musharraf. He is one coward about whom Israeli Foreign Minister said on record, and I quote ..
"Being a Proud and Staunch Jewish, Never in my Life I could even dream I would be praying for the life of a Muslim, but now I do .. for Musharraf"
This shows the state of slavery that man has pushed his nation into, no matter how confidently he can answer the journalists, because it doesn't matter. Being able to Answer confidently, when you're not even standing with the truth is no metric to measure LEADERSHIP.
A True Leader is one who stands for a CAUSE, not for others' causes .. He is the one who Stands for Truth, because even if you are in the Minority of ONE, Truth.. shall Still be the Truth ...
[ENGLISH e-Book] Al-Ghadir and its Relevance to ISLAMIC UNITY by Shaheed Ayatullah Mutahhari
Message of Thaqalayn
\"Al-Ghadir\" and its Relevance to Islamic Unity
________________________________________
Ayatullah Murtaza Mutahhari
Translated by Mojgan Jalali
Vol. 3,...
Message of Thaqalayn
\"Al-Ghadir\" and its Relevance to Islamic Unity
________________________________________
Ayatullah Murtaza Mutahhari
Translated by Mojgan Jalali
Vol. 3, No. 1 and 2 (1417 AH/1996 CE)
The distinguished book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" has raised a huge wave in the world of Islam. Islamic thinkers shed light on the book in different perspectives; in literature, history, theology, tradition, tafsir, and sociology. From the social perspective we can deal with the Islamic unity. In this review the Islamic unity has been dealt with from a social point of view.
Contemporary Muslim thinkers and reformists are of the view that unity and solidarity of Muslims are the most imperative Islamic exigencies at the present juncture when the enemies have made extensive inroads upon the Islamic community and have tried to resort to different ways and means to spread the old differences and create new ones. We are aware that Islamic unity and fraternity is the focus of attention of the Holy Legislator of Islam and is actually the major objective pursued by this Divine religion as firmed by the Qur\'an, the \"Sunnah\", and the history of Islam.
For this reason, some people have been faced with this question: Wouldn\'t the compilation and publication of a book such as \"al-Ghadir\" which deals with the oldest issue of differences among the Muslims- create a barrier in the way of the sublime and lofty objective of the Islamic unity?
To answer this question, it is necessary first to elucidate the essence of this issue, that is, the Islamic unity, and then proceed to examine the role of the magnum opus entitled \"al-Ghadir\"and its eminent compiler \'Allamah Amini in bringing about Islamic unity.
Islamic Unity
What is meant by the Islamic unity? Does it mean that one Islamic school of thought should be unanimously followed and others be set aside? Or does it mean that the commonalties of all Islamic schools of thought should be taken up and their differences be put away to make up a new denomination which is not completely the same as the previous ones? Or does it mean that Islamic unity is in no way related to the unity of the different schools of Fiqh (jurisprudence) but signifies the unity of the Muslims and the unity of the followers of different schools of Fiqh, with their different religious ideas and views, vis-a-vis the aliens?
To give an illogical and impractical meaning to the issue of the Islamic unity, the opponents of the issue have called it to be the formation of a single Madhhab, so as to defeat it in the very first step. Without doubt, by the term Islamic unity, the intellectual Islamic \'Ulama\' (scholars) do not mean that all denominations should give in to one denomination or that the commonalties should be taken up and the different views and ideas be set aside, as these are neither rational and logical nor favorable and practical. By the Islamic unity these scholars mean that all Muslims should unite in one line against their common enemies.
These scholars slate that Muslims have many things in common, which can serve as the foundations of a firm unity. All Muslims worship the One Almighty and believe in the Prophethood of the Holy Prophet (s). The Qur\'an is the Book of all Muslims and Ka\'abah is their \"qiblah\" (direction of prayer). They go to\"hajj\" pilgrimage with each other and perform the \"hajj\" rites and rituals like one another. They say the daily prayers and fast like each other. They establish families and engage in transactions like one another. They have similar ways of bringing up their children and burying their dead. Apart from minor affairs, they share similarities in all the aforementioned cases. Muslims also share one kind of world view, one common culture, and one grand, glorious, and long-standing civilization.
Unity in the world view, in culture, in the civilization, in insight and disposition, in religious beliefs, in acts of worship and prayers, in social rites and customs can well turn the Muslim into a unified nation to serve as a massive and dominant power before which the big global powers would have to bow down. This is especially true in view of the stress laid by Islam on this principle. According to the explicit wording of the Qur\'an, the Muslims are brothers, and special rights and duties link them together. So, why shouldn\'t the Muslims use all these extensive facilities accorded to them as the blessing of Islam?
This group of \'Ulama\' are of the view that there is no need for the Muslims to make any compromise on the primary or secondary principles of their religion for the sake of Islamic unity. Also it is not necessary for the Muslims to avoid engaging in discussions and reasons and writing books on primary and secondary principles about which they have differences. The only consideration for Islamic unity in this case is that the Muslims- in order to avoid the emergence or accentuation of vengeance - preserve their possession, avoid insulting and accusing each other and uttering fabrications, abandon ridiculing the logic of one another, and finally abstain from hurting one another and going beyond the borders of logic and reasoning. In fact, they should, at least, observe the limits which Islam has set forth for inviting non-Muslims to embrace it:
\"Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good exhortation, and have disputations with them in the best manner... \"(16: 125)
Some people are of the view that those schools of fiqh, such as, Shafi\'i and Hanafi which have no differences in principle should establish brotherhood and stand in one line. They believe that denominations which have differences in the principles can in no way be brothers. This group view the religious principles as an interconnected set as termed by scholars of Usul, as an interrelated and interdependent set; any damage to one principle harms all principles.
As a result, those who believe in this principle are of the view that when, for instance, the principle of \"imamah\" is damaged and victimized, unity and fraternity will bear no meaning and for this reason the Shi\'ah and the Sunnis cannot shake hands as two Muslim brothers and be in the same rank, no matter who their enemy is.
The first group answers this group by saying: \"There is no reason for us to consider the principles as an interrelated set and follow the principle of \"all or none\". Imam \'Ali (\'a) chose a very logical and reasonable approach. He left no stone unturned to retrieve his right. He used everything within his power to restore the principle of \"imamah\", but he never adhered to the motto of \"all or none\". \'Ali (\'a) did not rise up for his right, and that was not compulsory. On the contrary, it was a calculated and chosen approach. He did not fear death. Why didn\'t he rise up? There could have been nothing above martyrdom. Being killed for the cause of the Almighty was his ultimate desire. He was more intimate with martyrdom than a child is with his mother\'s breast. But in his sound calculations, Imam \'All (\'a) had reached the conclusion that under the existing conditions it was to the interest of Islam to foster collaboration and cooperation among the Muslims and give up revolt. He repeatedly stressed this point.
In one of his letters (No.62 \"Nahj al Balaghah\") to Malik al-Ashtar, he wrote the following:
\"First I pulled back my hand until I realized that a group of people converted from Islam and invited the people toward annihilating the religion of Muhammad(s). So I feared that if I did not rush to help Islam and the Muslims, I would see gaps or destruction which calamity would be far worse than the several-day-long demise of caliphate.\"
In the six-man council, after appointment of \'Uthman by \'Abdul-Rahman ibn \'Awf, \'Ali (\'a) set forth his objection as well as his readiness for collaboration as follows:\"
You well know that I am more deserving than others for caliphate. But now by Allah, so long as the affairs of the Muslims are in order and my rivals suffice with setting me aside and only I am alone subjected to oppression, I will not oppose (the move) and will give in (to it).\" (From Sermon 72, \"Nahj al- Balaghah\").
These indicate that in this issue \'Ali (\'a) condemned the principle of \"all or none\". There is no need to further elaborate the approach taken by \'Ali (\'a) toward this issue. There are ample historical proofs and reasons in this regard.
\'Allamah Amini
Now it is time to see to which group the eminent \'Allamah, Ayatullah Amini - the distinguished compiler of the \"al-Ghadir\" - belonged and how he thought. Did he approve of the unity of the Muslims only within the light of Shi\'ism? Or did he consider Islamic fraternity to be broader? Did he believe that Islam which is embraced by uttering the \"shahadatayn\" (the Muslim creed) would willy-nilly create some rights for the Muslims and that the brotherhood and fraternity set forth in the Qur\'an exists among all Muslims?
\'Allamah Amini personally considered this point - i.e. the need to elucidate his viewpoint on this subject and elaborate whether\"al-Ghadir\" has a positive or a negative role in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In order not to be subject to abuse by his opponent - be they among the pros and cons - he has repeatedly explained and elucidated his views.
\'Allamah Amini supported Islamic unity and viewed an open mind and clear insight. On different occasions, he set forth this matter in various volumes of the \"al-Ghadir\'. Reference will be made to some of them below:
In the preface to volume I, he briefly mentions the role of \"al-Ghadir\" in the world of Islam. He states: \"And we consider all this as service to religion, sublimation of the word of the truth, and restoration of the Islamic \'ummah\' (community).\"
In volume 3 (page 77), after quoting the fabrications of Ibn Taymiyah, Alusi, and Qasimi to the effect that Shi \'ism is hostile to some of the Ahl al-Bayt (the Household of the Prophet) such as Zayd bin \'Ali bin al-Huseyn, he notes the following under the title of \"Criticism and Correction\":
\"These fabrications and accusations sow the seeds of corruption, stir hostilities among the \'ummah\',create discord among the Islamic community, divide the \'ummah\', and clash with the public interests of the Muslims.
Again in volume 3 (page 268), he quotes the accusation leveled on the Shi\'ahs by Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida to the effect that \"Shi\'ahs are pleased with any defeat incurred by Muslims, so much as they celebrated the victory of the Russians over the Muslims.\" Then he says:
\"These falsehoods are fabricated by persons like Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida. The Shi\'ahs of Iran and Iraq against whom this accusation is leveled, as well as the orientalists, tourists, envoys of Islamic countries, and those who traveled and still travel to Iran and Iraq, have no information about this trend. Shi\'ahs, without exception, respect the lives, blood, reputation, and property of the Muslims be they Shi\'ahs or Sunnis. Whenever a calamity has befallen the Islamic community anywhere, in any region, and for any sects, the Shi\'ahs have shared their sorrow. The Shi\'ahs have never been confined to the Shi\'ah world, the (concept of) Islamic brotherhood which has been set forth in the Qur\'an and the \'sunnah\'(the Prophet\'s sayings and actions), and in this respect, no discrimination has been made between the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis.\"
Also at the close of volume 3, he criticizes several books penned by the ancients such as \"Iqd al-Farid\" by Ibn Abd al-Rabbih, \"al-Intisar\" by Abu al-Husayn Khayyat al-Mu\'tazili,\"al Farq bayn al-Firaq\" by Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi, \"al-Fasl\" by Ibn Hazm al-Andulusi, \"al-Milal wa al-Nihal\" by Muhammad ibn Abdul-Karim al-Shahristani \"Minhaj al-Sunnah\" by Ibn Taymiah and \"al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah\"by Ibn Kathir and several by the later writers such as \"Tarikh al-Umam al-Islamiyyah\" by Shaykh Muhammad Khizri, \"Fajr al Islam\" by Ahmad Amin, \"al-Jawlat fi Rubu al-Sharq al-Adna\" by Muhammad Thabit al-Mesri, \"al-Sira Bayn al-Islam wa al-Wathaniyah\" by Qasimi, and \"al- Washi\'ah\" by Musa Jarallah. Then he states the following:
\"By quoting and criticizing these books, we aim at warning and awakening the Islamic \'ummah\' (to the fact) that these books create the greatest danger for the Islamic community, they destabilize the Islamic unity and scatter the Muslim lines. In fact nothing can disrupt the ranks of the Muslims, destroy their unity, and tear their Islamic fraternity more severely than these books.\"
\'Allamah Amini, in the preface to volume 5, under title of\"Nazariyah Karimah\" on the occasion of a plaque of honor forwarded from Egypt for \"al-Ghadir\", clearly sets forth his view on this issue and leaves no room for any doubt. He remarks:
\"People are free to express views and ideas on religion. These (views and ideas) will never tear apart the bond of Islamic brotherhood to which the holy Qur\'an has referred by stating that \'surely the believers are brethren\'; even though academic discussion and theological and religious debates reach a peak. This has been the style of the predecessors, and of the \'sahaba\' and the\'tabi\'un\', at the head of them.
\"Notwithstanding all the differences that we have in the primary and secondary principles, we, the compilers and writers in nooks and corners of the world of Islam, share a common point and that is belief in the Almighty and His Prophet. A single spirit and one (form of) sentiment exists in all our bodies, and that is the spirit of Islam and the term\'ikhlas,\"
\"We, the Muslim compilers, all live under the banner of truth and carry out our duties under the guidance of the Qur\'an and the Prophetic Mission of the Holy Prophet (s). The message of all of us is \'Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam ... (3:18)\' and the slogan of all of us is \'There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger.\' Indeed, we are (the members of) the party of Allah and the supporters of his religion.
In the preface to volume 8, under the title of \"al-Ghadir Yowahhad al-Sufuf fil-Mila al-Islami\", \'Allamah Amini directly makes researches into the role of \"Al- Ghadir\" in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In this discussion, this great scholar categorically rejects the accusations leveled by those who said: \'Al-Ghadir\' causes greater discord among the Muslims. He proves that, on the contrary, \"Al-Ghadir\"removes many misunderstandings and brings the Muslims closer to one another. Then he brings evidence by mentioning the confessions of the non-Shi\'i Islamic scholars. At the close, he quotes the letter of Shaykh Muhammad Saeed Dahduh written in this connection.
To avoid prolongation of this article, we will not quote and translate the entire statements of \'Allamah Amini in explaining the positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" in (establishing) Islamic unity, since what has already been mentioned sufficiently proves this fact.
The positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" is established by the facts that it firstly clarifies the proven logic of the Shi\'ahs and proves that the inclination of Muslims to Shi\'ism - notwithstanding the poisonous publicity of some people - is not due to political, ethnic, or other trends and considerations. It also verifies that a powerful logic based on the Qur\'an and the \"sunnah\" has given rise to this tendency.
Secondly, it reflects that some accusations leveled on Shi\'ism - which have made other Muslims distanced from the Shi\'ah- are totally baseless and false. Examples of these accusations are the notion that the Shi\'ites prefer the non-Muslims to the non- Shi\'i Muslims, rejoice at the defeat of non-Shi\'ite Muslims at the hands of non-Muslims, and other accusations such as the idea that instead of going to hajj pilgrimage, the Shi\'ahs go on pilgrimage to shrines of the Imams, or have particular rites in prayers and in temporary marriage.
Thirdly, it introduces to the world of Islam the eminent Commander of the faithful \'Ali (\'a) who is the most oppressed and the least praised grand Islamic personality and who could be the leader of all Muslims, as well as his pure offspring.
Other Comments on \"al-Ghadir\"
Many unbiased non-Shia Muslims interpret the \"al-Ghadir\" in the same way that has already been mentioned.
Muhammad Abdul-Ghani Hasan al-Mesri, in his foreword on\"al-Ghadir\", which has been published in the preface to volume I, second edition, states:
\"I call on the Almighty to make your limpid brook (in Arabic, \'Ghadir\' means brook) the cause of peace and cordiality between the Shia and Sunni brothers to cooperate with one another in building the Islamic \"ummah.\"
\'Adil Ghadban, the managing editor of the Egyptian magazine entitled \"al-Kitab\", said the following in the preface to volume 3:
\"This book clarifies the Shi\'ite logic. The Sunnis can correctly learn about the Shi\'i through this book. Correct recognition of the Shi\'ahs brings the views of the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis closer, and they can make a unified rank\".
In his foreword to the \"al-Ghadir\" which was published in thepreface to volume 4, Dr. Muhammad Ghallab, professor of philosophy at the Faculty of Religious Studies al-Azhar University said:
\"I got hold of your book at a very opportune time, because right now I am busy collecting and compiling a book on the lives of the Muslims from various perspectives. Therefore, I am highly avidfor obtaining sound information about \'Imamiyah\' Shi\'ism. Your book will help me. And I will not make mistakes about the Shi\'ahs as others have\".
In this foreword published in the preface to volume 4 of the\"al-Ghadir\", Dr. \'Abdul-Rahman Kiali Halabi says the following after referring to the decline of the Muslims in the present age and the factors which can lead to the Muslims\' salvation, one of which is the sound recognition of the successor of the Holy Prophet (s):
\"The book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" and its rich content deserves to be known by every Muslim to learn how historians have been negligent and see where the truth lies. Through this means, we should compensate for the past, and by striving to foster the unity of the Muslims, we should try to gain the due rewards\".
These were the views of \'Allamah Amini about the important social issues of our age and such were his sound reflections in the world of Islam.
Peace be upon him.
Text Source: http://www.al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=ghadir-relevance.htm
More...
Description:
Message of Thaqalayn
\"Al-Ghadir\" and its Relevance to Islamic Unity
________________________________________
Ayatullah Murtaza Mutahhari
Translated by Mojgan Jalali
Vol. 3, No. 1 and 2 (1417 AH/1996 CE)
The distinguished book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" has raised a huge wave in the world of Islam. Islamic thinkers shed light on the book in different perspectives; in literature, history, theology, tradition, tafsir, and sociology. From the social perspective we can deal with the Islamic unity. In this review the Islamic unity has been dealt with from a social point of view.
Contemporary Muslim thinkers and reformists are of the view that unity and solidarity of Muslims are the most imperative Islamic exigencies at the present juncture when the enemies have made extensive inroads upon the Islamic community and have tried to resort to different ways and means to spread the old differences and create new ones. We are aware that Islamic unity and fraternity is the focus of attention of the Holy Legislator of Islam and is actually the major objective pursued by this Divine religion as firmed by the Qur\'an, the \"Sunnah\", and the history of Islam.
For this reason, some people have been faced with this question: Wouldn\'t the compilation and publication of a book such as \"al-Ghadir\" which deals with the oldest issue of differences among the Muslims- create a barrier in the way of the sublime and lofty objective of the Islamic unity?
To answer this question, it is necessary first to elucidate the essence of this issue, that is, the Islamic unity, and then proceed to examine the role of the magnum opus entitled \"al-Ghadir\"and its eminent compiler \'Allamah Amini in bringing about Islamic unity.
Islamic Unity
What is meant by the Islamic unity? Does it mean that one Islamic school of thought should be unanimously followed and others be set aside? Or does it mean that the commonalties of all Islamic schools of thought should be taken up and their differences be put away to make up a new denomination which is not completely the same as the previous ones? Or does it mean that Islamic unity is in no way related to the unity of the different schools of Fiqh (jurisprudence) but signifies the unity of the Muslims and the unity of the followers of different schools of Fiqh, with their different religious ideas and views, vis-a-vis the aliens?
To give an illogical and impractical meaning to the issue of the Islamic unity, the opponents of the issue have called it to be the formation of a single Madhhab, so as to defeat it in the very first step. Without doubt, by the term Islamic unity, the intellectual Islamic \'Ulama\' (scholars) do not mean that all denominations should give in to one denomination or that the commonalties should be taken up and the different views and ideas be set aside, as these are neither rational and logical nor favorable and practical. By the Islamic unity these scholars mean that all Muslims should unite in one line against their common enemies.
These scholars slate that Muslims have many things in common, which can serve as the foundations of a firm unity. All Muslims worship the One Almighty and believe in the Prophethood of the Holy Prophet (s). The Qur\'an is the Book of all Muslims and Ka\'abah is their \"qiblah\" (direction of prayer). They go to\"hajj\" pilgrimage with each other and perform the \"hajj\" rites and rituals like one another. They say the daily prayers and fast like each other. They establish families and engage in transactions like one another. They have similar ways of bringing up their children and burying their dead. Apart from minor affairs, they share similarities in all the aforementioned cases. Muslims also share one kind of world view, one common culture, and one grand, glorious, and long-standing civilization.
Unity in the world view, in culture, in the civilization, in insight and disposition, in religious beliefs, in acts of worship and prayers, in social rites and customs can well turn the Muslim into a unified nation to serve as a massive and dominant power before which the big global powers would have to bow down. This is especially true in view of the stress laid by Islam on this principle. According to the explicit wording of the Qur\'an, the Muslims are brothers, and special rights and duties link them together. So, why shouldn\'t the Muslims use all these extensive facilities accorded to them as the blessing of Islam?
This group of \'Ulama\' are of the view that there is no need for the Muslims to make any compromise on the primary or secondary principles of their religion for the sake of Islamic unity. Also it is not necessary for the Muslims to avoid engaging in discussions and reasons and writing books on primary and secondary principles about which they have differences. The only consideration for Islamic unity in this case is that the Muslims- in order to avoid the emergence or accentuation of vengeance - preserve their possession, avoid insulting and accusing each other and uttering fabrications, abandon ridiculing the logic of one another, and finally abstain from hurting one another and going beyond the borders of logic and reasoning. In fact, they should, at least, observe the limits which Islam has set forth for inviting non-Muslims to embrace it:
\"Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good exhortation, and have disputations with them in the best manner... \"(16: 125)
Some people are of the view that those schools of fiqh, such as, Shafi\'i and Hanafi which have no differences in principle should establish brotherhood and stand in one line. They believe that denominations which have differences in the principles can in no way be brothers. This group view the religious principles as an interconnected set as termed by scholars of Usul, as an interrelated and interdependent set; any damage to one principle harms all principles.
As a result, those who believe in this principle are of the view that when, for instance, the principle of \"imamah\" is damaged and victimized, unity and fraternity will bear no meaning and for this reason the Shi\'ah and the Sunnis cannot shake hands as two Muslim brothers and be in the same rank, no matter who their enemy is.
The first group answers this group by saying: \"There is no reason for us to consider the principles as an interrelated set and follow the principle of \"all or none\". Imam \'Ali (\'a) chose a very logical and reasonable approach. He left no stone unturned to retrieve his right. He used everything within his power to restore the principle of \"imamah\", but he never adhered to the motto of \"all or none\". \'Ali (\'a) did not rise up for his right, and that was not compulsory. On the contrary, it was a calculated and chosen approach. He did not fear death. Why didn\'t he rise up? There could have been nothing above martyrdom. Being killed for the cause of the Almighty was his ultimate desire. He was more intimate with martyrdom than a child is with his mother\'s breast. But in his sound calculations, Imam \'All (\'a) had reached the conclusion that under the existing conditions it was to the interest of Islam to foster collaboration and cooperation among the Muslims and give up revolt. He repeatedly stressed this point.
In one of his letters (No.62 \"Nahj al Balaghah\") to Malik al-Ashtar, he wrote the following:
\"First I pulled back my hand until I realized that a group of people converted from Islam and invited the people toward annihilating the religion of Muhammad(s). So I feared that if I did not rush to help Islam and the Muslims, I would see gaps or destruction which calamity would be far worse than the several-day-long demise of caliphate.\"
In the six-man council, after appointment of \'Uthman by \'Abdul-Rahman ibn \'Awf, \'Ali (\'a) set forth his objection as well as his readiness for collaboration as follows:\"
You well know that I am more deserving than others for caliphate. But now by Allah, so long as the affairs of the Muslims are in order and my rivals suffice with setting me aside and only I am alone subjected to oppression, I will not oppose (the move) and will give in (to it).\" (From Sermon 72, \"Nahj al- Balaghah\").
These indicate that in this issue \'Ali (\'a) condemned the principle of \"all or none\". There is no need to further elaborate the approach taken by \'Ali (\'a) toward this issue. There are ample historical proofs and reasons in this regard.
\'Allamah Amini
Now it is time to see to which group the eminent \'Allamah, Ayatullah Amini - the distinguished compiler of the \"al-Ghadir\" - belonged and how he thought. Did he approve of the unity of the Muslims only within the light of Shi\'ism? Or did he consider Islamic fraternity to be broader? Did he believe that Islam which is embraced by uttering the \"shahadatayn\" (the Muslim creed) would willy-nilly create some rights for the Muslims and that the brotherhood and fraternity set forth in the Qur\'an exists among all Muslims?
\'Allamah Amini personally considered this point - i.e. the need to elucidate his viewpoint on this subject and elaborate whether\"al-Ghadir\" has a positive or a negative role in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In order not to be subject to abuse by his opponent - be they among the pros and cons - he has repeatedly explained and elucidated his views.
\'Allamah Amini supported Islamic unity and viewed an open mind and clear insight. On different occasions, he set forth this matter in various volumes of the \"al-Ghadir\'. Reference will be made to some of them below:
In the preface to volume I, he briefly mentions the role of \"al-Ghadir\" in the world of Islam. He states: \"And we consider all this as service to religion, sublimation of the word of the truth, and restoration of the Islamic \'ummah\' (community).\"
In volume 3 (page 77), after quoting the fabrications of Ibn Taymiyah, Alusi, and Qasimi to the effect that Shi \'ism is hostile to some of the Ahl al-Bayt (the Household of the Prophet) such as Zayd bin \'Ali bin al-Huseyn, he notes the following under the title of \"Criticism and Correction\":
\"These fabrications and accusations sow the seeds of corruption, stir hostilities among the \'ummah\',create discord among the Islamic community, divide the \'ummah\', and clash with the public interests of the Muslims.
Again in volume 3 (page 268), he quotes the accusation leveled on the Shi\'ahs by Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida to the effect that \"Shi\'ahs are pleased with any defeat incurred by Muslims, so much as they celebrated the victory of the Russians over the Muslims.\" Then he says:
\"These falsehoods are fabricated by persons like Sayyid Muhammad Rashid Rida. The Shi\'ahs of Iran and Iraq against whom this accusation is leveled, as well as the orientalists, tourists, envoys of Islamic countries, and those who traveled and still travel to Iran and Iraq, have no information about this trend. Shi\'ahs, without exception, respect the lives, blood, reputation, and property of the Muslims be they Shi\'ahs or Sunnis. Whenever a calamity has befallen the Islamic community anywhere, in any region, and for any sects, the Shi\'ahs have shared their sorrow. The Shi\'ahs have never been confined to the Shi\'ah world, the (concept of) Islamic brotherhood which has been set forth in the Qur\'an and the \'sunnah\'(the Prophet\'s sayings and actions), and in this respect, no discrimination has been made between the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis.\"
Also at the close of volume 3, he criticizes several books penned by the ancients such as \"Iqd al-Farid\" by Ibn Abd al-Rabbih, \"al-Intisar\" by Abu al-Husayn Khayyat al-Mu\'tazili,\"al Farq bayn al-Firaq\" by Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi, \"al-Fasl\" by Ibn Hazm al-Andulusi, \"al-Milal wa al-Nihal\" by Muhammad ibn Abdul-Karim al-Shahristani \"Minhaj al-Sunnah\" by Ibn Taymiah and \"al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah\"by Ibn Kathir and several by the later writers such as \"Tarikh al-Umam al-Islamiyyah\" by Shaykh Muhammad Khizri, \"Fajr al Islam\" by Ahmad Amin, \"al-Jawlat fi Rubu al-Sharq al-Adna\" by Muhammad Thabit al-Mesri, \"al-Sira Bayn al-Islam wa al-Wathaniyah\" by Qasimi, and \"al- Washi\'ah\" by Musa Jarallah. Then he states the following:
\"By quoting and criticizing these books, we aim at warning and awakening the Islamic \'ummah\' (to the fact) that these books create the greatest danger for the Islamic community, they destabilize the Islamic unity and scatter the Muslim lines. In fact nothing can disrupt the ranks of the Muslims, destroy their unity, and tear their Islamic fraternity more severely than these books.\"
\'Allamah Amini, in the preface to volume 5, under title of\"Nazariyah Karimah\" on the occasion of a plaque of honor forwarded from Egypt for \"al-Ghadir\", clearly sets forth his view on this issue and leaves no room for any doubt. He remarks:
\"People are free to express views and ideas on religion. These (views and ideas) will never tear apart the bond of Islamic brotherhood to which the holy Qur\'an has referred by stating that \'surely the believers are brethren\'; even though academic discussion and theological and religious debates reach a peak. This has been the style of the predecessors, and of the \'sahaba\' and the\'tabi\'un\', at the head of them.
\"Notwithstanding all the differences that we have in the primary and secondary principles, we, the compilers and writers in nooks and corners of the world of Islam, share a common point and that is belief in the Almighty and His Prophet. A single spirit and one (form of) sentiment exists in all our bodies, and that is the spirit of Islam and the term\'ikhlas,\"
\"We, the Muslim compilers, all live under the banner of truth and carry out our duties under the guidance of the Qur\'an and the Prophetic Mission of the Holy Prophet (s). The message of all of us is \'Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam ... (3:18)\' and the slogan of all of us is \'There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger.\' Indeed, we are (the members of) the party of Allah and the supporters of his religion.
In the preface to volume 8, under the title of \"al-Ghadir Yowahhad al-Sufuf fil-Mila al-Islami\", \'Allamah Amini directly makes researches into the role of \"Al- Ghadir\" in (the establishment of) Islamic unity. In this discussion, this great scholar categorically rejects the accusations leveled by those who said: \'Al-Ghadir\' causes greater discord among the Muslims. He proves that, on the contrary, \"Al-Ghadir\"removes many misunderstandings and brings the Muslims closer to one another. Then he brings evidence by mentioning the confessions of the non-Shi\'i Islamic scholars. At the close, he quotes the letter of Shaykh Muhammad Saeed Dahduh written in this connection.
To avoid prolongation of this article, we will not quote and translate the entire statements of \'Allamah Amini in explaining the positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" in (establishing) Islamic unity, since what has already been mentioned sufficiently proves this fact.
The positive role of \"al-Ghadir\" is established by the facts that it firstly clarifies the proven logic of the Shi\'ahs and proves that the inclination of Muslims to Shi\'ism - notwithstanding the poisonous publicity of some people - is not due to political, ethnic, or other trends and considerations. It also verifies that a powerful logic based on the Qur\'an and the \"sunnah\" has given rise to this tendency.
Secondly, it reflects that some accusations leveled on Shi\'ism - which have made other Muslims distanced from the Shi\'ah- are totally baseless and false. Examples of these accusations are the notion that the Shi\'ites prefer the non-Muslims to the non- Shi\'i Muslims, rejoice at the defeat of non-Shi\'ite Muslims at the hands of non-Muslims, and other accusations such as the idea that instead of going to hajj pilgrimage, the Shi\'ahs go on pilgrimage to shrines of the Imams, or have particular rites in prayers and in temporary marriage.
Thirdly, it introduces to the world of Islam the eminent Commander of the faithful \'Ali (\'a) who is the most oppressed and the least praised grand Islamic personality and who could be the leader of all Muslims, as well as his pure offspring.
Other Comments on \"al-Ghadir\"
Many unbiased non-Shia Muslims interpret the \"al-Ghadir\" in the same way that has already been mentioned.
Muhammad Abdul-Ghani Hasan al-Mesri, in his foreword on\"al-Ghadir\", which has been published in the preface to volume I, second edition, states:
\"I call on the Almighty to make your limpid brook (in Arabic, \'Ghadir\' means brook) the cause of peace and cordiality between the Shia and Sunni brothers to cooperate with one another in building the Islamic \"ummah.\"
\'Adil Ghadban, the managing editor of the Egyptian magazine entitled \"al-Kitab\", said the following in the preface to volume 3:
\"This book clarifies the Shi\'ite logic. The Sunnis can correctly learn about the Shi\'i through this book. Correct recognition of the Shi\'ahs brings the views of the Shi\'ahs and the Sunnis closer, and they can make a unified rank\".
In his foreword to the \"al-Ghadir\" which was published in thepreface to volume 4, Dr. Muhammad Ghallab, professor of philosophy at the Faculty of Religious Studies al-Azhar University said:
\"I got hold of your book at a very opportune time, because right now I am busy collecting and compiling a book on the lives of the Muslims from various perspectives. Therefore, I am highly avidfor obtaining sound information about \'Imamiyah\' Shi\'ism. Your book will help me. And I will not make mistakes about the Shi\'ahs as others have\".
In this foreword published in the preface to volume 4 of the\"al-Ghadir\", Dr. \'Abdul-Rahman Kiali Halabi says the following after referring to the decline of the Muslims in the present age and the factors which can lead to the Muslims\' salvation, one of which is the sound recognition of the successor of the Holy Prophet (s):
\"The book entitled \"al-Ghadir\" and its rich content deserves to be known by every Muslim to learn how historians have been negligent and see where the truth lies. Through this means, we should compensate for the past, and by striving to foster the unity of the Muslims, we should try to gain the due rewards\".
These were the views of \'Allamah Amini about the important social issues of our age and such were his sound reflections in the world of Islam.
Peace be upon him.
Text Source: http://www.al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=ghadir-relevance.htm
3:04
|
US, Israel greatest security threat - English
http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/215690.html
A political activist says that the United States and Israeli governments are the greatest security threat in the world, inflicting wholesale...
http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/215690.html
A political activist says that the United States and Israeli governments are the greatest security threat in the world, inflicting wholesale slaughter and massive human displacement.
Press TV has conducted an exclusive interview with Dahlia Wasfi, with the Iraqi Justice & political activist, to further discuss the issue.
The following is a transcript of the interview.
Press TV: The US is supposed to withdraw from Iraq by the year's end. And with Obama saying just days ago in a press conference with Iraqi PM Nuri al-Maliki, the US troops will be leaving Iraq with heads held high. What legacy will the US leave behind in Iraq?
Wasfi: Well, it's nothing to be proud of. There's a legacy of the wholesale slaughter of over a million people, the making of a massive refugee crisis - the largest since the Palestinian refugee crisis began - the destruction of the Iraqi health care system, the destruction of the Iraqi education system, the destruction of Iraq's infrastructure.
In terms of security in Iraq, the most dangerous forces in the world today are the United States military and the Israeli occupation forces. Those are the greatest threats to global security. So while it's true that Iraq is a dangerous place, it is because of the US military stay and its illegal occupation, not in spite of it.
Press TV: If the US leaves Iraq - and I say IF, because there might be the possibility to extend the deadline at the 11th hour - how capable do you think Iraq would be in taking care of itself?
Wasfi: Iraq is the cradle of civilization. There's no question that though it will take decades to overcome the destruction that has been wrought by the forces led by the United States and Great Britain, that Iraq can recover on its own. History has shown that.
As you said, this is a farce. It's not actually an end to the military occupation of Iraq. It's a maintained military and economic occupation with, as I've read, 16,000 US military personnel, in addition to mercenaries, in addition to CIA and other operatives that are operating in Iraq under the guise of organizations like US Aid which have long time been used as cover for the CIA.
Press TV: Adding to your list, what remains for the question of the Mujaheddin Khalq Organization - the terrorist organization operating on Iraqi soil?
Wasfi: I'll repeat again that the largest terrorist organization that's operating on Iraqi soil is the US military. Iraq's borders have been blown wide open since March 19th, 2003. Anyone and everyone has access to Iraq. Iran has a very strong influence in Iraq today.
But the only future of Iraq, it is only up to the Iraqis, just as the future of Syria is up to the Syrians, just as the future of Iran is only up to Iran. And the future of the US is up to the Americans. And for all of these countries, no more interference by Israeli politics.
More...
Description:
http://edition.presstv.ir/detail/215690.html
A political activist says that the United States and Israeli governments are the greatest security threat in the world, inflicting wholesale slaughter and massive human displacement.
Press TV has conducted an exclusive interview with Dahlia Wasfi, with the Iraqi Justice & political activist, to further discuss the issue.
The following is a transcript of the interview.
Press TV: The US is supposed to withdraw from Iraq by the year's end. And with Obama saying just days ago in a press conference with Iraqi PM Nuri al-Maliki, the US troops will be leaving Iraq with heads held high. What legacy will the US leave behind in Iraq?
Wasfi: Well, it's nothing to be proud of. There's a legacy of the wholesale slaughter of over a million people, the making of a massive refugee crisis - the largest since the Palestinian refugee crisis began - the destruction of the Iraqi health care system, the destruction of the Iraqi education system, the destruction of Iraq's infrastructure.
In terms of security in Iraq, the most dangerous forces in the world today are the United States military and the Israeli occupation forces. Those are the greatest threats to global security. So while it's true that Iraq is a dangerous place, it is because of the US military stay and its illegal occupation, not in spite of it.
Press TV: If the US leaves Iraq - and I say IF, because there might be the possibility to extend the deadline at the 11th hour - how capable do you think Iraq would be in taking care of itself?
Wasfi: Iraq is the cradle of civilization. There's no question that though it will take decades to overcome the destruction that has been wrought by the forces led by the United States and Great Britain, that Iraq can recover on its own. History has shown that.
As you said, this is a farce. It's not actually an end to the military occupation of Iraq. It's a maintained military and economic occupation with, as I've read, 16,000 US military personnel, in addition to mercenaries, in addition to CIA and other operatives that are operating in Iraq under the guise of organizations like US Aid which have long time been used as cover for the CIA.
Press TV: Adding to your list, what remains for the question of the Mujaheddin Khalq Organization - the terrorist organization operating on Iraqi soil?
Wasfi: I'll repeat again that the largest terrorist organization that's operating on Iraqi soil is the US military. Iraq's borders have been blown wide open since March 19th, 2003. Anyone and everyone has access to Iraq. Iran has a very strong influence in Iraq today.
But the only future of Iraq, it is only up to the Iraqis, just as the future of Syria is up to the Syrians, just as the future of Iran is only up to Iran. And the future of the US is up to the Americans. And for all of these countries, no more interference by Israeli politics.
120:39
|
دیدار مردم آذربایجان با رهبر انقلاب Massive Voter Turnout Harms Enemies - 15Feb12 - Farsi
http://farsi.khamenei.ir/news-content?id=19054
دیدار مردم آذربایجان با رهبر انقلاب
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای رهبر معظم انقلاب...
http://farsi.khamenei.ir/news-content?id=19054
دیدار مردم آذربایجان با رهبر انقلاب
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای رهبر معظم انقلاب اسلامی صبح امروز (چهارشنبه) در دیدار هزاران نفر از علماء، مسئولان و قشرهای مختلف مردم آذربایجان، با اشاره به حضور دهها میلیونی و بسیار پرشورتر و با نشاطتر مردم در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن امسال، چرائی این اعجابآفرینی و عظمت ملت عزیز ایران را، بصیرت و موقعشناسی بینظیر آنان دانستند و تأكید كردند: ملت ایران با این بصیرت، ایستادگی و حضور بههنگام در صحنه، هیچگاه شكست نخواهد خورد و در انتخابات 12 اسفند نیز ملت بار دیگر هوشیاری و موقعشناسی خود را نشان خواهد داد و با حضور پرشور و فراوان خود در انتخابات مجلس نهم، ضربه سخت دیگری به دشمن خواهد زد.
در این دیدار كه در آستانه 29 بهمن، سالروز قیام مردم تبریز بر ضد رژیم ستمشاهی در سال 1356، برگزار شد، رهبر انقلاب اسلامی حوادث مهم انقلاب اسلامی را درسآموز و شاخصهای عمده در مسیر حركت بسوی قلهها و اهداف برشمردند و با اشاره به راهپیمایی عظیم ملت ایران در 22 بهمن افزودند: امسال همه تأكید داشتند كه حضور مردم در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن در سراسر كشور، نسبت به سالهای قبل، پرشورتر و با نشاطتر بوده است اما سؤال مهم این است كه چرا امسال شاهد چنین حضور با عظمتتری بودیم؟
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای خاطرنشان كردند: پاسخ به این سؤال جز به بصیرت و موقعشناسی كمنظیر مردم بر نمیگردد زیرا ملت ایران امسال احساس كرد كه كشور و نظام و اسلام به این حضور نیازمند است.
ایشان با اشاره به تبلیغات پرحجم و گسترده رسانهها و دستگاههای تبلیغاتی جبهه دشمن عنود و شریر، تحت هدایت شبكه صهیونیستی جهانی، تأكید كردند: هدف اصلی تبلیغات متراكم، القای این دروغ بزرگ بود كه ملت شجاع، مؤمن و امتحان داده ایران، نسبت به انقلاب، اسلام و اهداف والای خود سست و بیانگیزه شده است.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی افزودند: تمركز این تبلیغات هم بر روی راهپیمایی 22 بهمن بود تا شاید حضور مردم كمرنگ و بیرونق شود اما ملت ایران با بصیرت و موقعشناسی اعجاببرانگیز ، متوجه این ترفند دشمن شد و با حضور عظیم خود در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن امسال، به دهان دشمن كوبید.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای با اشاره به گزارشهای موثق درخصوص حضور بسیار پرشور و گسترده مردم در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن در هشتصد و پنجاه شهر كشور خاطرنشان كردند: این ملت ایران است. این ملت با چنین بصیرت و موقعشناسی و حضور در صحنه، شكست نخواهد خورد.
ایشان تأكید كردند: آنهایی كه باید پیام این حضور با عظمت مردم ایران در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن را بگیرند، گرفتند و آنهایی كه در مغزهای الكلی و آفتدیده خود، خیالاتی در سر میپروراندند، متوجه شدند كه در ایران چه خبر است و ملت قهرمان ایران چگونه در صحنه حاضر است.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی با اشاره به تلاش دستگاههای تبلیغاتی جبهه استكبار برای منعكس نشدن حقیقت و عظمت حضور مردم افزودند: كسانی كه مدعی آزادی اطلاعات و اخبار هستند، اخبار مربوط به این راهپیمایی را سانسور كردند و راهپیمایان میلیونی تهران را هزاران نفر و جمعیت دهها میلیونی كشور در راهپیمایی را صدها هزار نفر عنوان كردند.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای تأكید كردند: دشمن همواره از ابتدای پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی، انواع شیوههای دروغپردازی، تقلب، خدعه و تزویر را بكار گرفته است اما هنگامی كه پیام صادقانه یك ملت از دل برآید، كار خود را خواهد كرد و احساس حضور و انقلابیگری و حركت همراه با عزم راسخ، همچون هوای خوش بهاری در همه جا نفوذ و همه را بهرهمند خواهد كرد.
ایشان افزودند: نمونه آشكار این واقعیت، تحولات اخیر در شمال آفریقا، و كشورهای عربی و دنیای اسلام و فراگیر شدن شعارهایی است كه روزی ملت ایران، مظلومانه آنها را سر میداد.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی تأكید كردند: اسلام در حركت عظیم خود به نقطه حساسی رسیده است و نسلهای آینده شاهد حوادث مهمی خواهند بود كه دنیا را دگرگون خواهد كرد و سیاستهای مسلط مادی مستكبرانه را نیز از بین خواهد برد.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای خاطرنشان كردند: كانون اصلی این حركت، جمهوری اسلامی ایران است و جوشش اولیه آن هم از ایران بوده و ملت ایران همچنان ایستاده است.
ایشان، ایستادگی ملت ایران را رمز موفقیت و دستاوردهای بزرگ نظام اسلامی دانستند و افزودند: هنگامی كه ملتی میایستد و در مقابل شبكه پرهیمنه و پرهیاهو دشمن به خود ترس و واهمه راه نمیدهد، در عرصههای علم و فناوری، اقتصاد، مسائل اجتماعی، سیاستورزی بینالمللی و تأثیرگذاری بر ملتها، پیشرفت خواهد كرد و تفكر، دین و شعارش فراگیر خواهد شد.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی تأكید كردند: به لطف خداوند و به بركت این ایستادگی و استحكام درونی ملت ایران، جوانان ، با همتها و استقامت خود كشور را همانند دسته گل خواهند ساخت و آن را تبدیل به یك الگوی موفق و پیشرفته برای جهان اسلام خواهند كرد.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای لازمه پیشرفت و سازندگی كشور را، استمرار حركت در مسیر صراط مستقیم الهی و راه اسلام، دیانت و شریعت و حفظ هوشیاری و بصیرت و عمل به وظیفه دانستند و با اشاره به انتخابات پیش روی مجلس نهم افزودند: دستگاههای تبلیغاتی و رسانههای جبهه استكبار و عوامل همیشگی آنها، تلاش گستردهای را آغاز كردهاند تا انتخابات مجلس، انتخابات بیرونقی باشد اما همه باید بدانند كه حضور مردم در انتخابات، كشور را به پیش خواهد برد و دشمن را در اجرای توطئههایش دچار تردید و تزلزل و وادار به عقب نشینی خواهد كرد. ایشان تأكید كردند: انتخابات پرشور ضربه سختی به دشمن خواهد بود.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی با تأكید بر اینكه دلهای مردم در دست خدا است، افزودند: با عنایت و كمك خداوند متعال، انتخابات مجلس نهم پرشور و با احساس و همراه با بصیرت و حضور فراوان مردم، برگزار خواهد شد.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی اظهار امیدواری كردند نتیجه انتخابات دوازدهم اسفند، انتخاب مجلس و نمایندگانی خوب برای ورود به عرصه كار و خدمت باشد.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای در بخش دیگری از سخنان خود با اشاره به نقش و جایگاه آذربایجان و بویژه تبریز در حوادث و تحولات یكصد سال گذشته كشور، افزودند: مهمترین ویژگی قهرمانان و نامآوران تبریز همچون ستارخان و باقرخان، تدین و حركت در مسیر دین و پیروی از علمای دین بوده است.
ایشان همچنین با اشاره به نقشآفرینی علما و مردم آذربایجان و تبریز در نهضت اسلامی و حوادث مربوط به پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی و بعد از آن، خاطرنشان كردند: تقدیم دو شهید محراب از میان پنج شهید محراب، و شجاعت و خطشكنی لشكر دلاور و قهرمان عاشورا در دوران دفاع مقدس نمونههایی از كارنامه درخشان و برجسته مردم آذربایجان است.
در ابتدای این دیدار آیتالله مجتهد شبستری نماینده ولی فقیه و امامجمعه تبریز در سخنانی ضمن گرامیداشت قیام 29 بهمن در سال 1356، به پیشگامی مردم آذربایجان در عرصههای مختلف انقلاب اسلامی اشاره كرد و گفت: مردم غیور و بابصیرت آذربایجان، در انتخابات 12 اسفند نیز حماسهای فراموشنشدنی خلق خواهند كرد.
http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1587
Supreme Leader: Massive Voter Turnout Harms Enemies
15/02/2012
Ayatollah Khamenei the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution met today with thousands of religious scholars, government officials and ordinary citizens from East Azerbaijan. At the meeting, His Eminence referred to the upcoming parliamentary elections and said that the enemies are making widespread efforts to discourage the people from taking part in the elections. He added that massive presence of the people in the elections will harm the enemy and force him to back down.
Ayatollah Khamenei said that the enthusiastic and massive presence of the people in the demonstrations marking the victory of the Islamic Revolution is indicative of the extraordinary insight of the Iranian people. \"With this insight, the Iranian nation will never be defeated. In the elections that will be held on March 2, the people of Iran will once again prove their vigilance and their awareness of the requirements of time. And they will deal another serious blow to the enemy with their enthusiastic and massive presence in the 9th parliamentary elections.\"
Ayatollah Khamenei added: \"This year everybody was stressing that the people had a more enthusiastic presence in the nationwide demonstrations marking the 22nd of Bahman, but the important question is: why were the demonstrations so massive this year?\"
Ayatollah Khamenei said: \"The answer to this question is related to nothing but the extraordinary insight of the people and their awareness of the requirements of time because the people of Iran felt that our country, our government and Islam need their presence in the demonstrations.\"
His Eminence referred to the widespread propaganda by the enemies, led by the network of global Zionism, and stressed that the main goal of this propaganda is to promote the lie that the courageous and pious people of Iran are disappointed at the Revolution and Islam.
The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution added: \"These propaganda efforts were focused on the demonstrations of the 22nd of Bahman in the hope that they would discourage the people from participating in the demonstrations, but the Iranian nation discovered this plot thanks to its insight and its awareness of the requirements of time. With their massive presence in the demonstrations marking the 22nd of Bahman, the people of Iran kicked the enemy in the mouth.\"
His Eminence stressed: \"The message of this massive presence of the Iranian people in the demonstrations was delivered to those who should have received the message.\"
He added that those who were cherishing illusions regarding Iran realized the nature of the events that are happening in Iran.
The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution said that the propaganda machines of the arrogant powers tried to impose a news blackout on the great and massive presence of the people in the demonstrations. He added: \"Those who claim to support free flow of information censored the reports related to these demonstrations.\"
Ayatollah Khamenei stressed: \"Since the beginning of the Islamic Revolution, the enemy has utilized different methods to deceive and to promote lies, but when the people of a nation express a message from the bottom of their heart, that message proves effective.\"
His Eminence said that the slogans which used to be shouted by the Iranian nation are spreading to other parts of the world of Islam, further adding: \"Islam has reached a sensitive point in its great movement and future generations will witness important events which will transform the world of Islam and annihilate the dominant and materialistic policies of the arrogant powers.\"
Ayatollah Khamenei referred to the wave of Islamic Awakening in the world and added: \"The Islamic Republic of Iran was the original source of this movement.\"
His Eminence said that the resistance of the Iranian nation is the secret behind the success and achievements of the Islamic Republic of Iran. He added: \"When a nation stands up against the enemy\'s fearsome network without feeling afraid, it makes progress in science, it makes progress in economic areas, it makes progress in social matters, its youth become vigilant, it gains influence over other nations, and its ideas, religion and slogans spread to all parts of the world.\"
More...
Description:
http://farsi.khamenei.ir/news-content?id=19054
دیدار مردم آذربایجان با رهبر انقلاب
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای رهبر معظم انقلاب اسلامی صبح امروز (چهارشنبه) در دیدار هزاران نفر از علماء، مسئولان و قشرهای مختلف مردم آذربایجان، با اشاره به حضور دهها میلیونی و بسیار پرشورتر و با نشاطتر مردم در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن امسال، چرائی این اعجابآفرینی و عظمت ملت عزیز ایران را، بصیرت و موقعشناسی بینظیر آنان دانستند و تأكید كردند: ملت ایران با این بصیرت، ایستادگی و حضور بههنگام در صحنه، هیچگاه شكست نخواهد خورد و در انتخابات 12 اسفند نیز ملت بار دیگر هوشیاری و موقعشناسی خود را نشان خواهد داد و با حضور پرشور و فراوان خود در انتخابات مجلس نهم، ضربه سخت دیگری به دشمن خواهد زد.
در این دیدار كه در آستانه 29 بهمن، سالروز قیام مردم تبریز بر ضد رژیم ستمشاهی در سال 1356، برگزار شد، رهبر انقلاب اسلامی حوادث مهم انقلاب اسلامی را درسآموز و شاخصهای عمده در مسیر حركت بسوی قلهها و اهداف برشمردند و با اشاره به راهپیمایی عظیم ملت ایران در 22 بهمن افزودند: امسال همه تأكید داشتند كه حضور مردم در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن در سراسر كشور، نسبت به سالهای قبل، پرشورتر و با نشاطتر بوده است اما سؤال مهم این است كه چرا امسال شاهد چنین حضور با عظمتتری بودیم؟
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای خاطرنشان كردند: پاسخ به این سؤال جز به بصیرت و موقعشناسی كمنظیر مردم بر نمیگردد زیرا ملت ایران امسال احساس كرد كه كشور و نظام و اسلام به این حضور نیازمند است.
ایشان با اشاره به تبلیغات پرحجم و گسترده رسانهها و دستگاههای تبلیغاتی جبهه دشمن عنود و شریر، تحت هدایت شبكه صهیونیستی جهانی، تأكید كردند: هدف اصلی تبلیغات متراكم، القای این دروغ بزرگ بود كه ملت شجاع، مؤمن و امتحان داده ایران، نسبت به انقلاب، اسلام و اهداف والای خود سست و بیانگیزه شده است.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی افزودند: تمركز این تبلیغات هم بر روی راهپیمایی 22 بهمن بود تا شاید حضور مردم كمرنگ و بیرونق شود اما ملت ایران با بصیرت و موقعشناسی اعجاببرانگیز ، متوجه این ترفند دشمن شد و با حضور عظیم خود در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن امسال، به دهان دشمن كوبید.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای با اشاره به گزارشهای موثق درخصوص حضور بسیار پرشور و گسترده مردم در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن در هشتصد و پنجاه شهر كشور خاطرنشان كردند: این ملت ایران است. این ملت با چنین بصیرت و موقعشناسی و حضور در صحنه، شكست نخواهد خورد.
ایشان تأكید كردند: آنهایی كه باید پیام این حضور با عظمت مردم ایران در راهپیمایی 22 بهمن را بگیرند، گرفتند و آنهایی كه در مغزهای الكلی و آفتدیده خود، خیالاتی در سر میپروراندند، متوجه شدند كه در ایران چه خبر است و ملت قهرمان ایران چگونه در صحنه حاضر است.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی با اشاره به تلاش دستگاههای تبلیغاتی جبهه استكبار برای منعكس نشدن حقیقت و عظمت حضور مردم افزودند: كسانی كه مدعی آزادی اطلاعات و اخبار هستند، اخبار مربوط به این راهپیمایی را سانسور كردند و راهپیمایان میلیونی تهران را هزاران نفر و جمعیت دهها میلیونی كشور در راهپیمایی را صدها هزار نفر عنوان كردند.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای تأكید كردند: دشمن همواره از ابتدای پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی، انواع شیوههای دروغپردازی، تقلب، خدعه و تزویر را بكار گرفته است اما هنگامی كه پیام صادقانه یك ملت از دل برآید، كار خود را خواهد كرد و احساس حضور و انقلابیگری و حركت همراه با عزم راسخ، همچون هوای خوش بهاری در همه جا نفوذ و همه را بهرهمند خواهد كرد.
ایشان افزودند: نمونه آشكار این واقعیت، تحولات اخیر در شمال آفریقا، و كشورهای عربی و دنیای اسلام و فراگیر شدن شعارهایی است كه روزی ملت ایران، مظلومانه آنها را سر میداد.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی تأكید كردند: اسلام در حركت عظیم خود به نقطه حساسی رسیده است و نسلهای آینده شاهد حوادث مهمی خواهند بود كه دنیا را دگرگون خواهد كرد و سیاستهای مسلط مادی مستكبرانه را نیز از بین خواهد برد.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای خاطرنشان كردند: كانون اصلی این حركت، جمهوری اسلامی ایران است و جوشش اولیه آن هم از ایران بوده و ملت ایران همچنان ایستاده است.
ایشان، ایستادگی ملت ایران را رمز موفقیت و دستاوردهای بزرگ نظام اسلامی دانستند و افزودند: هنگامی كه ملتی میایستد و در مقابل شبكه پرهیمنه و پرهیاهو دشمن به خود ترس و واهمه راه نمیدهد، در عرصههای علم و فناوری، اقتصاد، مسائل اجتماعی، سیاستورزی بینالمللی و تأثیرگذاری بر ملتها، پیشرفت خواهد كرد و تفكر، دین و شعارش فراگیر خواهد شد.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی تأكید كردند: به لطف خداوند و به بركت این ایستادگی و استحكام درونی ملت ایران، جوانان ، با همتها و استقامت خود كشور را همانند دسته گل خواهند ساخت و آن را تبدیل به یك الگوی موفق و پیشرفته برای جهان اسلام خواهند كرد.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای لازمه پیشرفت و سازندگی كشور را، استمرار حركت در مسیر صراط مستقیم الهی و راه اسلام، دیانت و شریعت و حفظ هوشیاری و بصیرت و عمل به وظیفه دانستند و با اشاره به انتخابات پیش روی مجلس نهم افزودند: دستگاههای تبلیغاتی و رسانههای جبهه استكبار و عوامل همیشگی آنها، تلاش گستردهای را آغاز كردهاند تا انتخابات مجلس، انتخابات بیرونقی باشد اما همه باید بدانند كه حضور مردم در انتخابات، كشور را به پیش خواهد برد و دشمن را در اجرای توطئههایش دچار تردید و تزلزل و وادار به عقب نشینی خواهد كرد. ایشان تأكید كردند: انتخابات پرشور ضربه سختی به دشمن خواهد بود.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی با تأكید بر اینكه دلهای مردم در دست خدا است، افزودند: با عنایت و كمك خداوند متعال، انتخابات مجلس نهم پرشور و با احساس و همراه با بصیرت و حضور فراوان مردم، برگزار خواهد شد.
رهبر انقلاب اسلامی اظهار امیدواری كردند نتیجه انتخابات دوازدهم اسفند، انتخاب مجلس و نمایندگانی خوب برای ورود به عرصه كار و خدمت باشد.
حضرت آیتالله خامنهای در بخش دیگری از سخنان خود با اشاره به نقش و جایگاه آذربایجان و بویژه تبریز در حوادث و تحولات یكصد سال گذشته كشور، افزودند: مهمترین ویژگی قهرمانان و نامآوران تبریز همچون ستارخان و باقرخان، تدین و حركت در مسیر دین و پیروی از علمای دین بوده است.
ایشان همچنین با اشاره به نقشآفرینی علما و مردم آذربایجان و تبریز در نهضت اسلامی و حوادث مربوط به پیروزی انقلاب اسلامی و بعد از آن، خاطرنشان كردند: تقدیم دو شهید محراب از میان پنج شهید محراب، و شجاعت و خطشكنی لشكر دلاور و قهرمان عاشورا در دوران دفاع مقدس نمونههایی از كارنامه درخشان و برجسته مردم آذربایجان است.
در ابتدای این دیدار آیتالله مجتهد شبستری نماینده ولی فقیه و امامجمعه تبریز در سخنانی ضمن گرامیداشت قیام 29 بهمن در سال 1356، به پیشگامی مردم آذربایجان در عرصههای مختلف انقلاب اسلامی اشاره كرد و گفت: مردم غیور و بابصیرت آذربایجان، در انتخابات 12 اسفند نیز حماسهای فراموشنشدنی خلق خواهند كرد.
http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1587
Supreme Leader: Massive Voter Turnout Harms Enemies
15/02/2012
Ayatollah Khamenei the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution met today with thousands of religious scholars, government officials and ordinary citizens from East Azerbaijan. At the meeting, His Eminence referred to the upcoming parliamentary elections and said that the enemies are making widespread efforts to discourage the people from taking part in the elections. He added that massive presence of the people in the elections will harm the enemy and force him to back down.
Ayatollah Khamenei said that the enthusiastic and massive presence of the people in the demonstrations marking the victory of the Islamic Revolution is indicative of the extraordinary insight of the Iranian people. \"With this insight, the Iranian nation will never be defeated. In the elections that will be held on March 2, the people of Iran will once again prove their vigilance and their awareness of the requirements of time. And they will deal another serious blow to the enemy with their enthusiastic and massive presence in the 9th parliamentary elections.\"
Ayatollah Khamenei added: \"This year everybody was stressing that the people had a more enthusiastic presence in the nationwide demonstrations marking the 22nd of Bahman, but the important question is: why were the demonstrations so massive this year?\"
Ayatollah Khamenei said: \"The answer to this question is related to nothing but the extraordinary insight of the people and their awareness of the requirements of time because the people of Iran felt that our country, our government and Islam need their presence in the demonstrations.\"
His Eminence referred to the widespread propaganda by the enemies, led by the network of global Zionism, and stressed that the main goal of this propaganda is to promote the lie that the courageous and pious people of Iran are disappointed at the Revolution and Islam.
The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution added: \"These propaganda efforts were focused on the demonstrations of the 22nd of Bahman in the hope that they would discourage the people from participating in the demonstrations, but the Iranian nation discovered this plot thanks to its insight and its awareness of the requirements of time. With their massive presence in the demonstrations marking the 22nd of Bahman, the people of Iran kicked the enemy in the mouth.\"
His Eminence stressed: \"The message of this massive presence of the Iranian people in the demonstrations was delivered to those who should have received the message.\"
He added that those who were cherishing illusions regarding Iran realized the nature of the events that are happening in Iran.
The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution said that the propaganda machines of the arrogant powers tried to impose a news blackout on the great and massive presence of the people in the demonstrations. He added: \"Those who claim to support free flow of information censored the reports related to these demonstrations.\"
Ayatollah Khamenei stressed: \"Since the beginning of the Islamic Revolution, the enemy has utilized different methods to deceive and to promote lies, but when the people of a nation express a message from the bottom of their heart, that message proves effective.\"
His Eminence said that the slogans which used to be shouted by the Iranian nation are spreading to other parts of the world of Islam, further adding: \"Islam has reached a sensitive point in its great movement and future generations will witness important events which will transform the world of Islam and annihilate the dominant and materialistic policies of the arrogant powers.\"
Ayatollah Khamenei referred to the wave of Islamic Awakening in the world and added: \"The Islamic Republic of Iran was the original source of this movement.\"
His Eminence said that the resistance of the Iranian nation is the secret behind the success and achievements of the Islamic Republic of Iran. He added: \"When a nation stands up against the enemy\'s fearsome network without feeling afraid, it makes progress in science, it makes progress in economic areas, it makes progress in social matters, its youth become vigilant, it gains influence over other nations, and its ideas, religion and slogans spread to all parts of the world.\"