Ahmadinejad"s full speech at UN General Assembly Sept. 2010 (with PressTV commentary) - English
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the US took advantage of the 'suspicious' September 11 attacks to justify its occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq.
President Ahmadinejad said while...
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the US took advantage of the 'suspicious' September 11 attacks to justify its occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq.
President Ahmadinejad said while some 3,000 were killed on the September 11 incident, "for which we are all very saddened," hundreds of thousands of people have been killed and millions wounded and displaced up to now, as the conflicts continue to rage and expand.
While raising several questions about the source and nature of the 9/11 attacks, the president asked even if we grant credence to the US government's view that "a complex terrorist group was able to cross all layers of US intelligence and security" to wage the attacks, "is it rational to launch a classic war through widespread deployment of troops that led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people to counter a terrorist group?"
The Iranian president also blasted the Israeli regime for its siege of Palestinian lands and their repeated aggressions against the people of Gaza and Lebanon with blessings from their Western backers.
"The oppressed people of Palestine have lived under the rule of an occupying regime for 60 years, been deprived of freedom, security and the right to self-determination, while the occupiers are given recognition," he said.
"On a daily basis," he added, "the houses are being destroyed over the heads of innocent women and children. People are deprived of water, food and medicine in their own homeland. The Zionists have imposed five all-out wars on the neighboring countries and on the Palestinian people."
President Ahmadinejad also highlighted the Israeli attack against the Gaza-bound humanitarian flotilla and killing and injuring civilians onboard, calling it "a blatant defiance of all international norms."
The president emphasized that while the Tel Aviv regime "regularly threatens the countries in the region" and conducts "publicly announced assassination of Palestinian figures," it enjoys the "absolute support of some western countries." Whereas, he added, "Palestinian defender and those opposing this regime are pressured, labeled as terrorists and anti Semites."
The Iranian president then insisted that all solutions "are doomed to fail" if the rights of Palestinian people are not accounted for, calling for the return of the Palestinian refugees to their home land and the establishment of a Palestinian sovereignty and government based on a popular vote.
President Ahmadinejad referred to the recent burning of the holy Qur'an in the US as an "ugly and inhumane act" against the Divine Book of Islam's prophet that calls for "worshipping the one God, justice, compassion toward people, development and progress, reflection and thinking, defending the oppressed and resisting against the oppressors."
He then stressed that the Qur'an was burned "to burn all these truths and good judgments." However, he added, "the truth could not be burned."
On the Iranian nuclear issue, President Ahmadinejad reiterated Iran's readiness to resume talks based on the Tehran Nuclear Declaration, censuring the unjust imposition of anti-Iran sanctions by the UN Security Council.
Noting the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) allows member states to use nuclear energy without limits while prohibiting the development and stockpiling of nuclear weapons, the president underlined that some permanent members of the UN Security Council have nonetheless "equated nuclear energy with the nuclear bomb, and have distanced this energy from the reach of most nations by establishing monopolies and pressuring the IAEA."
Consequently, he said, "Not only the nuclear disarmament has not been realized, but also nuclear bombs have been proliferated in some regions, including by the occupying and intimidating Zionist regime."
Dr. Ahmadinejad went on to make the proposition that the year 2011 be proclaimed the year of nuclear disarmament and "Nuclear Energy for all, Nuclear Weapons for None."
On Iran's nuclear issue the Iranian president referred to the Tehran Declaration on a fuel swap deal as "a hugely constructive step in confidence building efforts" and said that it was facilitated through the good will of Turkish, Brazilian and Iranian governments.
He reiterated that although the declaration received "inappropriate reaction" by some governments and followed by an "unlawful resolution," it still remains valid.
"We have observed the regulations of the IAEA more than our commitments," he observed. "Yet, we have never submitted to illegally imposed pressures nor will we ever do so."
The president also slammed UN's "ineptitude" and "unjust structure," stressing that major power has been "monopolized" in the Security Council (UNSC) due to the veto privilege while the main pillar of the organization, the General Assembly, "is marginalized."
Noting that in the past decades at least one of the permanent members of the UNSC has been a party to conflicts, Dr. Ahmadinejad said, "The veto advantage grants impunity to aggression and occupation; how could, therefore, one expect competence while both the judge and the prosecutor are a party to the dispute?"
"Had Iran enjoyed veto privilege, would the Security Council and the IAEA Director General have taken the same position in the nuclear issue?"
The Iranian president then insisted that the veto privilege "be revoked" altogether and the General Assembly becomes the "highest body" in the United Nations.
At the beginning of his remarks, President Ahmadinejad expressed great sympathy with the people and government of flood-stricken Pakistan and urged the world to pldege adequate aid and support for the flood victims.
More...
Description:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the US took advantage of the 'suspicious' September 11 attacks to justify its occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq.
President Ahmadinejad said while some 3,000 were killed on the September 11 incident, "for which we are all very saddened," hundreds of thousands of people have been killed and millions wounded and displaced up to now, as the conflicts continue to rage and expand.
While raising several questions about the source and nature of the 9/11 attacks, the president asked even if we grant credence to the US government's view that "a complex terrorist group was able to cross all layers of US intelligence and security" to wage the attacks, "is it rational to launch a classic war through widespread deployment of troops that led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people to counter a terrorist group?"
The Iranian president also blasted the Israeli regime for its siege of Palestinian lands and their repeated aggressions against the people of Gaza and Lebanon with blessings from their Western backers.
"The oppressed people of Palestine have lived under the rule of an occupying regime for 60 years, been deprived of freedom, security and the right to self-determination, while the occupiers are given recognition," he said.
"On a daily basis," he added, "the houses are being destroyed over the heads of innocent women and children. People are deprived of water, food and medicine in their own homeland. The Zionists have imposed five all-out wars on the neighboring countries and on the Palestinian people."
President Ahmadinejad also highlighted the Israeli attack against the Gaza-bound humanitarian flotilla and killing and injuring civilians onboard, calling it "a blatant defiance of all international norms."
The president emphasized that while the Tel Aviv regime "regularly threatens the countries in the region" and conducts "publicly announced assassination of Palestinian figures," it enjoys the "absolute support of some western countries." Whereas, he added, "Palestinian defender and those opposing this regime are pressured, labeled as terrorists and anti Semites."
The Iranian president then insisted that all solutions "are doomed to fail" if the rights of Palestinian people are not accounted for, calling for the return of the Palestinian refugees to their home land and the establishment of a Palestinian sovereignty and government based on a popular vote.
President Ahmadinejad referred to the recent burning of the holy Qur'an in the US as an "ugly and inhumane act" against the Divine Book of Islam's prophet that calls for "worshipping the one God, justice, compassion toward people, development and progress, reflection and thinking, defending the oppressed and resisting against the oppressors."
He then stressed that the Qur'an was burned "to burn all these truths and good judgments." However, he added, "the truth could not be burned."
On the Iranian nuclear issue, President Ahmadinejad reiterated Iran's readiness to resume talks based on the Tehran Nuclear Declaration, censuring the unjust imposition of anti-Iran sanctions by the UN Security Council.
Noting the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) allows member states to use nuclear energy without limits while prohibiting the development and stockpiling of nuclear weapons, the president underlined that some permanent members of the UN Security Council have nonetheless "equated nuclear energy with the nuclear bomb, and have distanced this energy from the reach of most nations by establishing monopolies and pressuring the IAEA."
Consequently, he said, "Not only the nuclear disarmament has not been realized, but also nuclear bombs have been proliferated in some regions, including by the occupying and intimidating Zionist regime."
Dr. Ahmadinejad went on to make the proposition that the year 2011 be proclaimed the year of nuclear disarmament and "Nuclear Energy for all, Nuclear Weapons for None."
On Iran's nuclear issue the Iranian president referred to the Tehran Declaration on a fuel swap deal as "a hugely constructive step in confidence building efforts" and said that it was facilitated through the good will of Turkish, Brazilian and Iranian governments.
He reiterated that although the declaration received "inappropriate reaction" by some governments and followed by an "unlawful resolution," it still remains valid.
"We have observed the regulations of the IAEA more than our commitments," he observed. "Yet, we have never submitted to illegally imposed pressures nor will we ever do so."
The president also slammed UN's "ineptitude" and "unjust structure," stressing that major power has been "monopolized" in the Security Council (UNSC) due to the veto privilege while the main pillar of the organization, the General Assembly, "is marginalized."
Noting that in the past decades at least one of the permanent members of the UNSC has been a party to conflicts, Dr. Ahmadinejad said, "The veto advantage grants impunity to aggression and occupation; how could, therefore, one expect competence while both the judge and the prosecutor are a party to the dispute?"
"Had Iran enjoyed veto privilege, would the Security Council and the IAEA Director General have taken the same position in the nuclear issue?"
The Iranian president then insisted that the veto privilege "be revoked" altogether and the General Assembly becomes the "highest body" in the United Nations.
At the beginning of his remarks, President Ahmadinejad expressed great sympathy with the people and government of flood-stricken Pakistan and urged the world to pldege adequate aid and support for the flood victims.
0:42
|
New footage show Bahraini brutality -16Jul2011 - All Languages
A new video has emerged on YouTube depicting the latest brutality of the Saudi-backed Al Khalifa regime forces against the Bahraini people.
The video shows the Bahraini security forces...
A new video has emerged on YouTube depicting the latest brutality of the Saudi-backed Al Khalifa regime forces against the Bahraini people.
The video shows the Bahraini security forces kicking a door in and firing tear gas into a house only to flee the scene seconds later in their police vans.
Security forces on Friday resorted to violence once more, in an attempt to disperse a rally of anti-regime protesters who have been calling for an end of the Al Khalifa regime, a Press TV correspondent reported.
The anti-regime demonstrations on Friday led to one woman being killed and several others being injured.
Meanwhile, human rights groups have condemned Manama's political ploy in initiating national dialogue, saying the move is aimed at influencing the international community.
They argued that the Bahraini regime is continuing its severe repression of protesters despite the ongoing national talks launched earlier this month.
Human Rights Watch has also urged Manama to probe the dismissal of thousands of workers from state-linked firms and government jobs over participation in anti-government protests earlier this year.
Thousands of anti-government protesters have been waging protest rallies in Bahrain since mid-February, demanding an end to the Al Khalifa rule, which has been in power for over 40 years.
In mid-March, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates deployed their military forces in crisis-hit Bahrain to assist the Manama regime in its brutal crackdown on popular protests.
Scores of protesters have been killed -- many under torture -- and numerous others detained and transferred to unknown locations during the regime's brutal onslaught on protesters.
More...
Description:
A new video has emerged on YouTube depicting the latest brutality of the Saudi-backed Al Khalifa regime forces against the Bahraini people.
The video shows the Bahraini security forces kicking a door in and firing tear gas into a house only to flee the scene seconds later in their police vans.
Security forces on Friday resorted to violence once more, in an attempt to disperse a rally of anti-regime protesters who have been calling for an end of the Al Khalifa regime, a Press TV correspondent reported.
The anti-regime demonstrations on Friday led to one woman being killed and several others being injured.
Meanwhile, human rights groups have condemned Manama's political ploy in initiating national dialogue, saying the move is aimed at influencing the international community.
They argued that the Bahraini regime is continuing its severe repression of protesters despite the ongoing national talks launched earlier this month.
Human Rights Watch has also urged Manama to probe the dismissal of thousands of workers from state-linked firms and government jobs over participation in anti-government protests earlier this year.
Thousands of anti-government protesters have been waging protest rallies in Bahrain since mid-February, demanding an end to the Al Khalifa rule, which has been in power for over 40 years.
In mid-March, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates deployed their military forces in crisis-hit Bahrain to assist the Manama regime in its brutal crackdown on popular protests.
Scores of protesters have been killed -- many under torture -- and numerous others detained and transferred to unknown locations during the regime's brutal onslaught on protesters.
[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.
23:55
|
YEMEN Uprising of the Oppressed - Role of Saudi Arabia and USA - English
The leader of the Houthi movement in Yemen says Saudi Arabia is an enemy to the entire Muslim world, accusing the Kingdom of creating hatred and hostility, Press TV reports.
Mohamed Badreddin...
The leader of the Houthi movement in Yemen says Saudi Arabia is an enemy to the entire Muslim world, accusing the Kingdom of creating hatred and hostility, Press TV reports.
Mohamed Badreddin al-Houthi said in an interview with Press TV that Saudi Arabia is “an enemy to all the free people of the world, including non-Muslims.”
“It manufactures terrorism and an ideology that divides the people, divides Muslims, creates hatred and hostility,” Houthi added.
The Yemeni figure, who is the brother of the late leader of the movement, Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi, further explained that in 2009 the Saudis “bribed the tribal leaders within the Houthi movement into favoring the Salafi-Wahabi ideology” so that they can control the border region between Yemen and Saudi Arabia, especially the northwestern city of Sa'ada.
In 2009, clashes broke out between the Houthi fighters and Saudi forces along the common border between the two countries. The Houthis accused Saudi Arabia of supporting the Yemeni government in attacks against them.
Houthi pointed out that the Saudi regime “would spend hundreds of thousands if not millions” to achieve its goals.
Hussein al-Houthi and a number of his men were killed in an attack launched by Yemeni government forces in an area close to the border with the Kingdom in September 2004.
Yemeni dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh has repeatedly claimed that if he hands over power, Yemen would be divided into multiple states.
Mohamed al-Houthi, however, said the Yemeni nation “cannot be separated,” adding that the most important thing for the movement is “how to serve this nation, our Ummah, how to protect our morals and religious principles.”
“We want dignity and independence. We will not accept continuation of Saleh scenario. We had enough during the 33 years [of his rule]. We cannot be fooled again,” Houthi said.
Saleh, who was injured in an attack on the presidential palace in June, returned to Yemen on September 23 after receiving treatment in Saudi Arabia.
Demonstrators in Yemen have been holding protests against the US-backed Saleh regime since late January, demanding the trial of the Yemeni dictator for the brutal crackdown on the popular uprising.
According to local reports, hundreds of Yemenis have been killed and thousands more have been injured since the onset of the popular uprising in the country.
More...
Description:
The leader of the Houthi movement in Yemen says Saudi Arabia is an enemy to the entire Muslim world, accusing the Kingdom of creating hatred and hostility, Press TV reports.
Mohamed Badreddin al-Houthi said in an interview with Press TV that Saudi Arabia is “an enemy to all the free people of the world, including non-Muslims.”
“It manufactures terrorism and an ideology that divides the people, divides Muslims, creates hatred and hostility,” Houthi added.
The Yemeni figure, who is the brother of the late leader of the movement, Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi, further explained that in 2009 the Saudis “bribed the tribal leaders within the Houthi movement into favoring the Salafi-Wahabi ideology” so that they can control the border region between Yemen and Saudi Arabia, especially the northwestern city of Sa'ada.
In 2009, clashes broke out between the Houthi fighters and Saudi forces along the common border between the two countries. The Houthis accused Saudi Arabia of supporting the Yemeni government in attacks against them.
Houthi pointed out that the Saudi regime “would spend hundreds of thousands if not millions” to achieve its goals.
Hussein al-Houthi and a number of his men were killed in an attack launched by Yemeni government forces in an area close to the border with the Kingdom in September 2004.
Yemeni dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh has repeatedly claimed that if he hands over power, Yemen would be divided into multiple states.
Mohamed al-Houthi, however, said the Yemeni nation “cannot be separated,” adding that the most important thing for the movement is “how to serve this nation, our Ummah, how to protect our morals and religious principles.”
“We want dignity and independence. We will not accept continuation of Saleh scenario. We had enough during the 33 years [of his rule]. We cannot be fooled again,” Houthi said.
Saleh, who was injured in an attack on the presidential palace in June, returned to Yemen on September 23 after receiving treatment in Saudi Arabia.
Demonstrators in Yemen have been holding protests against the US-backed Saleh regime since late January, demanding the trial of the Yemeni dictator for the brutal crackdown on the popular uprising.
According to local reports, hundreds of Yemenis have been killed and thousands more have been injured since the onset of the popular uprising in the country.
6:06
|
Occupy Calgary draws several hundred protesters - Protest Against Capitalism - All Languages
Occupy Calgary draws several hundred protesters
Hundreds of people drummed, chanted and protested issues ranging from income disparity, capitalism and corporate politics to homelessness and fiat...
Occupy Calgary draws several hundred protesters
Hundreds of people drummed, chanted and protested issues ranging from income disparity, capitalism and corporate politics to homelessness and fiat currency during “Occupy Calgary.”
They began their protest at the foot of the locked glass doors of downtown Bankers Hall on Saturday afternoon. After about two hours, a crowd estimated to be between 300 and 500 people marched to Olympic Plaza, where several vowed to camp out over the weekend.
Police said there were no arrests. The demonstrators had remained peaceful.
Following similar protests in cities across Canada, the Occupy Wall Street movement is drawing thousands of people across the world to set up campsites in urban parks. It began in New York in September; when protesters began a sit-in at Zuccotti park to object to Wall Street’s role in the 2008 financial collapse.
“There’s a high disparity between the rich and the poor in Calgary,” said SAIT journalism student Sarah Pynoo, 19. “We’re one of the richest cities in North America, but we have enormous homelessness problems.
“And there are thousands of people living below the poverty line and that’s worrying.”
The protest was rich with signs, flags and even a few raging grannies. One cardboard sign, painted in a dark silhouette of a mouse, featured a red mouth with the sign “corporate politics eats people.”
Some protesters tried to draw awareness to investment fraud issues in Alberta. Others on 9/11 truth, a return to the gold standard, and mainstream media bias.
More...
Description:
Occupy Calgary draws several hundred protesters
Hundreds of people drummed, chanted and protested issues ranging from income disparity, capitalism and corporate politics to homelessness and fiat currency during “Occupy Calgary.”
They began their protest at the foot of the locked glass doors of downtown Bankers Hall on Saturday afternoon. After about two hours, a crowd estimated to be between 300 and 500 people marched to Olympic Plaza, where several vowed to camp out over the weekend.
Police said there were no arrests. The demonstrators had remained peaceful.
Following similar protests in cities across Canada, the Occupy Wall Street movement is drawing thousands of people across the world to set up campsites in urban parks. It began in New York in September; when protesters began a sit-in at Zuccotti park to object to Wall Street’s role in the 2008 financial collapse.
“There’s a high disparity between the rich and the poor in Calgary,” said SAIT journalism student Sarah Pynoo, 19. “We’re one of the richest cities in North America, but we have enormous homelessness problems.
“And there are thousands of people living below the poverty line and that’s worrying.”
The protest was rich with signs, flags and even a few raging grannies. One cardboard sign, painted in a dark silhouette of a mouse, featured a red mouth with the sign “corporate politics eats people.”
Some protesters tried to draw awareness to investment fraud issues in Alberta. Others on 9/11 truth, a return to the gold standard, and mainstream media bias.
2:57
|
Egyptians protest against military rule - 19 Nov 2011 - English
Hundreds of thousands of Protesters gathered in Tahrir Square in another Friday Demonstration dubbed " saving democracy and handing over power", the days demonstration comes after the...
Hundreds of thousands of Protesters gathered in Tahrir Square in another Friday Demonstration dubbed " saving democracy and handing over power", the days demonstration comes after the army-backed government proposed a supra-constitutional document which entailed privileges to the army regarding the privacy of its budget as well as stating that the army is protector of constitutional legitimacy, a clause many felt was paving the way for the army's intervention in state affairs even after handing power to a civilian government.
A large number of Egypt's politcal forces from far left to right participated in the demonstration but the overwhelming majority belonged to islamic factions, most prominently the Muslim brotherhood who said that they will continue adding pressure on the military council till the proposed constitutional document is withdrawn and specific dates of the transition of power to a civilian government is set in place for no later than mid 2012.
Another main demand for protesters was the immediate end to military trials for civilians. over 15,000 civilians have been trailed and are currently serving time in harsh military prisons, which is what propelled activists to launch a large campaign against these military tribunals that have been repeatedly used against those who oppose the ruling military council's political decisions.
many of those in the square felt that the there was a sense of unity among protesters despite different political affiliations, they criticized the military council's performance during the transitional period which they felt was extremely poor with ordinary egyptians still feeling economic difficulties and suffering from security conditions which have not been restored to normal since police were forced to withdraw off the streets in late january.
The proposal of the Supra-Constitutional document drove out hundreds of thousands of egyptians in protest in a seen reminiscent of the early days of the revolution and they say they will not leave till the document is withdrawn and a clear timetable to the transition of power is issued.
More...
Description:
Hundreds of thousands of Protesters gathered in Tahrir Square in another Friday Demonstration dubbed " saving democracy and handing over power", the days demonstration comes after the army-backed government proposed a supra-constitutional document which entailed privileges to the army regarding the privacy of its budget as well as stating that the army is protector of constitutional legitimacy, a clause many felt was paving the way for the army's intervention in state affairs even after handing power to a civilian government.
A large number of Egypt's politcal forces from far left to right participated in the demonstration but the overwhelming majority belonged to islamic factions, most prominently the Muslim brotherhood who said that they will continue adding pressure on the military council till the proposed constitutional document is withdrawn and specific dates of the transition of power to a civilian government is set in place for no later than mid 2012.
Another main demand for protesters was the immediate end to military trials for civilians. over 15,000 civilians have been trailed and are currently serving time in harsh military prisons, which is what propelled activists to launch a large campaign against these military tribunals that have been repeatedly used against those who oppose the ruling military council's political decisions.
many of those in the square felt that the there was a sense of unity among protesters despite different political affiliations, they criticized the military council's performance during the transitional period which they felt was extremely poor with ordinary egyptians still feeling economic difficulties and suffering from security conditions which have not been restored to normal since police were forced to withdraw off the streets in late january.
The proposal of the Supra-Constitutional document drove out hundreds of thousands of egyptians in protest in a seen reminiscent of the early days of the revolution and they say they will not leave till the document is withdrawn and a clear timetable to the transition of power is issued.
2:46
|
Yemen uprising continues to uproot corrupted government officials - 28 Dec 2011 - English
Tens of thousands of anti- government protesters have taken to the streets across the country on a day dubbed loyalty to the blood of martyrs.
Protesters gathered in the change square of...
Tens of thousands of anti- government protesters have taken to the streets across the country on a day dubbed loyalty to the blood of martyrs.
Protesters gathered in the change square of Sana'a and chanted anti-government slogans, denouncing the US -Saudi brokered deal as it gives Ali Abdullah Saleh immunity from prosecution.
They condemned the killing of peaceful march of life calling for the expulsion of US Ambassador to Yemen over his latest remarks. Earlier, Dirald Firstien stated that if two thousands protesters staged a march toward the WHIT house, they would be deterred from reaching it.
This comes as strikes are spreading through the capital Sana'a. Government employees staged rallies demanding for reforms and the firing of senior corrupted managers.
While, the Military commission plans to continue lifting barricades to the north of capital Sana'a, clashes erupted once again between republican guards and tribal armed men loyal to dissident tribal leader of Hashied Federation, Sadiq Al-Ahmar.
During its Tuesday's session, the parliament gave the trust to the newly unity government. Political analysts predict that protests would continue with no end in sight until people's demands are met.
The impoverished country has been hit by daily anti-government protests since late January demanding an end to corruption and unemployment.
As violent clashes have erupted once again in Al-Hassabah region, threatening the power transfer brokered deal, the protesters call for the continuation of their revolution in loyalty to the blood of martyrs, vowing to prosecute who they describe as killers and corrupted people.
More...
Description:
Tens of thousands of anti- government protesters have taken to the streets across the country on a day dubbed loyalty to the blood of martyrs.
Protesters gathered in the change square of Sana'a and chanted anti-government slogans, denouncing the US -Saudi brokered deal as it gives Ali Abdullah Saleh immunity from prosecution.
They condemned the killing of peaceful march of life calling for the expulsion of US Ambassador to Yemen over his latest remarks. Earlier, Dirald Firstien stated that if two thousands protesters staged a march toward the WHIT house, they would be deterred from reaching it.
This comes as strikes are spreading through the capital Sana'a. Government employees staged rallies demanding for reforms and the firing of senior corrupted managers.
While, the Military commission plans to continue lifting barricades to the north of capital Sana'a, clashes erupted once again between republican guards and tribal armed men loyal to dissident tribal leader of Hashied Federation, Sadiq Al-Ahmar.
During its Tuesday's session, the parliament gave the trust to the newly unity government. Political analysts predict that protests would continue with no end in sight until people's demands are met.
The impoverished country has been hit by daily anti-government protests since late January demanding an end to corruption and unemployment.
As violent clashes have erupted once again in Al-Hassabah region, threatening the power transfer brokered deal, the protesters call for the continuation of their revolution in loyalty to the blood of martyrs, vowing to prosecute who they describe as killers and corrupted people.
[Shia Power]Protest outside Governor House Karachi against Askari Raza target killing -Urdu
First ever protest in history of Pakistan, thousands of momineens including women and children attended protest in front of governor house Sindh Karachi against the targeted killing of shia people....
First ever protest in history of Pakistan, thousands of momineens including women and children attended protest in front of governor house Sindh Karachi against the targeted killing of shia people. protest continued over 11hrs. Alhamdolilah under guidance of ulmas like Ali Murtaza Zaidi, munawar naqvi, Mirza Yusuf hussain and many others, Matami anjumans and azadars from interior sindh came over there. Thousands of momineens covered the distance in the form of Juloos on feet.
Labbaik Ya hussain
More...
Description:
First ever protest in history of Pakistan, thousands of momineens including women and children attended protest in front of governor house Sindh Karachi against the targeted killing of shia people. protest continued over 11hrs. Alhamdolilah under guidance of ulmas like Ali Murtaza Zaidi, munawar naqvi, Mirza Yusuf hussain and many others, Matami anjumans and azadars from interior sindh came over there. Thousands of momineens covered the distance in the form of Juloos on feet.
Labbaik Ya hussain
[Shia Power] Protest outside governor House Karachi against Askari Raza target killing - Pt 2 - 01Jan2012 - Urdu
First ever protest in history of Pakistan, thousands of momineens including women and children attended protest in front of governor house Sindh Karachi against the targeted killing of shia people....
First ever protest in history of Pakistan, thousands of momineens including women and children attended protest in front of governor house Sindh Karachi against the targeted killing of shia people. protest continued over 11hrs. Alhamdolilah under guidance of ulmas like Ali Murtaza Zaidi, munawar naqvi, Mirza Yusuf hussain and many others, Matami anjumans and azadars from interior sindh came over there. Thousands of momineens covered the distance in the form of Juloos on feet.
Labbaik Ya hussain
More...
Description:
First ever protest in history of Pakistan, thousands of momineens including women and children attended protest in front of governor house Sindh Karachi against the targeted killing of shia people. protest continued over 11hrs. Alhamdolilah under guidance of ulmas like Ali Murtaza Zaidi, munawar naqvi, Mirza Yusuf hussain and many others, Matami anjumans and azadars from interior sindh came over there. Thousands of momineens covered the distance in the form of Juloos on feet.
Labbaik Ya hussain
3:26
|
[1] Quran Recitation by Br. Muhammad Rizvi - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - Arabic
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of \"Shias and Sunnis are brothers\" and \"Long Live Pakistan\". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of \"Shias and Sunnis are brothers\" and \"Long Live Pakistan\". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
[2] Speech by Dr. Ali Abbas - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - English
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
6:16
|
[3] Poetry by Sr. Maryam Hussain - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - English
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
8:54
|
[4] Speech by H.I. Shamshad Haider - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - English
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of \\\"Shias and Sunnis are brothers\\\" and \\\"Long Live Pakistan\\\". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of \\\"Shias and Sunnis are brothers\\\" and \\\"Long Live Pakistan\\\". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
5:43
|
[5] Poetry by Br. Muhammad Rizvi - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - English
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
8:21
|
[6] Speech by Imam Al-Asi - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - English
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
9:34
|
[8] Speech by H.I. Qaiser Abbas - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - Urdu
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
5:56
|
[9] Speech by Sr. Nisma Rizvi - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - English
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
9:56
|
[11] Speech by Sr. Malika Baltistani - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - Urdu
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
7:58
|
[12] Urdu Poetry - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - Urdu
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
5:37
|
[15] Nauha by Br. Mustafa Hadi - Protest @ Pakistan Embassy, Washington DC - 14Apr12 - Urdu
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the...
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
More...
Description:
This Video: Washington DC.
Thousands of American, Canadian and British Muslims protest against Extremist Wahabis and the Government of Pakistan.
April 14, 2012: The streets across the Embassies and Consulates of Pakistan in London, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary were filled with protestors chanting slogans against the extremist wahabis and against the Government of Pakistan. They were protesting the barbaric murders of innocent Shia Muslims on April 02, 2012, where buses travelling between Rawalpindi and Gilgit were stopped in Chilas and the Shia Muslims were identified and brutally slaughtered by the extremist wahabis as their families watched and screamed in horror. The protestors also expressed their pain and anger at the ongoing genocide in Quetta, Karachi, Lahore and other areas of Pakistan and demanded an immediate end to the killings.
Speakers at the rallies categorically stated that they are not protesting against Pakistan or against any sect of Islam. They are against the extremist ideology followed by the barbaric criminals committing the massacres and against the Government of Pakistan for failing to close Saudi-funded hate schools and for failing to arrest the murderous graduates of these schools.
The largest rallies were taken out in Washington DC (USA), London (UK) and Toronto (Canada), where thousands of Muslims belonging to various sects of Islam gathered to show their solidarity with the victims. They raised the slogans of "Shias and Sunnis are brothers" and "Long Live Pakistan". The participants of the Washington DC rally had traveled from Houston, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Atlanta Boston, Dallas, Seattle Washington DC and other cities to register their protest. These were the largest protest ever held against the Government of Pakistan and showcased the extreme pain and anger felt by the British, American and Canadian Muslims.
Hundreds also gathered in Los Angeles, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton to show their solidarity with the victims whose eyes were gouged out and heads smashed with rocks in front of their families without any reason.
The Saturday protests in USA, UK and Canada were called in solidarity with the protestors in Pakistan who staged a long sit-in at the parliament house in Islamabad to press for the arrest of the murderers. Delegation of the protestors across North America and Europe met with the officials at the Pakistani Embassies and Consulates and submitted their demands for the Government to take action against the perpetrators within 15 days and to take concrete steps to end the ongoing genocide. The protestors passed a resolution that if the Government does not arrest the perpetrators within 15 days they will hold larger and frequent protests across North America and Europe and will take their case to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice.
25:43
|
[1] Palestinians mark 64th anniversary of Nakba - Comment - 17 May 2012 - English
[1] Palestinians mark 64th anniversary of Nakba - Comment - 17 May 2012 - English
George: It's the 64th commemoration of the Nakba, the catastrophe when Palestine was wiped off the map by the so...
[1] Palestinians mark 64th anniversary of Nakba - Comment - 17 May 2012 - English
George: It's the 64th commemoration of the Nakba, the catastrophe when Palestine was wiped off the map by the so called state of Israel. Palestinians in their hundreds of thousands were driven out of their country, most of them never to return. Those hundreds of thousands are now millions, who are scattered around the region and around the world as refugees, as exiles, without passports or papers or status, but one thing they have not lost and that is the determination to return to their homes.
More...
Description:
[1] Palestinians mark 64th anniversary of Nakba - Comment - 17 May 2012 - English
George: It's the 64th commemoration of the Nakba, the catastrophe when Palestine was wiped off the map by the so called state of Israel. Palestinians in their hundreds of thousands were driven out of their country, most of them never to return. Those hundreds of thousands are now millions, who are scattered around the region and around the world as refugees, as exiles, without passports or papers or status, but one thing they have not lost and that is the determination to return to their homes.
2:57
|
[22 July 2012] Palestinian refugees face unjust situation during Ramadan - English
[22 July 2012] Palestinian refugees face unjust situation during Ramadan - English
Since Israelis occupied Palestine in 1948, thousands of Palestinians were forced to leave their homes, and they...
[22 July 2012] Palestinian refugees face unjust situation during Ramadan - English
Since Israelis occupied Palestine in 1948, thousands of Palestinians were forced to leave their homes, and they found themselves living in refugee camps far away from their original towns and villages. In Ramadan, the situation gets more difficult for these people.
This story is not an exception, and it is similar to thousands of others. According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), there are about five million Palestinian refugees. 1.2 million of them live in the besieged Gaza Strip under very hard humanitarian circumstances.
More...
Description:
[22 July 2012] Palestinian refugees face unjust situation during Ramadan - English
Since Israelis occupied Palestine in 1948, thousands of Palestinians were forced to leave their homes, and they found themselves living in refugee camps far away from their original towns and villages. In Ramadan, the situation gets more difficult for these people.
This story is not an exception, and it is similar to thousands of others. According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), there are about five million Palestinian refugees. 1.2 million of them live in the besieged Gaza Strip under very hard humanitarian circumstances.
7:42
|
Protest at US Consulate Karachi Against the Anti-Islam Film - Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah (saww) - Urdu
ISO, MWM rushed to the US Consulate.
KARACHI - Thousands of faithful of the great prophet Muhammad (PBUH) crossed all security barricades and reached the US Consulate for registering their...
ISO, MWM rushed to the US Consulate.
KARACHI - Thousands of faithful of the great prophet Muhammad (PBUH) crossed all security barricades and reached the US Consulate for registering their protest against the anti-Islam film; the protestors pulled down the US flag and hoisted flag of Labaik Ya Rasool Allah at the consulate on Sunday.
Law enforcement agencies have completely failed to stop the rally of thousands of faithful moving towards the US Consulate for staging their protest against the anti-Islam film.
More...
Description:
ISO, MWM rushed to the US Consulate.
KARACHI - Thousands of faithful of the great prophet Muhammad (PBUH) crossed all security barricades and reached the US Consulate for registering their protest against the anti-Islam film; the protestors pulled down the US flag and hoisted flag of Labaik Ya Rasool Allah at the consulate on Sunday.
Law enforcement agencies have completely failed to stop the rally of thousands of faithful moving towards the US Consulate for staging their protest against the anti-Islam film.
2:49
|
Shia Muslims mourn death of Professor Sibt-e-Jaffar Zaidi - 20 March 2013 - English
\\\"Murder of Urdu literature\\\" as many here put it, Professor Syed Sibt-e-Jaffar Zaidi was a renowned Shia Scholar, poet and academic who was gunned down in Karachi on Monday when he...
\\\"Murder of Urdu literature\\\" as many here put it, Professor Syed Sibt-e-Jaffar Zaidi was a renowned Shia Scholar, poet and academic who was gunned down in Karachi on Monday when he was commuting in the city near his college on his motorbike. The news of his death came as another Shock to the Shia Muslims in Pakistan including his students and fellow educationalists.
Shia Muslims are angry because those responsible for killing their loved ones continuously get away scot free. That is why once again thousands of Shia Muslims take to the streets to protest against the State\\\'s institutions who they say have miserably failed to perform their primary duty of providing security to its citizens.
Mourners consider various factors responsible for the on going acts of extremism in Pakistan.
Prof Zaidi was also one of the country’s renowned soz and marsiah reciter, a especial genres of Urdu Literature about mourning-poems that commemorate the martyrdom of Prophet Muhammad grandson Imam Hussain some 14 centuries ago in Karbala. Along with his college students he had large number of Marsia students across Pakistan
Shia Muslims makeup over 20 percent of Pakistan\\\'s 180 million population and according to Human rights groups thousands of Shias have been killed by the banned outfits working freely across Pakistan.
More...
Description:
\\\"Murder of Urdu literature\\\" as many here put it, Professor Syed Sibt-e-Jaffar Zaidi was a renowned Shia Scholar, poet and academic who was gunned down in Karachi on Monday when he was commuting in the city near his college on his motorbike. The news of his death came as another Shock to the Shia Muslims in Pakistan including his students and fellow educationalists.
Shia Muslims are angry because those responsible for killing their loved ones continuously get away scot free. That is why once again thousands of Shia Muslims take to the streets to protest against the State\\\'s institutions who they say have miserably failed to perform their primary duty of providing security to its citizens.
Mourners consider various factors responsible for the on going acts of extremism in Pakistan.
Prof Zaidi was also one of the country’s renowned soz and marsiah reciter, a especial genres of Urdu Literature about mourning-poems that commemorate the martyrdom of Prophet Muhammad grandson Imam Hussain some 14 centuries ago in Karbala. Along with his college students he had large number of Marsia students across Pakistan
Shia Muslims makeup over 20 percent of Pakistan\\\'s 180 million population and according to Human rights groups thousands of Shias have been killed by the banned outfits working freely across Pakistan.
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.
2:32
|
[06 July 13] Indian food prices spike as rains hit supply - English
Over the last week vegetable prices in north India have been rising sharply due to heavy rains which damaged crops and caused shortage of supplies. According to traders in okhla vegetable market...
Over the last week vegetable prices in north India have been rising sharply due to heavy rains which damaged crops and caused shortage of supplies. According to traders in okhla vegetable market the heavy rainfall in have also hampered the supply chain thus the prices have risen .Traders say the supplies of various vegetables have reduced drastically and may get worse if heavy rains continue to fall.
India has received about 54% more rainfall than usual in this monsoon season and in the northern states of uttarakhand and himachal Pradesh floods and landslides have left thousands of people dead and tens of thousands stranded.
More...
Description:
Over the last week vegetable prices in north India have been rising sharply due to heavy rains which damaged crops and caused shortage of supplies. According to traders in okhla vegetable market the heavy rainfall in have also hampered the supply chain thus the prices have risen .Traders say the supplies of various vegetables have reduced drastically and may get worse if heavy rains continue to fall.
India has received about 54% more rainfall than usual in this monsoon season and in the northern states of uttarakhand and himachal Pradesh floods and landslides have left thousands of people dead and tens of thousands stranded.
0:42
|
[24 Oct 2013] Bahraini opposition figure appears in court, denies charges of violence - English
In Bahrain, a prominent opposition leader appears in court to defend himself against charges of inciting violence.
Khalil al-Marzooq a top member of the main Shia political bloc al-Wefaq...
In Bahrain, a prominent opposition leader appears in court to defend himself against charges of inciting violence.
Khalil al-Marzooq a top member of the main Shia political bloc al-Wefaq rejected charges that he encouraged anti-regime attacks in the tiny Persian Gulf country. The arrest of Marzooq has prompted the Shia-led opposition to suspend political talks with the regime. Bahrain has been the scene of a nonstop uprising since 2011. Thousands of anti-government protesters have been staging regular demonstrations on the streets calling for the Al Khalifa royal family to relinquish power. The regime has responded with a crackdown in which scores of people have been killed and thousands arrested.
More...
Description:
In Bahrain, a prominent opposition leader appears in court to defend himself against charges of inciting violence.
Khalil al-Marzooq a top member of the main Shia political bloc al-Wefaq rejected charges that he encouraged anti-regime attacks in the tiny Persian Gulf country. The arrest of Marzooq has prompted the Shia-led opposition to suspend political talks with the regime. Bahrain has been the scene of a nonstop uprising since 2011. Thousands of anti-government protesters have been staging regular demonstrations on the streets calling for the Al Khalifa royal family to relinquish power. The regime has responded with a crackdown in which scores of people have been killed and thousands arrested.