Search Result in All

Description:

Shaykh Salim Yusufali analyses and deconstructs some of the indecency and immoral corruption of the music industry. Viewer discretion is advised; this video contains clips from mainstream musicians and bands, such as Britney Spears, Nicki Minaj, Justin Timberlake, Timberland, OutKast, 50 Cent, Eminem, Robin Thicke, One Direction and David Bowie. The examples that have been shown may offend some viewers; Shaykh Salim and the Islamic Pulse team here in the Holy City of Qom have deemed it necessary to highlight some of the immoral themes that our people worldwide are being exposed to.

Description:

What are you searching for in this world? Some of the pertinent and beautiful reminders in this clip will wake us up if we contemplate a little bit on what is being said. Allah has not created this world as a permanent abode- if our life objectives are to seek comfort and happiness, then perhaps we have been walking in the wrong direction. By reflecting on the lifestyle of the great scholars of the modern world, such as Imam Khomeini, Imam Khamenei and others, we will see that the primary objectives of their lives were not to seek out comfort, but to strive against their nafs (selves).

Description:

The BISKITOONS attempt to give the Pear hints, nudging him in the direction of good oral hygiene by telling him various ahadith about the benefits of brushing ones’ teeth. #IslamicCartoon #Sunnah #Toothbrush #Miswak #Islam #ChildrensIslamicCartoon

Description:

Muharram, Ashura, Karbala, and Azadari holds a special value in Islam and among all Muslims. What should be the direction of this Azadari? Should the focus of Azadari be self-made rituals? If no, what should be the focus? What are the key ingredients that should ideally be present in the mourning ceremonies of Imam Husayn ibne Ali (A)? The Leader, Imam Khamenei speaks.

Description:

\"His footprints show you the direction of the Qibla;\" \"O\' Imam Hadi (A)!\" \"The servant of his home, turns dirt to gold;\" \"O\' Imam Hadi (A)!\" This and more in this short, but moving Latmiyya by Husayn Tahiri in ode to Imam al-Hadi (A). Our condolences to all the believers upon the martyrdom anniversary of the 10th divinely appointed Imam, Imam Ali ibn Muhammad al-Naqi al-Hadi (A).

Description:

Iran's Secretary General of the High Council for Human Rights, Mohammad Javad Larijani has said that the recent claims by the International Atomic Energy Agency against Tehran are “laughable.” In his November 8 report on Iran's nuclear program, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano claimed that Iran had engaged in activities related to developing nuclear weapons before 2003, adding that these activities “may still be ongoing.” Based on the report, which Iran has called "unfounded and unbalanced," the IAEA Board of Governors on Friday passed a new resolution on the Islamic Republic's nuclear activities. The resolution voices "deep and increasing concern" over Tehran's nuclear program and also calls for Iran and the IAEA to intensify dialogue to resolve the dispute over the issue. Larijani made the remarks in a heated television debate aired on the American channel MSNBC. US president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Dr. Richard Haass, Mike Barnicle and John Mitchun were the other guests on the television debate. What follows is a rough transcription of the interview: MSNBC: Let's go to the heart of the matter when it comes to Iran, the headlines of the past week, the IAEA report found evidence of nuclear weapons program in Iran and you are quoted as saying that is “quite laughable.” Why sir? Larijani: The reason is very simple. There is no single evidence in that. These allegations which is aired again is based on a document which was put to us four years ago based on a laptop somewhere found by United States authorities. And at that time, four years ago, it has been discussed with the agency and the conclusion was that none of these allegations could be verified. So by a letter it has been closed- the whole issue. Then again it has been renewed and [let me] just give you an example. A good part of this so-called document which is on the laptop, for example lecture notes that somebody presented in Brussels or at some universities. Some of them are parts of some textbook as put together with pictures, formulas, so it is totally inconclusive. MSNBC: Let's back up. Before I send this to Richard Haass- are you saying it doesn't exist? There is no nuclear program? Larijani: Well we have a very extensive nuclear program but not to the direction of producing arms. Our nuclear project is very extensive, very advanced. We are number one in the Middle East but we are not pursuing the nuclear armament for two basic reasons. Number one there is a Fatwa by Ayatollah Khamenei, the leader and it is against the Islamic jurisprudence to build and use mass destructing weapons. It is Haram we call it, unlawful. And secondly, it doesn't add to our security. It is more liability than asset for us. Our military muscle is strong enough to repel or to deter any imminent threat and this is basically very important achievement. MSNBC: Richard Haass, put this into perspective for us. What the reports were saying and what this gentleman is saying. Haass: Well quite frankly it is impossible to take the Iranian denial seriously. They are preposterous. The International Atomic Energy Agency taking information from all the member states in the United Nations have put together a comprehensive and extraordinarily damning report. And what there is, is a pattern, not a single incident, a pattern over years of Iranian program to move in the direction of developing nuclear weapons. We see a procurement mechanism to gain access to all sorts of equipment, we see all sorts of undeclared efforts to produce nuclear material now up to 20 percent well on its way to what it needs to produce a weapon, most important there is now serious evidence about the Iranian testing of the implosive device that would actually be the heart of the nuclear weapon. So the idea that the Iranians have all these underground and undeclared facilities, that they have been misleading the International Atomic Energy Agency for years, the idea they're doing this- this oil rich country in order to produce electricity? If you believe that you seriously have to believe in the tooth fairy. MSNBC: Sir this doesn't sound like preposterous, little pieces of information that were roaming together randomly. Larijani: Well the whole scenes of allegation is produced and initiated by the United States. It seems there is a good machinery to produce perpetual allegation against Iran, it is not only one case. I am telling you exactly that there are no secret programs in our nuclear program and development. Iran's transparency is far ahead of United States, far ahead of UK, far ahead of France and incomparable to Israel which is a renegade state in the sense of NPT. Barnicle: So you allow inspectors to just come into Iran. Larijani: The inspectors are coming to Iran periodically, the cameras are there 24 hours. This is quite obvious. Haass: But the whole concept the way this works, just when you talk about inspectors, let's just be clear, I am sure if everyone watching this will understand, the entire international nuclear inspection effort depends upon the willingness of the country in question to cooperate fully. This is a gentlemen's agreement. They declare their facilities that are involved in the nuclear business then the inspectors come in and look at them. If they do not declare facilities the inspectors don't give a chance and the problem is this is a gentlemen's agreement in a world where not every country is a gentleman. So Iran quite frankly has undeclared facilities and undeclared programs which the inspectors had not had access to and the reason we only know about it is that member states, not simply the United States sir, but many, many member states of the United Nations have provided independent information to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which by the way you know and I know is not controlled by the United States. We have fundamental differences with this agency over the years including over Iraq. We had fundamental differences and we've also had differences over Iran where we the United States felt, this agency was not being nearly tough enough. So now they have come in with an extraordinarily damning report and Iranian officials can dismiss it. MSNBC: So if this is a gentlemen's agreement, the gentlemen certainly don't agree and sir, you seem very confident and almost as if it's funny it's interesting because we interviewed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about this about a year ago, off camera, and he too seemed very comfortable about his position which is similar to yours. And if you are so comfortable with your position about the lack of nuclear armament and the facilities that the IAEA is talking about, why not let inspectors completely come in? Open the door let them come in and see what you have. Larijani: Well the mechanism that the gentleman addressed is not complete because first of all there is no single secret installment or activity which is concealed from the agency. Secondly, two years ago we asked the agency tell us all the questions you have and he managed to put to us six groups of questions. The questions were raised by themselves not dictated by us. So one by one groups of inspectors came to Iran and we cleared them up and there is official letters from them this group has been finished then we moved to another one. Well it doesn't make sense that every morning somebody says we guess there is some secret things done there. There should be foundation for this allegation. What do you mean the door should be open? They should ask where do you want to inspect? Did they want to inspect my bedroom or other places? I mean it doesn't make sense. Barnicle: A few moments ago when you mentioned the nuclear programs of other nations I detected a definite edge in your voice when you mentioned the state of Israel. Do you fear an attack from the state of Israel on your nuclear facilities? Larijani: Well I am beyond the fear. What is the difference between us and Israel? Israel has a bomb, not a member of NPT; it doesn't disclose anything to agency, nothing wrong with it. You see what the double standard is in here. We are member of NPT, they periodically come to Iran, their cameras are there, we don't have the weapon then the whole pressure is put on us. No, not at all. We don't fear any attack from anyone. We take it serious in our calculation but we don't fear. There is a difference between that. Mitchum: Given your tone again Sir when you talk about Israel, just a second ago why shouldn't we suspect that there would be ambitions for Iran to join the club of which Israel is a part with the nuclear arms? Larijani: We are very advanced in the nuclear technology which is a matter of pride for us and that gentleman mentioned that we have plenty of gas and oil with all good calculations, the age of this is up to 20-25 period, 25 years from now. It means that if we don't have it, then we should beg in front of the Western countries to light our houses and we know how bad they are treating us in this area. We are right now very happy that we have the first power plant, we know how to make the fuel. We already have more than 25 percent share of sodalite and erudite they don't give us a bit of this fuel that we need, even the twenty percent that we needed for Tehran. Haass: It's important to keep in mind we are not talking about an established democracy that treats its own people with respect, we are talking about a country also that is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. So this is obvious and understandable concern about what Iran is doing. Larijani: In terms of record I think United States of America is the largest and the greatest country supporting terrorism. The records of terrorist activity which is supported by the tax money of these people is enormous, I can go one by one. Barnicle: Wait a minute. This is a free country. And part of our gift is we have the liberty and the freedom to say anything and to sound foolish, to sound absurd, to sound smart. That's absurd saying that America is the biggest terrorist nation in the world. My question to you Sir is, you seem like a really nice guy, alright, why doesn't your country be a better neighbor? Larijani: We have fantastic relations with all of our neighbors... Barnicle: Really? [laughing] Larijani: Definitely, but the policy of demonizing Iran, a very important policy which is pursued in the region- well it has its own benefit. Barnicle But it's just in little things, like the American tourists cross the border, supposedly cross the border, you grab them, you scoop them, you hold them for months on end. Why? Larijani: This is a very simple question I answered before; suppose the security of your people... Barnicle You're here... Larijani: No, I'm here with visa- It's quite different. [Suppose] The security of the United States' people, on a patrol with Mexico elsewhere they pick 3 Iranians and ask them why are you here? They say well we are just walking in the desert. Well, with the whole hostility and suspicion which is between the two countries, you are in here to blow up somewhere definitely they will be put into jail for years if not in Guantanamo, they bring them somewhere else. It took a lot of time that we convince- I was working on this case because they were like me from ... Berkeley. I talked with their families, managed to contact between them and their families when they were arrested- for their families to come to Iran to take the suspicion away. This is very natural for security of people to suspect a cross bordering which is in the most volatile regional area of Iran- in which there is daily shooting over there. Barnicle Ok. They're going to blow up the desert. What is the root? What do you think is the root of Iranian paranoia towards the United States and towards many of its neighbors? What is the root of this paranoia? Is it the fear that we find out about your nuclear program? Larijani: We don't have any paranoia about our neighbors. We are very suspicious of American paranoia with us. The question is what is wrong with Iran that this persistent hostility... Barnicle: You have a track record of international terrorism. Larijani: This is not true. We are ourselves the victim of international terrorism- terrorism in the area. Let me ask you, who was helping Al-Qaida and Taliban for years while we were at war with them in Afghanistan? The United States of America. The money from the United States was pouring to Al-Qaida and Taliban- the idea was we should curb Iran by another religious front. Is it correct? Haass: No it's not correct. The United States did support the Mujahidin; obviously in order to get rid of the Soviet... to say that the United States supported Al-Qaida is again preposterous- the fact is that Iran is supporting terrorism in Lebanon, it's supporting groups like Hezbollah, groups like Hamas; it is involved in Iraq; it is involved in Afghanistan. Iran has basically become a regional power that is trying to destabilize many countries, trying to make them in some ways heavily influenced by Tehran and that is simply a fact of life- which again is one of the reasons the world is so concerned about Iranian nuclear program. How do we know Iran will not become even more aggressive? How do we know that nuclear materials will not end in the hands of a group like Hezbollah? What do we see about Iran's track record that would lead us to believe that Iran in any way would be responsible with nuclear material? This is a genuine concern and if you dismiss it as laughable Sir you are seriously underestimating not simply the American, not simply the Israeli, but I would suggest the world's concern over the direction your government is heading. Larijani: The disastrous thing is the blind policy of the United States in supporting carte blanche renegade Israel which is the source of all tension in the region. If you call Hezbollah and Hamas terrorist groups- they are fighting to be given the permission to live. What about Israel? Israel is involved in government sponsored terrorism. Kills anybody who thinks that it's not correct and deprives millions of people from basic tenures of life. 60 years of atrocity in that area is supported carte blanche by the US, this is even against the basic interests of that nation- they don't know it. Mitchum:Sir do you recognize the right of Israel to exist? Larijani: We recognize the rights of Jews, Christians and Muslims to live together in peace and tranquility- to create a racist regime in the middle of a land put the others out is like creating a small colony for the blacks and leave the rest for the whites. Mitchum: Thank you for the answer. Barnicle: The answer is no. Larijani: No, the answer is not no. We respect any decision by Palestinians. We are not in a position to tell them what kind of state they [should] have. But they should be given the chance to decide. MSNBC:This has been fascinating and a great picture window into the choices that Americans make when they're choosing their president and also a sense of what our Secretary of State and what our diplomats have to confront in dealing with when they're going out into the world and working with other countries. It is extremely complicated and often conversations feel like they're going in circles because it's very hard to develop a common understanding or even a place where you can start engaging and I think this was an example of that. Mohammad Javad Larijani, thank you for coming on the show this morning.

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.

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.

Description:

Supreme Leader\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Speech to Members of Ahlul Bayt World Assembly and Islamic Radio and Television Uni Print 17/08/2015 The following is the full text of the speech delivered on August 17, 2015 by Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a meeting with the participants of Ahlul Bayt World Assembly and the members of Islamic Radio and Television Union. In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful‏ All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings be upon our Master and Prophet, Ab-al-Qassem al-Mustafa Muhammad and upon his immaculate, pure and chosen household, especially the one remaining with Allah on earth. I would like to welcome the honorable participants and the dear brothers and sisters, the brothers and sisters from Ahlul Bayt World Assembly, the brothers and sisters from the Islamic Radio and Television Union and the honorable families of martyrs who are present in the meeting. I ask Allah the Exalted to bestow His blessings on all of you. I would like to raise a few points about the Ahlul Bayt World Assembly and the Islamic Radio and Television Union. As for the Ahlul Bayt World Assembly, its significance originates from the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s (a.s.) household. Allah the Exalted says something - in a very explicit manner - about the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (a.s.) in the Holy Quran: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, you members of the Family, and to make you pure and immaculate\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 33: 33]. This description has been used for few groups of people in the Holy Quran. The Ahlul Bayt\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s understanding and knowledge lies in their divine purity. Well, this purity has many dimensions. If a group of people associate themselves with the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (a.s.), they should observe certain criteria. This is what we want to say: these groups should observe certain criteria. The efforts of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (greetings be upon them) revolved around these pivots- first, reviving the original teachings of Islam. They wanted to keep Islamic principles alive. Oppressive governments and taghuts always tried to destroy or change and distort Islamic teachings. One of the most important moves of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household was to resist this attempt. They wanted to preserve and revive Islamic teachings. This was one of their tasks. Another task that the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (greetings be upon them) did was to implement divine laws. They did so whether during the time when they ruled or during the time when they were removed from government. Their efforts were focused on implementing divine laws in society. This was another task. Another task that they carried out was to engage in jihad in the way of God. You read in the ziarat of the Imams, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"I testify that you strove [jihad] in the way of God, such a striving is due to him.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" This means that they did not show any negligence in fighting in the way of God. They engaged in jihad in the way of God with all their power and capability. This was another task. An important part of this jihad - which is a separate chapter in itself - was fighting against oppression and oppressors. The lives of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (a.s.) were imbued with fighting against oppression and oppressors. The reason behind all those pressures and poisoning attempts and all that martyrdom was this- they fought against oppression and oppressors. This is the life of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household. Now, we want to be their followers. Therefore, we should observe these things. These things should be observed. We should promote Islamic teachings. We should consider implementing divine laws as one of our goals. We should engage in jihad in the way of God with all our power. We should fight against oppressors. We should fight against and confront oppressors. This is our responsibility. Well, jihad is not confined to a military war. Jihad includes all kinds of fighting, ranging from cultural to political and economic fighting. All these kinds of fighting are included in jihad. Our minds should not only switch to a military war. Sometimes, it is possible that a military war breaks out, but jihad is not only this. In our opinion, today, the manifestation of jihad for us Muslims and followers of the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household is fighting against the plots of arrogance in this Islamic region. Today, this is the greatest form of jihad. We should fight against the plots of arrogance. First, we should identify these plots and study the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s thoughts so that we know what he is going to do. After that, we should plan on how we want to fight against his goals. And this is not confined to defense. Fighting includes both defense and offense. Sometimes, it is necessary for us to adopt a defensive position and sometimes, it is necessary to adopt an offensive position. In both cases, the goal is fighting against the plans of arrogance - which is the main enemy - in the region. This fighting should take place in the entire Islamic region - particularly in this region which is West Asia. The Europeans insist on referring to this region as the Middle East region. In other words, they locate east on the basis of Europe. To them, a region is Far East, another is Middle East and another region is Near East. Because of the Europeans\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' arrogance, this region has been called, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the Middle East\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" from the beginning. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"The Middle East\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" is a wrong name. This is West Asia. This is Asia - a large continent - and we are in West Asia. This region is a very sensitive region. It is a very important region in terms of strategy, military power, important underground resources and connection between three continents - Asia, Europe and Africa. It is an important region for which they have certain plans. We should see what these plans are and then we should confront them. This is jihad. The Holy Quran says to us, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And strive hard in the way of Allah, such a striving is due to Him\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 22: 78]. Today, this is jihad in the way of God. Hatching plots against the world of Islam and this region in particular is not a new development. Since many years ago - since 100 years ago: since World War I until today - this region has been exposed to many pressures by arrogant powers. One day, it was England, one day it was America and one day it was France. It is 100 years or more now that arrogant powers have been pursuing their goals here. However, these pressures, plans and plots have been reinforced since the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. This is because the victory of Islam in an important, great and sensitive country like Iran was confusing for arrogance. In the beginning, they lost the power to analyze events. We used to pursue events and we were witness to this. In the beginning, they were confused. Later on, when they collected themselves, they began to exert pressure and the pivot of this pressure was the Islamic Republic of Iran. First, they focused their efforts on preventing this experience from being repeated in other countries. They were after this. This was why they thought of increasing pressures on Iran. It is 35 years now that we have gotten used to the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s pressures. The people of Iran have gotten used to pressures. It is 35 years now that we have been facing threats, sanctions, security pressures, different political plots and all kinds of pressures. This began with the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. However, after the emergence of Islamic Awakening - that began four, five years ago in North African countries such as Egypt, Tunisia and other African countries - the enemies increased their pressures. That is to say, the enemy became anxious and uneasy in the real sense of the word. They adopted many measures that are continuing in the present time. Of course, they think that they have suppressed Islamic Awakening, but this humble person believes that Islamic Awakening is not suppressible. Although they have adopted some measures, this movement exists and it will find its true position sooner or later. In any case, they have increased their efforts in the recent years. They have adopted many measures and they have brought new elements into the equation. The enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plans are based on two things. First, I will tell you that when we say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" we do not refer to an imaginary and fictional creature. By \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" we mean global arrogance and arrogant powers: powers whose existence depends on dominating others, interfering in their affairs and possessing their financial and vital resources. These are arrogant powers or in other words, the leaders of global arrogance. We have a term in our political literature which is global arrogance. It means the division of the world into \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the oppressor\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" and \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the oppressed\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". This is global arrogance. Those who are the leaders of this system are enemies. If we want to give an example of who this enemy is in the outside world, we should refer to the regime of the United States of America. This regime is the epitome of global arrogance. Of course, others are part of global arrogance as well, but the clearest and the most obvious example is the regime of the United States of America. It knows nothing about human morality and it is not ashamed of committing any crime - of any nature. It covers these crimes, pressures and violent acts behind its smiles and its good and beautiful words. The manifestation of global arrogance is this regime. Therefore, when we say, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", it means this. This enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plan in the region is mainly based on two things. Of course, it has many branches, but these are the main two. One is creating discord and the second it exerting influence. This is the basis of the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plan in the region. They want to create discord between governments and - after that - between nations which is more dangerous than discord between governments. They want to make peoples bear grudge against each other and establish biased groups with different names. One day, it was \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"pan-Iranism\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"pan-Arabism\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\", \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"pan-Turkism\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" and other such orientations and today, it is the issue of Shia and Sunni, takfirism and other such things. They create discord with anything they can. This is only item of their measures and they are working on it in a very serious way. Of course, the English were the first experts of this measure. They have expertise in creating religious discord. The Americans have learned this from them and they are working on it today with all their power. All the takfiri groups that you see are their handicraft. Of course, we have been saying this for several years, but some people had doubts. Today, the Americans themselves are acknowledging this. They are acknowledging that it was they who created DAESH, al-Nusra Front and other takfiri groups. A bunch of simple-minded - although sincere - Muslims were deceived by them. This is the important point. What is very instructive to us and what we should pay attention to is that sometimes well-intentioned individuals work inside the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plan because of lack of vigilance. This has happened. One clear example of this is the issue of Syria. When taghuti governments were overthrown in Tunisia and Egypt with Islamic slogans, all of a sudden the Americans and the Zionists decided to use this formula for destroying resistant governments and countries. Therefore, they turned to Syria and as a result, a group of simple-minded and naïve individuals became the target of this plan. They made Syria reach the current situation. It is four, five years now that Syria has been experiencing this tumultuous situation and it is not clear when it will come to an end. This was what the enemy did and simple-minded individuals were incorporated in this plan. They filled in the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s puzzle. This happens in many cases. It was they who created takfiri groups. It was they who created thuggish and violent groups and set them on the Islamic Ummah. They pretend that this is a denominational war. I will tell you that the conflicts that they are trying to label as denominational conflicts in Iraq, Syria and other countries are not denominational at all. They are of a political nature. The war in Yemen is a political war, not a religious one. They falsely claim that the issue is about Shia and Sunni while this is not the case. Some of those people who are losing their children, women, infants and their hospitals and schools in Yemen under the bombardment of the Saudis are Shafi\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'i and some of them are Zaidi . So, the issue is not about Shia and Sunni. The conflict is a political conflict, the conflict between policies. Today, they are creating such a situation in the region. It was they who created discord. We should try to eliminate these differences and conflicts. We have said to everyone in an outspoken way that we extend the hand of friendship to all regional and Muslim governments. We have no problems with Muslim governments. Of course in the present time, our relations with many of our neighbors are already friendly and brotherly. The countries to the north, south, east and west of the Islamic Republic of Iran have good relations with us. Of course, some countries - near and far away - have certain differences with us. They behave in an obstinate way and show malevolence. This exists as well, but our principle is based on establishing good relations with neighboring countries, governments and - particularly - peoples. Our country has very good relations with peoples. Of course, we believe that we should be committed to principles. We say that principles should be preserved. It was with commitment to principles that our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) managed to achieve victory, preserve the Revolution and give stability to the Islamic Republic. He was committed to principles. One of these principles is \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"They are strong against unbelievers, compassionate amongst each other\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 48: 29]. This is one of the principles. We do not make peace with our enemies - with arrogance - and we do not show enmity towards our Muslim brothers, rather we behave in a friendly and brotherly manner towards them because we believe that we should be \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"strong against unbelievers, compassionate amongst each other.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" This is the lesson of our magnanimous Imam (r.a.). This is the clear line of the Islamic Republic. In supporting the oppressed, we do not look, have not looked and will not look at the other side\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s religion and denomination. This is our magnanimous Imam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s (r.a.) guideline. Imam behaved towards Shia resistance in Lebanon in the same way that he behaved towards Sunni resistance in Palestine. He behaved towards them without any difference. We supported our brothers in Lebanon in the same way that we supported our brothers in Gaza without any difference. The former were Sunnis and the latter were Shias. The main issue for us is defending Islamic identity and supporting the oppressed. The main issue for us is the issue of Palestine which is the main issue for Muslims in the present time. This is the main issue for us. We behave in the same way towards our enemies. Our magnanimous Imam (r.a.) fought against Mohammad Reza Pahlavi who was apparently a Shia. Likewise, he fought against Saddam Hussein who was apparently a Sunni. Of course, the former was not a true Shia and the latter was not a true Sunni either. Both of them were separate from Islam, but the former was apparently a Shia and the latter was apparently a Sunni. Imam (r.a.) fought against them in the same way. Therefore, the issue for us is not the issue of Sunni, Shia, denominational bias and other such things. The issue is the issue of Islam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s principles: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Be an enemy of the oppressor and helper of the oppressed\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [Nahjul Balaghah, Letter 47]. This is Islam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s command. This is our path. This is our line. Intensifying discord in the world of Islam is forbidden. We are opposed to the behavior of some Shia groups, as it leads to discord. We have said outspokenly that we are opposed to insulting the holy beliefs of Sunnis. Some people from both sides intensify and fuel the fire of enmities. Many of them have good intentions, but they do not have foresight. Foresight is necessary. We should see what the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plan is. The enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s first plan is creating discord and his second plan is exerting influence. They want to have decade-long influence in Islamic and regional countries. Today in the region, America does not enjoy the reputation that it did in the past and therefore, it wants to retrieve it. They have the same intention in our country. They have the same intention in Iran. They thought that they could use the nuclear negotiations to exert influence inside our country. Now, the fate of this nuclear agreement is not clear either in Iran or in America. It is not clear whether it will be approved or not in both countries. They wanted to use it as a means to exert influence in our country, but we blocked their path and we will definitely block their path in the future as well [audience chant \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Allahu Akbar\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"]. We will not allow the Americans to have economic or political influence in our country, nor will we allow them to have a political presence and cultural influence in our country. We will confront them with all our power which is thankfully great in the present time. The same is true of the region. In the region too, they want to exert influence, have an excuse to show their presence and pursue their goals. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor and grace, we will do our best to prevent this. Our policies in the region are the exact opposite of the Americans. The territorial integrity of regional countries is very important to us. The territorial integrity of Iraq and Syria is very important to us. On the contrary, they are after dismembering these countries. I have said before that the Americans are after dismembering Iraq, but some people expressed surprise. Recently, the Americans themselves have acknowledged that they are after dismembering Iraq. They want to dismembering Iraq. If they can, they want to dismember Syria as well. Their purpose of doing this is to create small and obedient countries, but by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor and grace, this will not happen [audience chant \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Allahu Akbar\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"]. We will defend the Resistance in the region. We will defend the Palestinian Resistance which is one of the most prominent chapters in the history of the Islamic Ummah throughout these years. We will defend this group. We will support anyone who fights against Israel, who condemns the Zionist regime and who approves of the Palestinian Resistance. We will offer all kinds of support, within the scope of our capabilities, to such people. We will offer all kinds of possible support to anyone who confronts the Zionist regime. We will support the Resistance. We will support the territorial integrity of countries. We will support all those individuals who resist the divisive policies of America. We confront all those people who create discord. We do not approve of the kind of Shia whose headquarters are in London [audience chant \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Allahu Akbar\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"] because it is not the kind of Shia that the Holy Prophet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s household (greetings be upon them) promoted. The kind of Shia that is based on creating discord and on clearing the road for the presence of the enemies of Islam is not real Shia, rather it is deviation. Shia is the epitome of original Islam and the Holy Quran. We will support all those people who help unity and we will oppose all those who act against unity. We will support all the oppressed. We will not leave the arena just because they say that we interfered in the affairs of Bahrain and other countries. We did not interfere at all, but we will support them. We feel for the oppressed people of Bahrain and Yemen. We pray for them and we will offer any kind of help we can. Today, the people of Yemen are really oppressed. They are destroying a country just because of some arrogant and political polices which are pursued in a foolish manner. They could have pursued political goals in a different manner, but they are pursuing them foolishly. The events of Yemen and many other events in the world of Islam - in Pakistan, Afghanistan and other such countries - are really painful for us. And these events are too many and they are really painful. The world of Islam should cure such problems with vigilance and foresight. As for the Islamic Radio and Television Union, I want to say that this union is very important. The task that you have begun - that is to say, establishing this union - is a very important task. Notice that in the present time, at least 70, 80 percent of the people in Muslim countries are committed to religious principles and beliefs. If you take a look at Islamic countries, you will see that the people are committed to and believe in their religion. To what extent are the radio and television networks in such countries - which should be the representatives of the people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s wishes and demands - committed to religion? There is a shocking gap and rift. Seventy, eighty percent of the people are religious, but radio and television networks in such countries do not move in a religious direction and they do not reflect the people\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s demands. This is very strange. They reflect the same things that the dangerous media empire of arrogance wants. Today, arrogance has created a great media empire. They distort and cover up news and they tell lies. This way, they promote their policies. This is while they constantly say that they take an impartial position. The English radio claims that it is impartial, but they are lying. They are not impartial at all. They move in the exact direction of arrogant and colonialist policies - whether American or English policies. Audio and print media, news agencies and the complicated means of mass communication that exist today are all at the service of their policies. They are at the service of arrogance, Zionism and their goals. We should do something in the face of this dangerous empire and this large media mafia that is in the hands of American and Zionist capitalists and cartels. What you are doing is the beginning of a movement and therefore, it should be pursued and strengthened on a daily basis. You should bring your partners and colleagues into the arena as well. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, a good future is awaiting us. I will tell you that despite the boastful behavior of arrogance and the great efforts that arrogance and its allies and followers are carrying out in financial, military, political and security areas, the future belongs to Islam in the region and in the entire world of Islam. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, Islam\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s dignity and power will increase on a daily basis. Of course, it is necessary to show diligence. Thankfully, there are many mujahid men, women and youth in the entire world of Islam. Therefore, we should appreciate their value and we should use our slogans, our moves, our words and our activities in this direction. If we do so, Allah the Exalted will definitely help: \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If you help the cause of Allah, He will help you and make firm your feet\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 47: 7]. Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings

Description:

Dua to Allah in favor of Muslim Ummah - Urdu. Request to all Shia and Sunni Muslims to unite against the enemy and defend Islam and Muslims. Follow the direction of Rahber e Muazzim Ayatullah Sayyed Ali Khamenei who has raised his voice on the behalf of Muslim Ummah against any oppression. Rahber has supported to defend any innocent human, let it be Muslims or non-Muslims, let it be Shia or Sunni. The evident proof of it is his all sorts of support to Hamas in defending their homeland and their lives from the attacks by the illegally formed and illigitimate government of Israel. We thank Allah (s.w.t) to provide us with such a leadership like Imam Khamenei (h.a) who has provided us direction. Imam Khamenei has steadfastly followed the foot steps of Imam Khomeini (r.a). May Imam of our time, Imam Mehdi (a.s) reappear soon and take charge of Muslim Ummah and spread the justice on the face of the earth.

Description:

The Mosque of Zulqeblatain or the Mosque of the two Qiblas which means the direction of prayer is a unique mosque in Medina because of God's command to Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him and his progeny) to change the direction of qibla from Al-Aqsa to Mecca. Our correspondent in Medina has more on the issue Mosque of Two Qiblas - Zulqeblatain - Unique mosque in Medina - November 2010 - English

Description:

Sayyed Jawwad Naqvi - Islamic Awakening - اسلامی بیداری از نظر رهبر معظم - Urdu Seminar held in at Bhojani hall Karachi on 17th October 2011 HIGHLIGHTS: TODAY: Islam (Islame Naab e Muhammadi) VS Imperialism (in the cloak of "Democracy") TODAY: Exportation of Islamic Revolution VS Exportation of Democracy. Listen around 48 minutes. What is the difference between a "Rahber" and a "Analyst". "Mujtahideen e Imperialism" are struggling to export Imperialism (in the cloak of "Democracy") throughout the world. "Mujtahideen e Islam" must practically struggle to export Islamic Revolution throughout the world. Purpose of Islamic Awakening Conference by Islamic Republic was to make these movements throughout Middle East: (1) Islamic (2) Public (Awami: Not controlled by fake leaders) (3) Global (Alami: Not isolated and regional) Summay of Rahber's speech: (1) Give direction to these movements. (2) Identify threats to these movements. (3) How to protect these movements from these threats. Expansion of Point (1) below, i.e. DIRECTION. (a) People from all walks of life should get involved, i.e. workers, farmers, working professionals etc. (b) Define transparent and clear goals. (c) Give ideologically clear slogans. (d) Recognize your enemy. (e) Future roadmap should be clearly communicated to all the involved. (f) Be careful of the dignitaries and prominent figures in these movements. (g) Be vigilant of the infiltrators. (h) Stay optimistic, persistent, don't get tired. (i) Demands must be crafted carefully (e.g. not for jobs & salaries). (j) Be ready for sacrifice. (k) Public and public leaders create their own guideline for these movements based on Islam. (l) First and foremost goal of these movements should be to revive the lost dignity of Muslims and Islam. Second, continue till pure Islamic system is not installed in your areas. Third, resistance against America. Forth, hatred of israel. Fifth, unity amongst Muslims and other countries. Expansion of Point (2) below, i.e. THREATS. (a) Internal Threats. (b) External Threats. Internal threats: (i) Wrongly considering that the mission is accomplished when a dictator falls. This is a major milestone but not the goal. (ii) Prominent figures and dignitaries are sometimes a threat. Listen to understand :) (iii) Don't get deceived by the smiles of enemy. Enemy is deceptive. (iv) Don't start celebrating small achievements. (v) Internal conflicts and disagreements. External threats: (i) Enemies have puppet revolutionaries ready to hijack movements. (ii) Enemies have ready-made constitutions and manifesto for your successful movements. (iii) Enemies want to distract your attention from core and primary issues to secondary issues. (iv) Don't get deceived by a different face same policies leadership. (v) Enemies will create disappointment and lack of confidence among you. (vi) Enemies will target your leadership. Must protect those who lead from the front. (vii) Sectarianism. (viii) Media war. Expansion of Point (3) below, i.e. SOLUTION. (a) Rely on ALLAH. (b) Trust in divine help. (c) Stay optimistic, determined, and ready for sacrifice. (d) Repeats real goals and slogans of the movement. (e) Strictly avoid all kinds of nationalism, tribe-ism, language-ism etc. (f) Beware of the hijackers of the movements (they use slogans sometimes). (g) America and NATO will come to "help" you. Reject them! (h) Don't trust ready-made manifestos, constitution, and recipes "others" have for you. Evaluate them with doubt. (i) Accept minority right and rights of other denominations living in the country. (j) Avoid Liberalism, Nationalism, Marxism, Socialism, and "so-called" Democracy (Imperialism) (k) Hold tight to Muslim Unity and Akhlaq e Islami (Islamic morals, ethics, and values). (l) Make Freedom of Palestine one of your leading slogans.

Description:

Supreme Leader\\\\\\\'s Speech to Air Force Commanders and Personnel 07/02/2013 The following is the full text of the speech delivered on February 7, 2013 by Ayatollah Khamenei the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution in a meeting with commanders and personnel of the Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran Army. The meeting was held on the occasion of the historic pledge of allegiance of Air Force officers to Imam Khomeini (r.a.) on the 19th of Bahman of 1357. ‌ In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful I am very happy to meet you - once more at our annual meeting - brothers and dear youth from the glorious Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran Army. I welcome all of you. As for the song which was performed, the lyrics were good, the melody was good, the content was good and it was performed well. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, our hearts will always be imbued with the scent of mercy and divine guidance which is the most important source of support. If we take a look at the history of the Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran Army over the past years, we will discover a number of important facts. There was one day when we could not and were not allowed to fix the plane parts that we had bought. Today, you build training planes, fighters and flight simulators. You carry out a lot of important radar-related work and you produce complex components. This great movement towards blossoming of talents, love, innovation, self-confidence and self-sufficiency - which has been established in the Air Force, in the entire Islamic Republic of Iran Army, in the Armed Forces and throughout the country - is such a movement that cannot be denied even by the opponents and the enemies of the Islamic Republic. Dominant powers tried to take control of all nations and countries throughout the world by using force, money and weapons and by launching military attacks. They tried to make nations believe that they cannot find the path towards greatness, identity and independence without relying on superpowers and on those who have money and power - Zionist and non-Zionist companies have lined up behind them. You shattered their hopes. Compare the Iranian nation, today, with nations who have been under the domination of American power. See where you are and where they are. With their movement, independence, self-confidence and reliance on God, the Iranian people proved that one can and should stand up against the domination of foreigners and those who seek domination. The Iranian nation has proved this. Thirty years ago, what was the position of the Iranian nation in science, civilization, progress, technology and political influence? What position does it enjoy today? It achieved such a position by putting up a resistance, relying on God and bringing all its capacities into the arena. This is an experience for both the Iranian nation and future generations. It is also an experience for other nations. The Air Force of the Islamic Republic of Iran Army is one of the examples of this resistance and this movement which has been based on self-confidence. We should continue this. We Iranian people should continue this path. This path is full of blessings. For more than thirty years, the enemies of the Iranian nation have done everything in their power to harm the Iranian nation. There is not a thing which they have not used against the Iranian nation. They provoked conflicts, waged wars, supported the enemy of the Islamic Republic with all their power and they waged hard and soft wars. They fought the people of Iran as hard as they could, but our people stood up against them and they resisted. Not only could they not bring our people to their knees and destroy them, but they also failed to prevent them from making progress. Our nation has made progress. They made use of everything they could. They hatched plots, launched coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'états, provoked military conflicts, shot down passenger airliners, imposed heavy sanctions and increased them on a daily basis. They did these things in the hope that our people would lose their hope, disappear from the scene and lose their trust in Islam and the Islamic Republic. But they failed. This is the record of the Islamic Republic. These days, referred to as ten-day Fajr celebrations, are good opportunities for our intellectuals, our youth and all the people of Iran to spend some time evaluating their actions during the past thirty-something years and see their achievements, see their successful efforts, see the divine assistance and see the weakness of the enemies\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' plots. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"And they (the unbelievers) planned, and Allah planned, and Allah is the best of planners\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 3: 54]. This is the general guideline for us, to see how we should choose our future path. You the people in the Air Force should move forward according to this outlook and orientation. Different sectors of the country, all the people and the officials of the country should move forward according to this outlook. Of course, the enemy inflicts harm, but it cannot do anything except for causing slight annoyance. I mentioned a few days ago that Allah the Exalted said, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"They shall by no means harm you but with a slight evil\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" [The Holy Quran, 3: 111]. Their job is to harm you. But, they cannot create obstacles for you and block your path. Over the past 30 years, the Americans have been ranting and raving against the Iranian nation. They said and did whatever they could. They broadcast negative propaganda and they established an evil media empire against the Iranian nation. But the result is this: today, by Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, the Iranian nation has become happier, more determined and more active than ever and it is witnessing more blossoming in different areas. They have been trying to separate the people from the Islamic Republic and the Revolution. Each year on the 22nd of Bahman, the Iranian people frustrate the enemy with their presence in the national and revolutionary rallies. They are trying to separate the people from one another. The previous inexperienced American secretary of state said openly that they are imposing sanctions in order to pit the people of Iran against the Islamic Republic. The people of Iran have always responded to such statements through their rallies and their actions. You will see that on the 22nd of Bahman, the Iranian people will, once more, frustrate their efforts with a crushing move [Audience shout \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Allahu Akbar\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"]. The good thing is that the people are wise and vigilant. They know the purpose of the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s plot, they predict the enemy\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s moves, they understand why the enemy has adopted a certain policy and they move in the opposite direction. They rely on their own achievements and they will show their presence in this great arena of national dignity. They will show themselves and they will prove their presence. This is the good thing. In the face of the negative propaganda by the enemy - particularly, the Americans and the Zionists - the people do not take the wrong path because of their communal wisdom and they do not make the mistake which the enemy is waiting for. This is the good thing about large-scale issues of our country. Now the Americans have raised the issue of negotiations again. They repeat that America is prepared to directly negotiate with Iran. This is not new. The Americans have repeatedly raised the issue of negotiations at every juncture. Now their newly appointed politicians repeat that we should negotiate. And they say that the ball is in Iran\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s court. The ball is in your court. It is you who should explain the meaning of negotiations that are accompanied by pressure and threats. Negotiations are for the sake of proving one\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s goodwill. You commit tens of acts which show lack of goodwill and then you speak about negotiations. Do you expect the Iranian nation to believe that you have goodwill? Of course, we understand why the Americans repeatedly raise the issue of negotiations and why they speak about it in different ways. We know what the reason is. As the Americans themselves say, their Middle East policies have failed. They need to play their trump card. Their trump card is dragging the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is based on the people, to the negotiating table. They need this. They want to say to the world that they have goodwill. No, we do not see any goodwill. Four years ago - during the early days of the current American administration - when they were saying the same words, I announced that we will not prejudge and we will wait to see what action they will take and then we will judge. Now after four years, how should the Iranian nation judge their actions? They supported the fitna in Iran, they helped those who started the fitna, they sent their troops to Afghanistan under the claim that they were fighting terrorism, they trampled on so many people and they destroyed them. They are also supporting and cooperating with the same terrorists in Syria and they used the same terrorists wherever they could in Iran. Their agents, their allies and Zionist spies openly killed the scientists of the Islamic Republic. They did not even condemn these terrorist activities. [On the contrary] They supported them. This is their record. They imposed sanctions - which they wanted to be crippling - on the Iranian nation. They openly said, crippling. Who do you want to cripple? Did you want to cripple the Iranian nation? Do you have goodwill? Negotiations are meaningful when the two sides negotiate with good intentions and without planning to deceive one another. Negotiations should be on equal terms. Negotiations for the sake of negotiations, tactical negotiations and offer of negotiations as a superpower gesture, are deceptive moves. They are not honest moves. I am not a diplomat. I am a revolutionary. I speak openly and honestly. A diplomat says something, but he actually means something else. We speak openly and honestly. We speak clearly and decisively. Negotiations are meaningful when the two sides show their good intentions. [Negotiations are not meaningful] when one side does not show his good intentions. You yourselves refer to this as pressures and negotiations. These two things are not compatible. You want to point the gun at the people of Iran and say, negotiate or we will shoot. You say these things to intimidate the Iranian nation. You should know that the Iranian nation is not intimidated by these things [Audience shout \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Allahu Akbar\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"]. A number of people become happy about the American offer of negotiations and they say, come and negotiate with us. This is expressed by a number of people who are either simple-minded or who have some ulterior motives. One cannot make definitive judgments about people. But what a simple-minded person does is no different, in essence, from what a person who has ulterior motives does. Negotiations with America will not solve any problems. When did they keep their promises? Over the past 60 years, since the coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état of the 28th of Mordad of 1332 until today, the officials of our country have been harmed whenever they trusted the Americans. One day Mosaddeq trusted the Americans, relied on them and considered them as his friends. Then the coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état of the 28th of Mordad occurred and the Americans found the opportunity to launch a coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état. The agent responsible for launching the coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état came to Tehran with a briefcase full of money and he divided it among thugs and vandals so that they launch the coup d\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'état. The agent was American. They admitted what the purpose of their plot was. After that, they helped the oppressive Pahlavi regime achieve domination over our country. They established SAVAK and chained and tortured political activists. These are the things they did at that time. During a certain period after the Revolution, the officials of the country trusted them. But the politicians of the American government labeled Iran as \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"axis of evil\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\". It is you who are the embodiment of evil. It is you who are doing evil deeds in the world. You wage wars, loot nations and support the Zionist regime. On the issue of Islamic Awakening, you suppress the nations who have risen in revolt as much as you can and you weaken them and pit them against one another. You are evil. Evil is part of your character. They accused the Iranian nation of doing evil acts. This is a big insult. Whenever people trusted them, they made such moves. They should show their good intentions. Negotiations and offer of negotiations are not compatible with pressures. Negotiations and pressures are two different paths. It is not possible for the Iranian nation to accept negotiations under pressures and threats, with those who make threats. What should we negotiate for? Today, the Iranian nation is vigilant. The true face of America has been revealed not only in Iran, but also in the region. Nations distrust America and there are many reasons for this distrust. The Iranian nation has also accurately read the Americans\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' moves. It understands what their purpose is. Our nation is vigilant. Today, if certain people want to help America re-establish its domination and act against our national interests, against the progress of the country and against the path of independence, they will be held responsible by the people and even if I act against this public demand, the people will complain. It is obvious. All the officials are responsible for safeguarding national interests and preserving national independence. They should preserve the dignity of the Iranian nation. We have negotiated, signed contracts and established relations with countries which have not plotted against Iran. The Iranian nation is peace-loving. The Iranian nation is patient. The unity of the Iranian nation is in line with promoting the interests of humanity. Today, what the Iranian nation does is for the sake of its interests and the interests of the Islamic Ummah and humanity. And undoubtedly, divine assistance is behind the Iranian nation. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, the people of Iran will be able to help not only themselves but also the Islamic Ummah to reach the peak of glory with their wisdom, with their firm determination and with the resistance that they have shown on this bright path, the path that they will continue following in the future as well. The way to reach this glory is to preserve this wisdom. The way to do this is to preserve our unity. The way to do this is for the officials to safeguard the interests of the country. This improper conduct which is witnessed in certain areas from certain government officials - they should end this. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor, I will address this issue in the future and I will speak to the people. Our nation is unified, determined and active. Even if there are differences of opinion between the people over different issues, all the officials and all the people join hands against the enemy, global arrogance and those who have prepared themselves to destroy the roots of the people and the Islamic Republic. There is no disagreement among the people over this issue. By Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s favor and grace, on the 22nd of Bahman the people will show, once more, that they are present on the scene, that they are prepared, that they are united, that they are moving in the same direction. And undoubtedly, divine blessings will be bestowed on them. Greetings be upon you and Allah\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s mercy and blessings. Source: http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1741&Itemid=4

Description:

#Ramadan #Quran #ProphetMuhammad Every faith tradition has a focus or direction which they hold sacred and important. For the Muslims, this is Mecca and the Sacred Ka’bah. However it was not always the direction of prayer. For the entire period of life in Mecca, the Muslims would turn towards Jerusalem when they engaged in their acts of worship. However, once they established themselves in Medina, the order was given to now turn towards Mecca and the Ka’bah. HOW did this shift occur? WHY did it happen? WHEN did it transpire? -- 𝐒𝐭𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐀𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐨 𝐒𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐬: 1. Mouse Click sound @ http://www.kalmanovitz.co.il/courses/English/construction/Assets/Mousclik.wav 2. Bell sound: \"Bell, Candle Damper, A (H1).wav\" by InspectorJ (www.jshaw.co.uk) of Freesound.org 3. Background Music in Introduction: \"Sad Business\" Music by Palle1958 from Pixabay @ https://pixabay.com/music/introoutro-sad-business-4956/ 𝐒𝐭𝐨𝐜𝐤 𝐕𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐨 𝐒𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐬: 1. https://www.vecteezy.com/video/3914166-islamic-video-background-image-hd-free 2. https://www.vecteezy.com/video/1615228-reading-book-pages 3. https://www.vecteezy.com/video/4238353-a-middle-aged-asian-muslim-man-prays-at-his-home Our appreciation goes to the Hussaini Association of Sasakatoon (https://www.hussainiassociation.com/) for the use of their centre to record the Ramadan Reflections 2022 series 𝐅𝐎𝐋𝐋𝐎𝐖 𝐔𝐒 𝐈𝐍 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐒𝐄 𝐏𝐋𝐀𝐂𝐄𝐒 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐔𝐏𝐃𝐀𝐓𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫: https://twitter.com/The_IPH 𝐅𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐛𝐨𝐨𝐤: https://www.facebook.com/TheIPH 𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐦: https://www.instagram.com/islamic_publishing_house/ 𝐓𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐦: https://t.me/the_iph 𝐆𝐨𝐨𝐠𝐥𝐞 𝐏𝐨𝐝𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐬: https://www.google.com/podcasts?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy81MTMyZGQ4L3BvZGNhc3QvcnNz 𝐒𝐩𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐲: https://open.spotify.com/show/1JoPnBlm0n72YveE6gGRtm?si=ldXM0FBGSKmUU_1AkjmPoQ&utm_ 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐄𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐯𝐢𝐚 𝐏𝐚𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐨𝐧: https://www.patreon.com/TheIPH #Mecca #Medina #Mohammed #Arabia #Shia #Sunni

Description:

Transcript: The luminous statement of Imam Sajjad (a) in the Sahifa Sajjadiya is this: \"[I saw that] the needy who seeks from the needy is foolish and misguided.\" How sweet is this statement! He (a) said that it is foolishness for a person to want something from another person; for \'other than God\' to want something from \'other than God.\' \"[I saw that] the needy who seeks from the needy is foolish and misguided.\" Isn\'t this statement worthy of being kissed? He (a) said that the One who gave everything, the One who gives everything, Who is closer to you than anyone else, and Who hears your words better than anyone else- why don\'t you talk with Him? \"[I saw that] the needy who seeks from the needy is foolish and misguided\"- This is in the Sahifa Sajjadiya. He (a) has defined foolishness, he has defined wisdom, he has defined knowledge, he has defined ignorance. \"The needy who seeks from the needy is foolish and misguided.\" Another part of the luminous sayings of Imam Sajjad (a) is that what happens if a person swims in the opposite direction of this general path and direction that everything is going towards? The first supplication of these luminous supplications of the Sahifa Sajjadiya is the introduction of the human being in that, \"What is the human being?\" If you ask for the introduction of the human being from others, they will say, \"The human being is a talking animal.\" But when you ask Imam Sajjad (a), \"What is the human being?\" he (a) says that the human being is a living, divine being who praises God. The final distinguishing characteristic of the \'human being\' is praising and worshipping Truth. This is in the first supplication of the Sahifa Sajjadiya. The final distinguishing characteristic [to be human] is recognizing Truth, so that they know these are blessings. And that they know that the Giver is God and to be grateful to Him. \"And be grateful to Me and do not be ungrateful to Me\" [Qur\'an 2:152]. Then this luminous saying is in the very first supplication [of the Sahifa Sajjadiya]...He (a) said that if God did not give us the order to be grateful to Him and to praise Him, and if humanity enjoyed divine blessings and success and was not grateful, this leads to this matter: \"[Had such been the case], they would have left the bounds of humanity for that of beastliness, and became as He has described, \'They are only like cattle- no, but they are even further astray\' [25:44].\" This is not demeaning, this is not insulting or damnation- this is research. It said that if someone is not one who praises God, if they do not know God, if they do not know the blessings from God, if they are not grateful for His blessings, they are not a \'human being.\' Support Elhaam Magazine: https://yaseened.givingfuel.com/elhaam-magazine Find us in other places: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ElhaamMagazine Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/elhaammagazine/ Tumblr: https://elhaammagazine.tumblr.com/ Website: http://elhaam.org/

Description:

The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff. -- ISLAM is against materialism because it results in social injustice and oppression. But also because Islam wants to nurture the inner spirituality and other potential noble qualities in human beings - and materialism - that is the slavery of this world - takes them in exactly the opposite direction. Often non-religious movements choose to resist materialism because of its consequences on society - that is they resist materialism for instrumental - means to ends - reasons. Islam however places importance on simplicity and modesty because they are valuable in themselves for human perfection. Hence even if the world becomes full of resources and everyone has more than what he or she needs Islam would still stress on simplicity and modesty in the lifestyles and pursuits of its followers. With its ideals of human perfection and emphasis on the eternal life in the hereafter Islam provides a powerful rational and emotional stimulus for individuals to abstain from materialism and channel their self-interest into attaining lofty human ideals and qualities. For more on this see Shaheed Mutahhari-s following works available on al-islam.org - a. Spiritual Discourses b. Perfect Man.

Description:

The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff. -- ISLAM is against materialism because it results in social injustice and oppression. But also because Islam wants to nurture the inner spirituality and other potential noble qualities in human beings - and materialism - that is the slavery of this world - takes them in exactly the opposite direction. Often non-religious movements choose to resist materialism because of its consequences on society - that is they resist materialism for instrumental - means to ends - reasons. Islam however places importance on simplicity and modesty because they are valuable in themselves for human perfection. Hence even if the world becomes full of resources and everyone has more than what he or she needs Islam would still stress on simplicity and modesty in the lifestyles and pursuits of its followers. With its ideals of human perfection and emphasis on the eternal life in the hereafter Islam provides a powerful rational and emotional stimulus for individuals to abstain from materialism and channel their self-interest into attaining lofty human ideals and qualities. For more on this see Shaheed Mutahhari-s following works available on al-islam.org - a. Spiritual Discourses b. Perfect Man.

Description:

The Story of Stuff will take you on a provocative tour of the consumer-driven culture in the US and the increasing consumerism and materialism in the rest of the world - from resource extraction to iPod incineration - exposing the real costs of our use-it and lose-it approach to stuff. -- ISLAM is against materialism because it results in social injustice and oppression. But also because Islam wants to nurture the inner spirituality and other potential noble qualities in human beings - and materialism - that is the slavery of this world - takes them in exactly the opposite direction. Often non-religious movements choose to resist materialism because of its consequences on society - that is they resist materialism for instrumental - means to ends - reasons. Islam however places importance on simplicity and modesty because they are valuable in themselves for human perfection. Hence even if the world becomes full of resources and everyone has more than what he or she needs Islam would still stress on simplicity and modesty in the lifestyles and pursuits of its followers. With its ideals of human perfection and emphasis on the eternal life in the hereafter Islam provides a powerful rational and emotional stimulus for individuals to abstain from materialism and channel their self-interest into attaining lofty human ideals and qualities. For more on this see Shaheed Mutahhari-s following works available on al-islam.org - a. Spiritual Discourses b. Perfect Man.

Description:

Blood and Oil calls for a radical re-thinking of US energy policy warning that unless we change direction we stand to be drawn into one oil war after another as the global hunt for diminishing world petroleum supplies accelerates.

Description:

Martyrdom of Imam Sajjad (a.s) - Sh. Hamza Sodagar - English. How to recognize the Imam of our time. Importance of Munajat. Why is it that everytime I think and feel that I am moving in the right direction, I get distracted?

Description:

Tesla's scientific discoveries are a reminder that there are alternative ways of imagining and doing science. They also highlight the fact that the current fossil fuel based economy is not a result of some NATURAL (and inevitable) development in the history of science and technology but was guided in this particular direction by materialistic greed. SOME suggest that because of Tesla's eccentric behavior and views it became easy for the likes of Thomas Edison and J. P. Morgan to defame him and sweep him under the carpet. Tesla's works remain classified and are perhaps still used in classified scientific and military projects.

Description:

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution has described the \\\\\\\'unprecedented\\\\\\\' turnout of almost 85% in the election as a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy. Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said high turnout in the election, which witnessed more than 40 million Iranians casting their votes, was a great manifestation of people\\\\\\\'s solidarity with the Islamic establishment. Addressing Friday prayers congregation, Ayatollah Khamenei said that last Friday\\\\\\\'s election indicated a \\\\\\\'common sense of responsibility\\\\\\\' of the Iranian nation to determine the future of the country. The Leader added that all those who took part in the election proved their \\\\\\\'political consciousness and commitment\\\\\\\' towards the establishment to the whole world. The Leader said the high voter turnout in the election was a \\\\\\\'political quake\\\\\\\' for the enemy and a \\\\\\\'real celebration\\\\\\\' for the friends of the country. \\\\\\\"The Islamic Republic of Iran will by no means betray the votes of the nation,\\\\\\\" the Leader said, adding the legal system of the election will not allow any ballot rigging in Iran. Ayatollah Khamenei, however, maintained that the Guardian Council, the body tasked with overseeing the election, would look into the complaints of the candidates who are unhappy with the election results. The Leader also added that the establishment would never give-in to illegal demands, urging all presidential candidates to pursue their complaints through legal channels. Ayatollah Khamenei called for an end to illegal street protests aimed at reversing the result of the election. Following the announcement of the election outcome, supporters of the defeated candidate Mir-Hussein Mousavi-who rejected the election results-- took to the streets of Tehran and other cities in daily rallies. The Leader also warned against attempts made by foreign media outlets seeking to destabilize the country and blamed Britain in particular. Ayatollah Khamenei also decried the slander of former and incumbent top officials in pre-election debates by candidates. President Ahmadinejad was re-elected the next president of the country with over 60% percent of the votes. He won over his three rivals Mir-Hossein Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi and Mohsen Rezaei with almost 25 million votes. The Leader said the time is over for rivalry, stressing that all should unite and line up behind the president-elect Complete Transcript http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610 In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing. In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country. I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election. I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media. On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment. The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system. Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote. In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us. It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence. Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense. Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored. Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system. Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement. My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory. Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system. This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy. This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene. This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country. This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election. If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election. Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment. They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout. A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other. For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game. This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today. I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily. For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts. The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed. These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent. Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system. The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue. The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment. Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system. I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism. I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted. My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue. Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution. People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent. Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities. They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon. The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects. All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people. They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated. One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice. These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates. Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings. Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth. If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates. But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate. There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made. This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions. They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me. For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems. On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere. I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law. On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures. They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption. Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities. You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation. Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures. He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date. On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities. For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know. In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people. The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine. The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that. The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced. There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country. We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources. Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it. Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized. Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat. They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this. The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution. It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust. In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process. When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place? However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands. If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system. Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this. I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries. We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now. Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people. It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues. I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy. In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain. I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say. All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want. If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections? Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda. It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this? They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership. Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents. It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country. Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time. I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly. The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries. Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters. When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal. When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave. Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks. Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe? Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security. This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services. The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution. Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people. American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime? During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights? In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment!

Description:

Complete Transcript http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=98610 In this sermon, I call all the respected brothers and sisters who have attended the Friday prayers here to piety and I advise them against any wrongdoing. In this sermon, I will address the issue of the election, which is a hot topic in our country. I want to address three different groups on three different issues; firstly, I want to address the general public. Secondly, I want to address the political elite, the candidates of the presidential election, activists and those who have been active in the process of election. I also have something to say to the leaders of the global arrogance, certain Western governments and their media. On the first issue, where I address you dear people, I want to express my appreciation and gratitude. I do not like to exaggerate while I am addressing my audience, but regarding the recent election, I must tell you great people that no matter what I say, words cannot describe the greatness of your great accomplishment. The June 12 election was a great show of the people\\\\\\\'s sense of responsibility, their will to participate, and their dedication to the system. Truly, I have never heard of anything similar to what you have accomplished taking place in any of the democratic systems around the world, whether they are false democracies or truly built on their people\\\\\\\'s vote. In the Islamic Republic, aside from the 1979 referendum, there has no election like the one held last Friday with a turnout of almost 85 percent. This means almost 40 million voters. You can see the presence of the 12 and last Shia Imam behind this. This is a sign of God\\\\\\\'s blessing to us. It is necessary that I address you all across the nation from the depths of my heart, to express my respect and tell you that I feel humble in your presence. Our young generation showed and proved they have insight and that like the first generation of the Islamic Revolution, they are committed. The difference is, during the days of the revolution, revolutionary fire burned in the hearts of all. It was the same is the days of the imposed war but in a different sense. Today, however, there is no more of that but we still witness this commitment, this sense of responsibility, this understanding and fervor in our youth. This is not something that can be ignored. Of course, there are differences of taste and of opinion among our people. Some people support a certain candidate; others back another person and his words and ideas. This is natural, but you can see a collective commitment amid all this and amongst people of all walks of life. You can see a consensus, a collective commitment to the protection of our country and system. Everyone entered the political scene in villages, towns, cities, major cities, different ethnic groups, people of different faiths, men, women, young and old. They all entered the scene. They all took part in this great movement. My dear people, this election was a political tremor for your enemies. For your friends across the world, it was a real celebration -- a historical ceremony and victory. Thirty years after the victory of the Islamic Revolution, such a huge turnout and show of commitment to the Islamic system and the late Imam [Khomeini] shows the renewal of the pledge of allegiance to the late Imam and the martyrs. This was a breath of fresh air, a new movement and a great opportunity for the Islamic system. This election put religious democracy on display for the whole world to witness. All ill-wishers of the Islamic establishment saw for themselves the meaning of religious democracy. This is an alternative path in the face of dictatorships and arrogant regimes on the one side and democracies devoid of spirituality and religion on the other. This is religious democracy. This is what brings the hearts of people together and draws them to the scene. This is the first point I wanted to make about the election. The second point is that the June 12 election showed that people live with trust, hope and national enthusiasm in this country. This is against a great deal of comments your enemies make in their propaganda. If the people of this country were not hopeful about their future, they would not have taken part in any election. If people were not dedicated to the Islamic establishment, they would have never voted. If they did not feel free, they would have never shown up at polling stations. The trust they have in the Islamic system was evident in this election. Later on, I will tell you how the enemy targeted the very trust of the people in the Islamic establishment. This trust is the very thing they want to crush. This trust is the greatest asset of the Islamic system, so they want to take it away from the Islamic establishment. They want to cast doubt on the election and weaken the confidence of the people in the system. They want to cause the people to panic. The enemies of the Iranian nation know that without trust there would have been a low turnout. A low turnout would have questioned the legitimacy of the establishment. That is what they are after. They wanted to take away your [people] trust and keep you away from the polls to target this legitimacy, and if they had achieved this goal, the damage done would have been incomparable to any other. For the people to come to the polls en masse and then be told that they made a mistake and should not have trusted the Islamic establishment, this is an enemy game. This path is the same one they pursued even before the elections. A few months before the election, in late march, I said in Mashhad that the enemy has started whispers and rumors that their will be vote rigging. They were preparing the grounds for the events of today. I advised our friends in the country not to repeat what the enemy wants to plant in people\\\\\\\'s minds. The Islamic establishment has the people\\\\\\\'s trust and it has not gained this trust easily. For the past 30 years, authorities in the Islamic Republic have managed to maintain this trust, with their performance and painstaking efforts. The third issue I want to touch upon is the issue of rivalry. This competition was a free, serious and transparent race between four candidates as we all witnessed. These competitions, debates and discussion were so transparent that some began to voice objections. I will tell you that to they had the right to object to some extent. Certain problems were also created that resulted in what you see today. I must tell you that we were and still are under the impression that these rivalries were between the four candidates who are all individuals committed to the system. The Enemies want to portray the situation in the media - some of which belong to the Zionists -as if there is a row between the proponents and opponents of the Islamic Republic. No, this is not the case, this very untrue. The four candidates who entered the presidential race all belonged and still belong to the Islamic establishment. One of these four is the president of our country - a hardworking and trustworthy president. One of them is the two-term prime minister, he served the country when I myself was president. He was my prime minister for eight years. One of them was the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps and one of the wartime commanders. One them was two-time head of parliament and Majlis speaker. They are all members of our Islamic establishment. Of course, they have differences of opinion and plans that differ from one another. But, they all belong to this Islamic establishment. This race was defined within the framework of the system. It was not a competition between insiders and outsiders as the Zionist and the US were trying to portray. No, this was a competition within the framework of the system between members of the system. I know them all personally, I know their system of thought and their tastes very well. I am familiar with their personalities. I have worked with all of them closely. I know them all. But of course, I do not share all their views. I believe some of their views and executive records are subject to criticism. I see some more suitable to serve the country than others. But, this is up to the people to decide, and this is exactly what happened, they chose who they wanted. My desire and my choice was never announced nor was there any need for the people to pay heed to it. The people had their own criteria and this is what they based their decision on. Millions here and outside the country decided for themselves. This is an internal issue. Misrepresenting the problem is underhand. The row is not between insiders of the system and outsiders. The row is not between revolutionary and anti-revolutionary forces, it is a difference of opinion between the members of the Islamic Revolution. People who voted for these four candidates, voted with faith in the system. They believed their candidate of choice was better for the country so they voted for him. They voted in favor of the person they found most competent. Well, these campaigns and debates were an important and interesting initiative. They were very clear, to the point and serious. The televised debates proved wrong those who were trying to say from the outside that these competitions are formalities. They saw that these rivalries are real and serious. They saw that they are really battling it out and exchanging viewpoints. From this perspective, these debates were positive. But, they also had some negative points which I will touch upon. The positive aspect was that in these televised discussions and debates everyone spoke their mind clearly and casually. A flood of criticism followed. Everyone was forced to respond. Everyone was criticized and they defended themselves. The stances that these individuals and groups had were unveiled before the eyes of the nation. They talked about their plans, commitments and projects. All this was publicized for the people so that they could judge for themselves. People felt that in the Islamic system they are not the outsiders. Everything was clearly laid out before the people. They were shown that the nature of their vote is not ceremonial. The right to vote truly does belong to the people. People want to have the right to choose. This is what the televised debates indicated. One of the main reasons that ten million additional voters participated in this election was because the people\\\\\\\'s minds had been engaged, therefore they came and voted for the candidate of their choice. These debates found their way into the streets and homes. These debates helped the people become better informed and hence make better decisions. The Islamic establishment is in favor of such debates. Note that such debates should not be steered in a direction that may cause people to hold grudges against one another. If these debates had remained within their intended framework, they would have been positive. But when they turn into arguments than they will gradually bring grudges and hard feelings. Of course, such debates should continue at managerial levels, but without a negative aspect. Officials should allow criticism and feel responsible to answer. If an individual is criticized, he must see it as an opportunity to enlighten the people and reveal fact and truth. If these debates are regularly carried out [as normal government practice], at election time when there are such debates we would not witness such reactions. All arguments would emerge and all ideas would be exchanged over time. These are the positive aspects of such debates. But, there have also been some negative aspects to the debates that need to be dealt with. In some cases, we saw that logical points were undermined and emotional and destructive responses dominated the debate. There were efforts to portray the last four years as a dark era. There were also attempts to portray previous administrations in a similar light. Allegations were made that have not been proven in any court, rumors were used as a reference, and unjust remarks were made. This administration, despite the excellent services it had rendered came under unjust attacks. Similarly, the performance of previous governments in the past 30 years came under attack. The candidates gave in to their emotions. They made some positive points. They also raised some unpleasant negative issues. Like the rest of the nation, I sat and watched these TV debates. I took pride in the freedom of speech I witnessed. I enjoyed the fact that the Islamic Republic has been able to aid the people in deciding their future, but the shortcomings saddened me. For supporters of the candidates the shortcomings and negative aspects were also a cause for concern; both sides were a party to this... both sides had their problems. On the one hand, insults were hurled against the president of the country, even two to three months prior to these debates, speeches were brought to me and in them, I read the insults made and the accusations leveled against the president of the country who was elected by the vote of the people. They accused him of lying. This is not good. They fabricated documents against the government and distributed them everywhere. I saw what was going on. They [accusations] were all untrue and contrary to the facts. They swore at the president, called him superstitious, and called him names. They closed their eyes to ethics and the law. On the other hand, almost the same thing happened. The performance of the past 30 years of the Revolution was brought under question. People were named who are among the system\\\\\\\'s veteran figures. They are people who have dedicated their lives to this establishment. Never before have I mentioned people by name in the Friday prayer sermons, but today, I have to mention some names, particularly Mr. [Akbar] Hashemi Rafsanjani, Mr. [Ali Akbar] Nateq-Nouri. I must mention their names and point out that nobody has accused them of corruption. Now, if anyone has any claims or complaints regarding their [Hashemi Rafsanjani and Nateq-Nouri\\\\\\\'s] relatives they should refer to judicial authorities. You cannot raise these issues in the media before they are proven. If it is proven, you can raise the issue as every member of society is equal, but you are not allowed to make claims. When such things are mentioned, misunderstandings are the outcome. This can cause misunderstandings for the younger generation. Everyone knows Mr. Hashemi. My relationship with him goes back to before the Islamic Revolution. I have known him for more than 25 years. Mr. Hashemi was one of the main revolutionary figures. He was one of the most active proponents of the revolution, and after the Islamic Revolution, he was one of the main political figures serving the people alongside the late Imam, And after the departure of the founder of the Islamic Revolution he has been alongside the leadership to date. On several occasions, there were assassination attempts on his life. Before the revolution, he donated his possessions for the revolutionary cause. Our youth should know these facts. After the revolution, he had different responsibilities. For eight years, he served as the president and before that he was the parliament speaker. He held other sensitive positions as well. Throughout these years, I am not aware of one incident in which he gathered wealth. These are the facts that everyone should know. In the most sensitive of periods, he served the revolution and the establishment. Of course, my opinion and Mr. Rafsanjani\\\\\\\'s differs on numerous issues, which is natural. However, we should not create any misunderstandings for the people. The president and Mr. Rafsanjani have had differences of opinion since the president took office in 2005. They have differences of opinion in foreign policy, in the manner of spreading social justice as well as on some cultural issues. However, the president\\\\\\\'s ideas are closer to mine. The same goes fort Mr. Nateq-Nouri. He has also served the revolution, rendered great services for the establishment and there is not a shred of doubt about that. The live televised debates are a positive step, but these shortcomings should be removed. After the debates, I had a talk with the president because I knew he would listen to me. The stance of the Islamic establishment is clear-cut regarding corruption and social justice. Corruption should be fought anywhere it is traced. There is a point I want to make here. We do not claim that our establishment is free of all economic and financial corruption. Yes, there is corruption. If there was no corruption, I would not have written the eight-point letter to the heads of the legislative, judiciary, and executive branches of the country. We have corruption, but the Islamic establishment is one of the healthiest establishments in the world today. However, it is not right to accuse the country of corruption based on some Zionist reports and sources. Moreover, questioning the credibility of statesmen goes beyond the bounds of decency. Financial corruption is an important issue in the Islamic establishment. The judiciary, executive and legislative branches of the country must do everything within their power to fight against it. Everyone is duty-bound to fight corruption. If corruption is not contained, it will spread in the same manner as you see occurring in many countries…. They are struggling with an alarming level of corruption as you have heard about in the UK. This is only a fraction of the scandal as it goes way beyond what has been publicized. Let me summarize the points I made. The Friday election was a historical event, which touched the entire world. Some of our enemies, however, attempted to cast doubt over this absolute and definitive victory. Some even attempted to portray it as a national defeat. They did not want you to enjoy this victory. They did not want to see the highest turnout in the world go down in history in your name. However, it has happened, it has been recorded in history. They cannot manipulate this. The time for rivalry is passed... These four candidates have all fought in the battlefront of this revolution and they are members of this establishment. Forty million people went to the polls and cast their votes for this revolution. It was not only the 24 million votes that went to the president; 40 million votes were cast in favor of the revolution. The people have trust [in the establishment], and all supporters of candidates should rest assured that the Islamic establishment would never betray the people\\\\\\\'s trust. In fact, the electoral system of the country does not allow for any vote rigging, which is testified to by all those in charge of the election process. When there is a margin of one hundred thousand or one million at most, then one can doubt that there may have been some form of manipulation or irregularity; however, when there is a difference of eleven million votes, how could any vote rigging have taken place? However, as I have said, and the Guardian Council has accepted, if some people have doubts then it should be dealt with through legal channels. Everything must be dealt strictly though legal channels. I will never accept illegal demands. If the legal frameworks are breached today, then no future election can be guaranteed. In every election, there is only one winner, and of course, some defeated candidates. Complaints, if there is any doubt, should be pursued through legal channels. We have a comprehensive and competent legal system. Just as the candidates have the right to appoint observers, they are given the right to file complaints. I have requested the Guardian Council conduct a partial vote recount in the presence of the candidates and their representatives. We have no problem with this. I want to address the politicians, candidates and political parties at this point. We are at a critical historical juncture. Look at current world affairs, the situation in the Middle East, global economic woes and the situation in our neighboring countries. We are duty bound to remain vigilant and to be careful not to commit mistakes at this critical point in time. In the election, people fulfilled their duty in the best way possible, which was by going to the polls. We have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders now. Those figures who are looked up to by the people and politicians, should be cautious about their words and deeds. If they show any amount of extremist attitude, it will penetrate into the ranks of the people. It may have dangerous consequences and may eventually get out of control. Extremism in society will trigger or fan other extremist moves in the country. If political elites disobey the law and make wrong decisions, they will be held accountable for any violent actions or rioting that ensues. I urge these people, these friends of mine, to exercise restraint and patience. You should see enemy hands at work [against the country]. You should see hungry wolves laying in ambush. They are taking off their masks of diplomacy and are showing their true colors. I urge you to open your eyes and see the enemy. In the past few days the prominent diplomats of some Western countries, which have been dealing with us through diplomatic rhetoric, have removed their masks. Today you can see their true face. They are now showing their enmity toward the Islamic establishment and the most treacherous of them all is Britain. I tell these brothers of ours to think of their responsibility. You are responsible before God. I call on you to remember what Imam has written in his will; the law has the final say. All differences should be settled at the ballot box. This is what elections are for, to let ballot boxes and not the streets determine what the people want. If after every election, the supporters of the candidates who have lost take to streets and the supporters of the candidate who has won respond in the same manner, then what need would we have for elections? Why should the people have to suffer? We should not take to the streets to show off with the number of our supporters to the people. Such acts are not a political issue for those terrorists who take advantage of the situation to hide among the masses in order to carry out their agenda. It is a very good cover for these saboteurs. Who will take responsible for this? Some of the people who were killed in these riots were ordinary people, ordinary Basij members. Who will be held accountable for this? They may start taking advantage of this situation to assassinate Basij members, which will naturally provoke emotional reactions. Who is to be held responsible for this? One is grieved to see them attack religious students at Tehran University dormitories and afterwards chant slogans in support of the leadership. Post-election rivalry on the streets is not the right way to go. It only challenges the election. I want all sides to put an end to this. If they do not stop such actions, then they will be responsible for the repercussions of such incidents. It is also wrong to assume that street riots can be used as leverage to pressure the establishment and to force officials to listen to them for what they believe is in the interest of the country. Giving in to illegal demands under pressure is in itself the beginning of dictatorship. This is a miscalculation and the consequences will be directed at those who orchestrated them. If necessary, I will tell the people about them in due time. I ask all these brothers and friends of mine to act based on friendship and abide by the law. I hope God will help us choose the righteous path. The celebration of 40 million votes should be appreciated and the enemy must not be allowed to ruin the celebration. However, if certain people decide to choose another path, then I will have no choice but to talk with the people more openly. The third group I wish to address are the leaders of the Western media and arrogant powers. In the past two to three weeks, I have heard the words and witnessed the actions of politicians from the United States and certain European countries. Before the elections, they attempted to cast doubt over the election itself so that there would be a low voter turnout. They had their own assessments of results forecasts, but they did not expect the mass participation of the people. They never predicted an 85 percent turnout, or 40 million voters. When they saw the mass turnout, they were shocked. They realized the reality of Iran. They came to understand that they need to adapt themselves to the new situation be it regional, nuclear or internal. When they saw the great popular movement on Election Day, they realized that a new chapter had been opened with regards to Iran and that they must come to terms with it. When some candidates began protesting the results, they felt that there was a change, so they jumped at the chance to ride this wave. Their tone after the election changed on Saturday and Sunday. Their attention shifted to the riots and that was when they gradually began removing their masks. Western officials, their presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers commented on this situation. The US President said that we were waiting for the day when people would take to the streets. At the same time they write letters saying that they want to have ties and that they respect the Islamic Republic. Which are we to believe? Inside the country, their elements [foreign countries] began street protests and vandalism, they set fire to public property, they made shops and businesses insecure, and they are trying to rob the people of their security. This has nothing to do with the people and their preferred candidates. This kind of behavior stems from ill-wishers, mercenaries and elements working for Western and Zionist secret services. The incidents occurring inside the country have misled some of those outside our borders, who imagine Iran to be the same as Georgia. A Zionist American capitalist a few years ago, had been quoted in the media saying that he had spent 10 million dollars in Georgia to start a velvet revolution. Our nation cannot be compared to any another nation. Their problem is they have not come to know this revolution and its people. American officials say they are worried about the Iranian nation, how can you be worried? Can you even speak about human rights when you are responsible for the blood shed in Afghanistan and Iraq? In Palestine who has and is supporting and funding the Zionist regime? During the term of a previous US government, eighty people affiliated with the Davidian sect were burnt alive in their compound in Waco, Texas. For some reason these people were disliked by the then US administration. Eighty people were burnt in that building, how dare you talk of human rights? In my opinion, these western officials should at least feel a little embarrassment! Supreme Leader Ayatullah Sayyed Ali Khamenei - Friday Prayer Speech - 19Jun09 - English