Search Result in All

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.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities. The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue. The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran. AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran. Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more. Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president. AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic. Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur. JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs. We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region. AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place. A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another. But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number. So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free. JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that? AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now. PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed. AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it. Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that. But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy. AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see. Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here. I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end. It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward. I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie. AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran. Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is. JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion. Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad. But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue. AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad. ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president President Ahmadinejad was interviewed recently in New York by Democracy Now

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities. The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue. The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran. AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran. Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more. Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president. AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic. Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur. JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs. We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region. AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place. A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another. But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number. So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free. JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that? AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now. PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed. AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it. Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that. But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy. AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see. Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here. I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end. It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward. I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie. AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran. Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is. JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion. Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad. But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue. AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad. ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the Threat of US Attack and International Criticism of Iran’s Human Rights Record In part one of an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talks about the threat of a US attack on Iran and responds to international criticism of Iran’s human rights record. We also get reaction from CUNY Professor Ervand Abrahamian, an Iran expert and author of several books on Iran. JUAN GONZALEZ: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week, while the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is meeting in Vienna to discuss Iran’s alleged nuclear program. An IAEA report earlier this month criticized Iran for failing to fully respond to questions about its nuclear activities. The European Union told the IAEA Wednesday that it believes Iran is moving closer to being able to arm a nuclear warhead. Iran could face a fourth set of Security Council sanctions over its nuclear activities, but this week Russia has refused to meet with the US on this issue. The Iranian president refuted the IAEA’s charges in his speech to the General Assembly and accused the agency of succumbing to political pressure. He also welcomed talks with the United States if it cuts back threats to use military force against Iran. AMY GOODMAN: As with every visit of the Iranian president to New York, some groups protested outside the United Nations. But this year, President Ahmadinejad also met with a large delegation of American peace activists concerned with the escalating possibility of war with Iran. Well, yesterday, just before their meeting, Juan Gonzalez and I sat down with the Iranian president at his hotel, blocks from the UN, for a wide-ranging discussion about US-Iran relations, Iran’s nuclear program, threat of war with the US, the Israel-Palestine conflict, human rights in Iran and much more. Today, part one of our interview with the Iranian president. AMY GOODMAN: Welcome to Democracy Now!, President Ahmadinejad. You’ve come to the United States. What is your message to people in the United States and to the world community at the UN? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] In the name of God, the compassion of the Merciful, the president started by reciting verses from the Holy Quran in Arabic. Hello. Hello to the people of America. The message from the nation and people of Iran is one of peace, tranquility and brotherhood. We believe that viable peace and security can happen when it is based on justice and piety and purity. Otherwise, no peace will occur. JUAN GONZALEZ: Mr. President, you’re faced now in Iran with American soldiers in Iraq to your west, with American soldiers and NATO troops to your east in Afghanistan, and with Blackwater, the notorious military contractor, training the military in Azerbaijan, another neighbor of yours. What is the effect on your country of this enormous presence of American forces around Iran and the impact of these wars on your own population? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] It’s quite natural that when there are wars around your borders, it brings about negative repercussions for the entire region. These days, insecurity cannot be bordered; it just extends beyond boundaries. In the past two years, we had several cases of bomb explosions in southern towns in Iran carried out by people who were supervised by the occupying forces in our neighborhood. And in Afghanistan, following the presence of NATO troops, the production of illicit drugs has multiplied. It’s natural that it basically places pressure on Iran, including costly ones in order to fight the flow of illicit drugs. We believe the people in the region are able to establish security themselves, on their own, so there is no need for foreigners and external forces, because these external forces have not helped the security of the region. AMY GOODMAN: Do you see them as a threat to you? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, it’s natural that when there is insecurity, it threatens everyone. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to turn for a moment to your domestic policies and law enforcement in your country. Human Rights Watch, which has often criticized the legal system in the United States, says that, under your presidency, there has been a great expansion in the scope and the number of individuals and activities persecuted by the government. They say that you’ve jailed teachers who are fighting for wages and better pensions, students and activists working for reform, and other labor leaders, like Mansour Ossanlou from the bus workers’ union. What is your response to these criticisms of your policies? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] I think that the human rights situation in Iran is relatively a good one, when compared to the United States and other countries. Of course, when we look at the ideals that are dear to us, we understand that we still need to do a lot, because we seek divine and religious ideals and revolutionary ones. But when we compare ourselves with some European countries and the United States, we feel we’re in a much better place. A large part of the information that these groups receive come from criticisms coming from groups that oppose the government. If you look at it, we have elections in Iran every year. And the propaganda is always around, too. But they’re not always true. Groups accuse one another. But within the region and compared to the United States, we have the smallest number of prisoners, because in Iran, in general, there is not so much inclination to imprison people. We’re actually looking at our existing laws right now to see how we can eliminate most prisons around the country. So, you can see that people in Iran like each other. They live coexistently and like the government, too. This news is more important to these groups, not so much for the Iranian people. You have to remember, we have over 70 million people in our country, and we have laws. Some people might violate it, and then, according to the law, the judiciary takes charge. And this happens everywhere. What really matters is that in the end there are the least amount of such violations of the law in Iran, the least number. So, I think the interpretation of these events is a wrong one. The relationship between the people and the government in Iran is actually a very close one. And criticizing the government is absolutely free for all. That’s exactly why everyone says what they want. There’s really no restrictions. It doesn’t necessarily mean that everything you hear is always true. And the government doesn’t really respond to it, either. It’s just free. JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask you in particular about the question of the execution of juveniles. My understanding is that Iran is one of only five or six nations in the world that still execute juveniles convicted of capital offenses and that you—by far, you execute the most. I think twenty-six of the last thirty-two juveniles executed in the world were executed in Iran. How is this a reflection of the—of a state guided by religious principles, to execute young people? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Firstly, nobody is executed under the age of eighteen in Iran. This is the first point. And then, please pay attention to the fact that the legal age in Iran is different from yours. It’s not eighteen and doesn’t have to be eighteen everywhere. So, it’s different in different countries. I’ll ask you, if a person who happens to be seventeen years old and nine months kills one of your relatives, will you just overlook that? AMY GOODMAN: We’ll continue our interview with Iranian President Ahmadinejad after break. [break] AMY GOODMAN: We return to our interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you, recently the Bush administration agreed to provide Israel with many new bunker buster bombs that people speculate might be used against Iran. Your reaction to this decision by the Bush administration? And do you—and there have been numerous reports in the American press of the Bush administration seeking to finance a secret war against Iran right now. PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, we actually think that the US administration and some other governments have equipped the Zionist regime with the nuclear warhead for those bombs, too. So, what are we to tell the American administration, a government that seeks a solution to all problems through war? Their logic is one of war. In the past twenty years, Americans’ military expenditures have multiplied. So I think the problem should be resolved somewhere else, meaning the people of America themselves must decide about their future. Do they like new wars to be waged in their names that kill nations or have their money spent on warfare? So I think that’s where the problem can be addressed. AMY GOODMAN: The investigative reporter Seymour Hersh said the Bush administration held a meeting in Vice President Cheney’s office to discuss ways to provoke a war with Iran. Hersh said it was considered possibly a meeting to stage an incident, that it would appear that Iranian boats had attacked US forces in the Straits of Hormuz. Do you have any evidence of this? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Well, you have to pay attention to find that a lot of this kind of stuff is published out there. There’s no need for us to react to it. Of course, Mr. Bush is very interested to start a new war. But he confronts two big barriers. One is the incapability in terms of maneuverability and operationally. Iran is a very big country, a very powerful country, very much capable of defending itself. The second barrier is the United States itself. We think there are enough wise people in this country to prevent the unreasonable actions by the administration. Even among the military commanders here, there are many people with wisdom who will stop a new war. I think the beginning or the starting a new war will mark the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Many people can understand that. But I also think that Mr. Bush’s administration is coming to an end. Mr. Bush still has one other chance to make up for the mistakes he did in the past. He has no time to add to those list of mistakes. He can only make up for them. And that’s a very good opportunity to have. So, I would advise him to take advantage of this opportunity, so that at least while you’re in power, you do a couple—few good acts, as well. It’s better than to end one’s work with a report card of failures and of abhorrent acts. We’re willing to help him in doing good. We’ll be very happy. AMY GOODMAN: And your nuclear program? PRESIDENT MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: [translated] Our time seems to be over, but our nuclear program is peaceful. It’s very transparent for everyone to see. Your media is a progressive one. Let me just say a sentence here. I think that the time for the atomic bomb has reached an end. Don’t you feel that yourself? What will determine the future is culture, it’s the power of thought. Was the atomic bomb able to save the former Soviet Union from collapsing? Was it able to give victory to the Zionist regime of confronting the Palestinians? Was it able to resolve America’s or US problems in Iraq and Afghanistan? Naturally, its usage has come to an end. It’s very wrong to spend people’s money building new atomic bombs. This money should be spent on creating welfare, prosperity, health, education, employment, and as aid that should be distributed among others’ countries, to destroy the reasons for war and for insecurity and terrorism. Rest assured, whoever who seeks to have atomic bombs more and more is just politically backward. And those who have these arsenals and are busy making new generations of those bombs are even more backward. I think a disloyalty has occurred to the human community. Atomic energy power is a clean one. It’s a renewable one, and it is a positive [inaudible]. Up to this day, we’ve identified at least sixteen positive applications from it. We’re already aware that the extent to which we have used fossil fuels has imbalanced the climate of the world, brought about a lot of pollution, as well as a lot of diseases, as a result. So what’s wrong with all countries having peaceful nuclear power and enjoying the benefits of this energy? It’s actually a power that is constructively environmental. All those nuclear powers have come and said, well, having nuclear energy is the equivalent of having an atomic bomb pretty much—just a big lie. AMY GOODMAN: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Tomorrow, part two of our conversation. But right now, we’re joined by Ervand Abrahamian. He’s an Iran expert, CUNY Distinguished Professor of History at Baruch College, City University of New York, author of a number of books, most recently, A History of Modern Iran. Welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about both what the Iranian president said here and his overall trip? Was it a different message this year? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: No, it’s very much the same complacency, that, you know, everything’s fine. There may be some problems in Iran and in foreign relations, but overall, Iran is confident and is—basically the mantra of the administration in Iran is that no one in their right senses would think of attacking Iran. And I think the Iranian government’s whole policy is based on that. I wish I was as confident as Ahmadinejad is. JUAN GONZALEZ: And his dismissing of the situation, the human rights situation, in Iran, basically ascribing any arrests to some lawbreakers? Your sense of what is the human rights situation right there? ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Well, I mean, he basically changed the question and talked about, you know, the probably two million prisoners in America, which is of course true, but it certainly changes the topic of the discussion. Now, in Iran, you can be imprisoned for the talking of abolishing capital punishment. In fact, that’s considered blasphemy, and academics have been charged with capital offense for actually questioning capital punishment. So, he doesn’t really want to address those issues. And there have been major purges in the university recently, and of course the plight of the newspapers is very dramatic. I mean, mass newspapers have been closed down. Editors have been brought before courts, and so on. So, I would find that the human rights situation—I would agree with the Human Rights Watch, that things are bad. But I would like to stress that human rights organizations in Iran don’t want that issue involved with the US-Iran relations, because every time the US steps in and tries to champion a question of human rights, I think that backfires in Iran, because most Iranians know the history of US involvement in Iran, and they feel it’s hypocrisy when the Bush administration talks about human rights. So they would like to distance themselves. And Shirin Ebadi, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize, has made it quite clear that she doesn’t want this championing by the United States of the human rights issue. AMY GOODMAN: Big protest outside. The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Israel Project, UJ Federation of New York, United Jewish Communities protested. They invited Hillary Clinton. She was going to speak. But they invited—then they invited Governor Palin, and so then Clinton pulled out, so they had had to disinvite Palin. And then you had the peace movement inside, meeting with Ahmadinejad. ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think—I mean, the demonstrations outside are basically pushing for some sort of air strikes on the premise that Iran is an imminent threat and trying to build up that sort of pressure on the administration. And clearly, I think the Obama administration would not want to do that, but they would probably have a fair good hearing in the—if there was a McCain administration. AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to leave it there. Part two of our conversation tomorrow. We talk about the Israel-Palestine issue, we talk about the treatment of gay men and lesbians in Iran, and we talk about how the Iraq war has affected Iran with the Iranian president

http://pknews.tv - on tripartite summit - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was born in village of Aradan near city of Garmsar, southeast of Tehran in 1956. He is the fourth son of an ironworker who had seven children. Mahmoud and his family migrated to Tehran when he was one-year-old. He went to primary and high school in Tehran and got his diploma and was admitted to the University of Science and Technology (Elm-o-Sanaat) in the field of civil engineering after he ranked 132nd in the nationwide university entrance exams in 1975. He was accepted as an MS student at the same university in 1986 and became a member of the scientific board of the Civil Engineering College of University of Science and Technology. Later on he got his doctorate in 1987 in the field of engineering and traffic transportation planning. He is married with two sons and one daughter. Following the 1979 Islamic revolution he became a member the conservative faction of the Office for Strengthening Unity [OSU] Between Universities and Theological Seminaries. The OSU was established by Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, one of Ayatollah Khomeini's key advisors, to organize Islamic students against the rapidly growing Islamic group of Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK). With invasion of Iraq and start of the Iran-Iraq war in 1980, Ahmadinejad rushed to the western fronts to fight against the enemy and joined the voluntary (basij) forces of the Islamic Revolution's Guards Corps (IRGC). He served in different units of the Islamic Revolution Guards Engineering Corps. He served as governor of Maku and Khoy cities in the northwestern West Azerbaijan province, and as an advisor to the governor general of the western province of Kurdistan for two years. While serving as the cultural advisor to then Ministry of Culture and Higher Education in 1993, he was appointed as governor general of the newly established northwestern province of Ardebil from 1993 to 1997. He was elected as the exemplary governor general for three consecutive years. But in 1997 the newly-installed Khatami administration removed Ahmadinejad from his post as Ardebil governor general. He returned to the University of Science and Technology (Elm-o-Sanaat) again to teach in 1997. In April 2003 Ahmadinejad was appointed mayor of Tehran by the capital's municipal council, which is dominated by the hard-line Islamic Iran Developers Coalition (Etelaf-e Abadgaran-e Iran-e Islami). In some of Ahmadinejad's public statements, he has appeared to identify himself as a Developer. He lives a very Spartan lifestyle and that's how he projected himself. As Mayor, he reversed many of the policies of previous moderate and reformist mayors, placing serious religious emphasis on the activities of the cultural centers by turning them into prayer halls during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. He also suggested the burial of the bodies of martyrs of the Iran-Iraq war in major city squares of Tehran. On 24 June 2005 Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected as Iran's sixth president. He swept to the presidential post with a stunning 17,046,441 votes out of a total of 27,536,069 votes cast in the runoff election. In the 2009 presidential election Ahmadinejad was nominated to run for the second term. In the presidential election of 2009, 39,165,191 ballots were cast on 12th June, according to Iran's election headquarters. Ahmadinejad won 24,527,516 votes, (62.63%). In second place, Mir Hossein Mousavi won 13,216,411 (33.75%) of the votes. The election drew unprecedented public interest in Iran. The election results remain in dispute as Mir Hossein Mousavi and his supporters who believe that electoral fraud occurred during the election. This popular belief ignited protests and demonstrations in the large cities with a united slogan of “Where is my vote”, which resulted in the birth of “Green Movement” of Iran. Finally Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei formally endorsed Ahmadinejad as President on 3 August 2009, and Dr. Ahmadinejad was sworn in for a second term on 5 August 2009 Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran have agreed to expand socio-economic cooperation and more particularly neutralize foreign interference in this part of the world. At the conclusion of a tripartite summit in Islamabad, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the regional cooperation will lead to an end to foreign interference, a reference to the US-led NATO military presence in Afghanistan. The Iranian President said that the nuclear weapon do not empower any state and must be eliminated from political relations. Howerver, Afghan President Hamid Karazi’s focus was to gain regional support for the Taliban talks, a reference to his demand to include Kabul in the talks between the US and Taliban. Islamabad asserted that it would lend its support to President Karazi in any future Taliban talks. The Taliban have so far refused to negotiate with Kabul describing Karzai administration as the puppet. The three neighboring countries also decided to step up their efforts to combat drug production and trafficking in Afghanistan, a particular source of concern for Pakistan. The summit also decided to enhance trilateral trade through facilitative measures like preferential tariff and free trade arrangements and barter trade. The three countries in their summit declaration sounded determined to ensure the territorial integrity and sovereignty of regional states. This is a clear reference to the frequent US drone strikes in Pakistan's tribal region that have killed large number of civilians since 2004. However, analysts believe more than any thing else, it depends on Islamabad if it is willing to scrap secret deals with Americans that allows them to carry out drone attacks in the tribal areas.

Iran questions Obama's 'change' Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has criticized his American counterpart Barack Obama for failing to realize his campaign trail promise of "change." "They (the Americans) announced that they had pulled out part of their forces from Iraq in recent days and claimed that their move was in line with their slogan of 'change,'" Fars News Agency quoted President Ahmadinejad as saying on Wednesday. "You said you would withdraw all your troops from Iraq, why is it that some of them are still in this country? Secondly, where are you relocating your forces from Iraq?" "The Americans want to relocate their soldiers to Afghanistan. What kind of a change in their military policy is this?" the president asked during a speech in the western Hamadan Province. Ahmadinejad went on to say, "Real change means that you take your forces... and leave our region." The president also referred to the standoff over Iran's nuclear program, urging the US leader "not to miss another chance" over Tehran's nuclear fuel swap proposal. "Obama missed last year's chance for fuel swap, but this opportunity is once again on the table today. We have informed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that we are ready for fuel swap and for negotiations from mid-Ramadan (September)." The president dismissed a recent host of unilateral sanctions imposed against Iran by the US, the European Union, Canada, and Australia, as "ineffective." Western powers, led by the US and Israel, accuse Iran of following a covert military nuclear program. Tehran denies the charges, arguing that as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) it has the right to civilian nuclear technology. Earlier reports on Wednesday said that the president's motorcade had come under a grenade attack during the trip to Hamadan. The President's office, however, rejected the reports.

Iran's president lashes out at Western powers for their opposition to the outcome of the June 12 presidential election. In a Thursday address to thousands of people in the northeastern city of Mashad, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the West has gone as far as setting up satellite channels to influence Iranians against their better judgment. Ahmadinejad, who was speaking during his first provincial trip after the June 12 presidential vote, said foreign countries have no right to insult the choice made during the election. "During the whole election process, certain foreign countries attempted to push the country to the brink of civil war," argued Ahmadinejad. Iran turned into a scene of opposition rallies after the re-election of president Ahmadinejad with nearly two-thirds of the vote. President Ahmadinejad's rivals -- Mehdi Karroubi and Mir-Hossein Mousavi -- reject the election result as fraudulent and have yet to acknowledge the Iranian president's re-election. On June 20, the unrest over the result of the vote took a turn for the worse after protesters, who demanded a re-run of the 10th presidential election, gathered to hold a rally without the official permission of the country's Interior Ministry. The day turned bloody -- increasing the post-vote deaths to at least 20 -- when, according to Iranian officials, terrorist elements infiltrated the rallies. Ahmadinejad went on to say that the West has trouble tolerating an independent nation that takes a stand against their policies. He said Iran would respond to any aggressors in a way that they would forget how to return home. "I have told the enemies that this nation will strike you in the face so hard you will lose your way home," he said. The president said the high voter turnout in the recent elections has caught Westerners off guard and "has foiled all their evil plans". On the Iranian nuclear issue, Ahmadinejad said that his government would remain open to "logic and dialogue" to end the international deadlock. He, however, issued a warning. "If each and every one of the Western countries that oppose Iran's nuclear program joins forces, they would still fail to deprive the Iranian nation of its inalienable nuclear rights," he said.

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has just arrived in the Lebanese capital, Beirut, for a two-day official visit. The Iranian chief executive, who is in Lebanon at an official invitation by his Lebanese counterpart Michel Sleiman, was warmly welcomed by a number of prominent Lebanese officials at Beirut International Airport on Wednesday morning. A large crowd of Lebanese people were cheering President Ahmadinejad and waving Iran's flags on his route to the Lebanese Presidential palace. He is scheduled to address international reporters in a press conference in the Lebanese capital. The Iranian chief executive will then meet with Iranian and Lebanese businessmen. Later the Iranian president will head to southern Beirut to visit the area where Israeli bombs destroyed the location during 2006 war against the state. Many analysts believe that President Ahmadinejad's trip to Lebanon is aimed at consolidating resistance's position against Israel. Earlier, President Sleiman had asked the Islamic Republic to equip the country's army and supply the state with defense industry. The Iranian president is so popular among the Lebanese nation and is seen as the sympbol of resistance against Israel as he has been outspoken, criticizing Israel's atrocities against Lebanese and Palestinians. Iran offered unconditional support to Lebanon after Israel's war on Lebanon in summer 2006, when Tel Aviv destroyed the country's main infrastructure, electricity and water systems. Hezbollah Secretary General Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah hailed Iran's big role in rebuilding Lebanon following the Israeli war. Article Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/146471.html

[23 June 2012] Iranian president in Venezuela to boost bilateral ties - English Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez warmly greeted his close ally Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the presidential palace in Caracas. The Iranian leader arrived in Venezuela's capital from stops in Brazil, where he attended the United Nations Rio+20 conference in Rio de Janeiro, and Bolivia.Chavez and Ahmadinejad vowed to keep building closer ties. The Venezuelan president has expressed solidarity with Iran on its nuclear energy program which Iran insists it's for peaceful purposes. Caracas and Tehran have signed an estimated five billion dollars worth of trade deals and accords since 2001 including construction projects, car factories and most recently an agreement for Caracas to manufacture unmanned aerial aircrafts better known as drones.The United States has looked at these accords with disapproval and last year put sanctions on Venezuela's state oil company for making deals with Iran's energy sector.Chavez criticized the sanctions against Iran and pledged to continue being Tehran's key ally in Latin America.This is President Ahmadinejad second visit to Venezuela this year. According to Hugo Chavez there have been more than 300 bilateral accords signed by both countries.

French President François Hollande has demanded answers from US President Barack Obama about the National Security Agency\'s spying on French citizens. In a statement, Hollande also expressed his deep disapproval of Washington\'s eavesdropping on millions of French people\'s phone calls. Hollande said spying activities between allies are not acceptable because it is a violation of French citizens\' privacy. Meanwhile the US says some claims by the French press about its information gathering are distorted. Earlier, the US State Department announced that it does not want to see its ties with France damaged due to the issue.

Welcome to the Islamic Pulse Talk Show. In this episode, we\'re talking about \"The People\'s President: Shaheed Ibrahim Raisi\". How was President Ibrahim Raisi a president of the people and what qualities did he represent? How were the people that were martyred with President Ibrahim Raisi a manifestation of Islamic teachings? And what does it mean to be \'men of the people\'? And finally, how is the Islamic model of leadership and management different from that of the rest of the world? In order to answer these questions and more, we invited Sayyid Agha Ali Raza to come and speak a little bit about \"The People\'s President: Shaheed Ibrahim Raisi\". #IslamicPulse #IPTalkShow #Islam #Allah #Shia #Ahlulbayt #Raisi #Raesi #AmirAbdollahian #AleHashim #ServiceMartyrs #President #ThePeople #PeoplesPresident #ThePresident #Tyrants #Oppressor #Oppression #GlobalArrogance #IslamicRevolution #Revolution #Resistance #MassMedia #ArrogantPowers #Truth #Justice #IslamicResistance #Media #FreePalestine #Gaza #HelpGaza #SavePalestine #Palestine #Freedom #Zionism #israel #JihadeTabyiin #SoftWar #IslamicAwareness

The opening of a United Nations conference in Switzerland on anti-racism was marred by chaotic scenes Monday as protests and a walkout by delegates disrupted a controversial address by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The presence of the Iranian leader at the conference had already prompted Israel to withdraw its ambassador from Switzerland, while several countries including the United States are also boycotting the gathering. Dozens of delegates walked out of the chamber as Ahmadinejad accused Israel and the West of making "an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering ... in order to establish a totally racist government." Video Watch delegates make their exit » He said Zionism, the Jewish national movement, "personifies racism," and accused Zionists of wielding economic and political resources to silence opponents. He also blasted the United States-led invasion of Afghanistan. Protesters in brightly colored wigs interrupted Ahmadinejad as he began to speak, shouting: "You're a racist!" in accented English. But some delegates cheered, while security officers dragged at least two protesters from the chamber. Earlier, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman called Ambassador Ilan Elgar home to protest a meeting between the Swiss president and Ahmadinejad, Israel's foreign ministry said in a statement. "The meeting of a president of a democratic country with a notorious Holocaust denier such as the Iranian president, who has openly declared his intention of wiping Israel off the map, is not in keeping with the values represented by Switzerland," the ministry said. Netanyahu's office had earlier said the diplomatic move was a response to the presence of Ahmadinejad at the conference. Ahmadinejad has said that the Holocaust is a myth, and Iran hosted a conference in 2006 questioning the Holocaust, in which about 6 million Jews were killed. The United States, among others, is refusing to send envoys to the Durban Review Conference. The U.N. high commissioner for human rights said Sunday that she regrets -- and is "shocked" by -- the United States' decision to boycott. "I am shocked and deeply disappointed by the United States' decision not to attend a conference that aims to combat racism, xenophobia, racial discrimination and other forms of intolerance worldwide," High Commissioner Navi Pillay said in a written statement. "A handful of states have permitted one or two issues to dominate their approach to this issue, allowing them to outweigh the concerns of numerous groups of people that suffer racism and similar forms of intolerance... These are truly global issues, and it is essential that they are discussed at a global level, however sensitive and difficult they may be," she said. The U.S. State Department said Washington's decision was based in part on a conference document that "singles out" Israel in its criticism and conflicts with the United States' "commitment to unfettered free speech." President Barack Obama noted Sunday that the United States had previously warned it would not attend the conference if the document was not sufficiently altered in advance. According to the State Department, the document contains language that "prejudges key issues that can only be resolved in negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians." The language reaffirms the Durban Declaration and Programme of Actions from the 2001 conference in Durban, South Africa, which the United States has said it won't support. Obama said the United States hopes to partner with other countries "to actually reduce discrimination around the globe, but this (conference) wasn't an opportunity to do it." Australia, Canada, Germany and Italy, among others, are also boycotting the conference. Poland announced Monday it too would pull out of the conference. Netanyahu on Monday praised the countries that refused to attend: "I congratulate the nations that boycotted the show of hate."

President: Supporting Iran's National Production on Government's Agenda TEHRAN (FNA)- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in a message on the occasion of the new Iranian year on Tuesday, stressed that support for national production is high on the agenda of the government this year. In a nationwide address on the state-run TV, President Ahmadinejad congratulated the nation on the advent of the spring season and Nowrouz (marking the start of the Iranian new year). "Like previous years, support for national production, exports, capital and labor is on the government agenda for this year," President Ahmadinejad stated. The president lauded the Iranian nation's progress in various economic, scientific, industrial, technological and political fields and vowed that Iran would continue on the same path at a higher pace in the new year. Ahmadinejad stressed that the country should be developed through the thoughts and efforts of the Iranian nation. He further expressed the hope that the new year would bring further prosperity for the people of the country. Also on Tuesday, Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei named the new Iranian year as the "Year of National Production, Supporting Iranian Labor and Capital", and once again underlined the importance of efforts to bolster the country's economic progress. In a televised address on the occasion of the advent of the Iranian New Year, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei extends his congratulatory message in the early hours of the Persian calendar year of 1391. Ayatollah Khamenei said Economic Jihad, which was the slogan of the previous year, is never-ending, adding that one important aspect of economic issues is domestic production. The Leader said if domestic production prospers, most of the enemies' efforts will undoubtedly fail. Ayatollah Khamenei said the prosperity of national production is the key to resolving the problems of inflation and unemployment and will strengthen domestic economy.

[26 Sept 2013] Bolivia President calls for legal action against US President - English

US President Barack Obama is ending his fifth year in office matching the worst public approval ratings of his presidency. A new poll shows that Obama\'s approval rating has hit a new record low. The poll, conducted by ABC News and the Washington Post, shows that just 43 percent of US citizens currently approve the president\'s job performance down 11 points from this time last year. The poll has put the US president\'s disapproval at 55 percent up from 42 percent last year. That\'s the highest unpopularity mark in Obama\'s presidency so far. Political analysts say the US president\'s controversial healthcare law, known as the Obamacare, and his weak national security strategies are some of the main reasons for his waning popularity

Sanctions prelude to extinction of dollar Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insists that the anti-Iran sanctions will serve as a stepping stone to eradicate the domination of the US dollar in world markets. Ahmadinejad said the countries that followed the US campaign for anti-Iran sanctions have deprived themselves of the opportunity to participate in Iranian economic projects, IRNA reported on Sunday. Addressing a ceremony marking the international week of mosques, the Iranian president stressed that Iran would use Western sanctions to move towards developing the country's domestic manufacturing and globalizing Iranian-made products. Ahmadinejad said the US-led sanctions was a form of a psychological warfare intended to force the Iranian nation into compromise, adding, "This nation will never compromise when it comes to its independence, integrity, principles and justice-seeking." "If sanctions were to have any impact on Iran, it would not be during the tenure of [US President Barack] Obama." Ahmadinejad went on to say that the only impact sanctions will have on the Iranian economy is that "they will help its flourishing." The president said by adopting anti-Iran measures, the West has further discredited itself.

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the Israeli prime minister is a professional assassin, who should be tried for his crimes against the people of Palestine. "[Benjamin] Netanyahu should be tried in court for blockading Gaza and massacring innocent Palestinian women and children," Ahmadinejad said in an interview with CNN's Larry King on Wednesday. "Netanyahu is a professional assassin. All dictators in history accuse others to turn the spotlight away from themselves," the Iranian president said when asked about the Israeli prime minister's worries about Iran. "It is questionable [why] American media feel responsible for this person (Netanyahu)," Ahmadinejad said, adding that "you (American media) are afraid of Netanyahu's warmongering." The Iranian president said the US and Israel's nuclear weapons are the main threat to the world, and they are mistaken to think they can divert attention from this issue by using propaganda campaigns and spreading lies about others. "Iran is firmly after the nuclear disarmament of the US and Israel." Ahmadinejad added that Israel is an "illegitimate regime" and an "occupier" and that the US easily starts wars and massacres people, "they are not qualified to have nuclear weapons and should be disarmed as soon as possible." When asked about the fate of a former FBI agent who allegedly disappeared on Kish Island, the Iranian president said a "joint Iranian-American intelligence committee is to investigate the matter." Robert Levinson, a former FBI agent, disappeared on March 9, 2007 on Kish Island where he was doing investigative work for a private security firm. US officials have dismissed suggestions that Levinson was on assignment for a US government agency. Iranian authorities have announced that Tehran has no information on the matter but they stand ready to work with the FBI if asked by Washington.

Press conference given on October 13, 2010 at about 1030bst by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and President Michele Slieman on President Ahmadinejad's historic visit to Lebanon. English Voiceover

The Venezuelan president arrived in Iran on Monday for a three-day official visit, with the goal of boosting ties between Tehran and Caracas. It is his ninth visit to Iran since assuming power in 1999 and comes almost one year after President Ahmadinejad paid a visit to Venezuela. Iran has expanded bilateral relations with Latin America in recent years, especially in the commerce and industrial sectors. Chavez and Iranian officials will be holding the eighth round of Iran-Venezuela energy talks as part of the two states' efforts to boost bilateral cooperation in the oil, gas, and petrochemical sectors. Over the past five years, Iran and Venezuela have signed a number of Memoranda of Understanding and contracts for joint participation and investments in oil and gas projects.

Address by H.E. Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad President of the Islamic Republic of Iran before the 66th Session of the United Nations General Assembly. New York 22 September 2011 In the Name of God, the Compassionate The Merciful All praise be to Allah, the lord of the Universe, and peace and blessing be upon our Master and prophet, Mohammad, and his pure household, his noble companions and on all divine messengers. ‘Oh, God, hasten the arrival of Imam al-Mahdi and grant him good health and victory, and make us his followers and all those who attest to his rightfulness.’ Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, I am grateful to the Almighty Allah who granted me, once more, the opportunity to appear before this world assembly. I have the pleasure to express my sincere thanks to H.E. Joseph Deiss, president of the sixty-fifth session for his tremendous efforts during his tenure. I also would like to congratulate H.E Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser on his election as the president of sixty-sixth session of the United Nations and wish him all success. Let me seize the moment to pay tribute to all those who lost their lives in the past year, particularly to the victims of tragic famine in Somalia and the devastating flood in Pakistan. I urge everyone to increase their assistance and aid to the affected populations in these countries. Over the past years, I spoke about different global issues, and the need to introduce fundamental changes in the current international order. - Today, considering the international developments, I will try to analyze the present situation from a different angle. - As you all know the dominance and superiority of human beings over other creatures, lie in the very nature and the truth of humankind. which is a divine gift and a manifestation of the divine spirit embodying: - Faith in God, who is the ever-lasting creator and planner of the entire universe. - Showing compassion to others, generosity, justice-seeking, and having integrity both in words and in deeds. - The quest for dignity to reach the pinnacles of perfection, the aspiration to elevate one’s material and spiritual status, and the longing to realize liberty; - Defying oppression, corruption, and discrimination in contrast to supporting the oppressed. - Seeking happiness, and lasting prosperity and security for all. - These are some of the manifestations of common divine and human attributes which can clearly be seen in the historical aspirations of human beings as reflected in the heritage of our search for art and literary works both in prose and poetry, and in the socio-cultural and political movements of human beings in the course of history. - All divine prophets and social reformers invited human beings to tread on this righteous path. - God has given dignity to humankind to elevate his status to assume his successor role on Earth. Dear Colleagues and friends: - It is vividly clear that despite all historical achievements, including creation of the United-Nations, that was a product of untiring struggles and efforts of free-minded and justice-seeking individuals as well as the international cooperation, human societies are yet far from fulfilling their noble desires and aspirations. - Most nations of the world are unhappy with the current international circumstances. - And despite the general longing and aspiration to promote peace, progress, and fraternity, wars, mass-murder, widespread poverty, and socioeconomic and political crises continue to infringe upon the rights and sovereignty of nations, leaving behind irreparable damage worldwide; - Approximately, three billion people of the world live on less than 2.5 dollars a day, and over a billion people even live without having even one sufficient meal on a daily basis; - Forty-percent of the poorest world populations only share five percent of the global income, while twenty percent of the richest people share seventy-five percent of the total global income. - More than twenty thousand innocent and destitute children die every day in the world because of poverty. - Eighty percent of financial resources in the United States are controlled by ten percent of its population, while only twenty percent of these resources belong to the ninety percent of the population. - What are the causes and reasons behind these inequalities? How can bone remedy such injustice? - Those who dominate and run centers of global economic power put the blame on people’s aspiration for religion and the pursuit of the path of divine prophets or the weakness of nations and the ill-performance of a number of groups or individuals. They claim that only their views, approaches or prescriptions can save the humanity and the world economy. Dear Colleagues and friends - Don’t you think that the root cause of the problems must be sought in the prevailing international order, or the way the world is governed? I would like to draw your kind attention to the following questions: - Who abducted forcefully tens of millions of people from their homes in Africa and other regions of the world during the dark period of slavery, making them a victim of their materialistic greed? - Who imposed colonialism for over four centuries upon this world? Who occupied lands and massively plundered resources of other nations, destroyed talents, and alienated languages, cultures and identities of nations? - Who triggered the first and second world wars, that left seventy millions killed and hundreds of millions injured or homeless. Who created the wars in Korean peninsula and in Vietnam? - Who imposed, through deceits and hypocrisy, the Zionists and over sixty years of war, homelessness, terror and mass murder on the Palestinian people and on countries of the region? - Who imposed and supported for decades military dictatorship and totalitarian regimes on Asian, African, and Latin American nations. - Who used atomic bomb against defenseless people, and stockpiled thousands of warheads in their arsenals? - Whose economies rely on waging wars and selling arms? - Who provoked and encouraged Saddam Hussein to invade and impose an eight-year war on Iran, and who assisted and equipped him to deploy chemical weapons against our cities and our people. - Who used the mysterious September 11 incident as a pretext to attack Afghanistan and Iraq - killing, injuring, and displacing millions in two countries- with the ultimate goal of bringing into its domination the Middle-East and its oil resources? - Who abolished the Breton Woods system and printed trillions of dollars without the backing of gold reserves or equivalent currency? A move that triggered inflation worldwide and was intended to prey on the economic gains of other nations. - What country’s military spending exceeds annually a thousand billion dollars, more than the military budgets of all countries of the world combined? - Which governments are the most indebted ones in the world? - Who dominates the policy-making establishments of the world economy? - Who are responsible for the world economic recession, and are imposing its consequences on America, Europe and the world in general? - Which governments are ever ready to drop thousands of bombs on other countries, but ponder and hesitate to send a bit of food aid to famine-stricken people in Somalia or in other places? - Who are the ones dominating the Security Council which is ostensibly responsible to safeguard the international security? - There exist tens of other similar questions and of course, the answers are clear. - The majority of nations and governments of the world have had no role in the creation of the current global crises, and as a matter of fact were themselves the victims of such policies. - It is as lucid as daylight that the same slave masters and colonial powers that once instigated the two world wars have caused widespread miseries and disorder with far-reaching effects across the globe since then. Dear Colleagues and Friends, - Do these arrogant powers really have the competence and ability to run or govern the world, or is it acceptable that they call themselves as the sole defender of freedom, democracy, and human rights, while they militarily attack and occupy other countries? - Can the flower of democracy blossom from NATO’s missiles, bombs or, guns? Ladies and Gentlemen; - If some European countries still use the Holocaust, after six decades, as the excuse to pay fine or ransom to the Zionists, should it not be an obligation upon the slave masters or colonial powers to pay reparations to the affected nations? - If the damage and losses of the period of slavery and colonialism were indeed compensated, what would happen to the manipulators and behind-the-scene political powers in the United States and in Europe? Will there remain any gaps between the North and the South? - If only half of military expenditures of the United States and its allies in NATO is cut to help solve the economic problems in their own countries will they be witnessing any symptom of the economic crisis? - What would happen, if the same amount is allocated to poor nations? - What is the justification for the presence of hundreds of US military and intelligence bases in different parts of the world, including 268 bases in Germany, 124 in Japan, 87 in South Korea, 83 in Italy, 45 in the United-Kingdom, and 21 in Portugal? Does this mean anything other than military occupation? - Don’t the bombs deployed in the said bases undermine the security of other nations? Ladies and Gentlemen - The main question is the quest for the root cause of such attitudes? - The prime reason should be sought in the beliefs and tendencies of the establishment. - Assemblies of people in contradiction with the inner human instincts and disposition, who also have no faith in God and in the path of the divine prophets, replace their lust for power and materialistic ends with heavenly values. - To them, only power and wealth prevail, and every attempt must bring into focus these sinister goals. - Oppressed nations have no hope to restore or protect their legitimate rights against these powers. - These powers seek their progress, prosperity and dignity through the poverty, humiliation and annihilation of others. - They consider themselves superior to others enjoying special privileges or concessions. They have no respect for others and easily violate the rights of all nations and governments. - They proclaim themselves as the indisputable custodians of all governments and nations through intimidation, recourse to threat and force, and the abuse of international mechanisms. They simply break all the internationally-recognized and regulations. - They insist on imposing their lifestyle and beliefs on others. - They officially support racism. - They weaken countries through military intervention, and destroy their infrastructures, in order to plunder their resources by making them all the more dependent. - They sow the seeds of hate and hostility among nations and people of different pursuits, in order to prevent them from fulfilling their goals of development and progress. - All cultures, identities, lives, values and wealth of nations, women, youth, families, families as well as the wealth of nations are sacrificed by their hegemonic tendencies and the inclination to enslave and captivate others. - Hypocrisy and deceit are allowed to secure their interests and imperialistic goals. Drug- trafficking and killing of innocent human beings are also allowed in pursuit of such diabolic goals. Despite NATO’s presence in the occupied Afghanistan, there has been a dramatic increase in the production of illicit drugs there. - They tolerate no question or criticism, and instead of presenting a reason for their violations, they always put themselves in the position of a claimant. - By using their imperialistic media network which is under the influence of colonialism they threaten anyone who questions the Holocaust, and September 11 with sanctions and military action. - Last year, when the need to form a fact-finding team to undertake a thorough investigation concerning the hidden elements involved in September 11 incident was brought up- an idea which is also endorsed by all independent governments and nations as well as by the majority in the United States-, my country and myself came under pressure and threats by the government of the United States. - Instead of assigning a fact-finding team, they killed the main perpetrator and threw his body into the sea. - Would it not have been reasonable to bring to justice and try openly the main perpetrator of the incident in order to identify the elements behind the safe space provided for the invading aircraft to attack the twin world trade towers? - Why should it not have been allowed to bring him into trial to help recognize those who launched terrorist groups and brought wars and other miseries into the region? - Is there any classified information that must be kept secret? - They view Zionism as a sacred notion or ideology and any question concerning its very foundation and history is condemned by them as an unforgivable sin. However they endorse and allow sacrileges and insult against beliefs of other divine religions. Dear Colleagues and Friends. - Real freedom, justice, dignity, well being, and lasting security are the rights of all nations. - These values can neither be achieved by reliance on the current inefficient system of world governance, nor through the intervention of the world arrogant powers and the gun barrels of NATO forces. - These values could only be realized under independence and recognition of others’ right and through harmony and cooperation. - Is there any way to address the problems and challenges besetting the world by using the prevailing international mechanisms or tools to help humanity achieve the long-standing aspiration of peace, security and equality? - All those who tried to introduce reforms whilst preserving the existing norms and tendencies have failed. The valuable efforts made by the Non-Aligned movement and Group 77 and 15 as well as by some prominent individuals have failed to bring fundamental changes. - Governance and management of the world entail fundamental reforms. - What has to be done now? Dear Colleagues and Friends - Efforts must be made with a firm resolve and through collective cooperation to map out a new plan, on the basis of principles and the very foundation of human universal values such as Monotheism, justice, freedom, love and the quest for happiness. - The idea of creation of the United Nations remains a great and historical achievement of mankind. Its importance must be appreciated and its capacities must be used to the extent possible for our noble goals. - We should not allow the organization which is the reflection of the collective will and shared aspiration of the community of nations, to deviate from its main course and play into the hands of the world powers. - Conducive ground must be prepared to ensure collective participation and involvement of nations in an effort to promote lasting peace and security. - Shared and collective management of the world must be achieved in its true sense, and based on the underlying principles enshrined in the international law; and justice must serve as the criterion and the basis for all international decisions or actions. - All of us should acknowledge the fact that there is no other way than the shared and collective management of the world in order to put an end to the present disorders, tyranny, and discriminations worldwide. - This is indeed the sole way to prosperity and welfare of human society which is an established and vivid truth. - While acknowledging the above truth, one should note that it is not enough and that we must have further faith in that and spare no effort toward its realization. Dear Colleagues and Friends - Shared and collective management of the world is the legitimate right of all nations, and we as their representatives, have an obligation to defend their rights. Although some powers continuously try to frustrate all international efforts, aimed at promoting collective cooperation, we must, however, strengthen our belief in achieving the perceived goal of establishing a shared and collective cooperation to run the world. - The United Nations was created to make possible effective participation of all nations in international decision-making processes. - We all know that this goal has not yet been fulfilled because of the absence of justice in the current management structures and mechanisms of the UN. - The composition of the Security Council is unjust and inequitable. Therefore, changes and restructuring of the United Nations are considered as the basic demands of the nations that must be addressed by the General Assembly. - During last year session, I emphasized the importance of this issue and called for the designation of this decade as the decade of shared and collective Global Management. - I would like now to reiterate my proposal and I am sure that through international cooperation diligent and efforts of committed world leaders or governments and through insistence on justice and the support of all other nations, we can expedite the building of a common bright future. - This movement is certainly on the rightful path of creation with the assurance of promising future for humanity. - A future that will be built when humanity initiates to trend the path of the divine prophets and the righteous the under the leadership of Imam al-Mahdi, the Ultimate Savior of mankind and the inheritor to all divine messengers, leaders and to the pure generation of our great Prophet. - Creation of a supreme and ideal society with the arrival of a perfect human being, who is a true and sincere lover of all human beings, is the guaranteed promise of Allah. - He will come with Jesus Christ to lead the freedom and justice lovers to eradicate tyranny and discrimination, and promote knowledge, peace, justice freedom and love across the world. He will present to every single individual all the beauties of the world and all good things which bring happiness for humankind. - Today nations have been awakened and with the increase in public awareness, they no longer succumb to oppressions and discriminations. - The world is now witnessing more than ever, the widespread awakening in Islamic lands, in Asia, Europe, and America. These movements are ever expanding everyday their specter and influence to pursue the realization of justice, freedom and the creation of a better tomorrow. - Our great nation stands ready to join hands with other nations to march on this beautiful path in harmony and in line with the shared aspirations of mankind. - Let us salute love, freedom, justice, knowledge, and the bright future that awaits humankind.

Iran\'s president says threats of a military option can not derail the process of nuclear talks between Iran and the permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany. Hassan Rouhani said Iran is after a win-win situation in the Geneva talks. Speaking at a cabinet meeting, the president added that Iran seeks peace and stability in the Middle East, and that all nations will benefit from successful talks on Iran\'s nuclear program. He said differences over the nuclear program should be resolved through international regulations, adding that Tehran will NOT give up its nuclear rights or cross the red lines set by the Islamic Republic. Regarding the previous round of talks in Geneva, President Rouhani said the two sides had made progress, but unfortunately irrelevant expectations derailed the negotiations, leading to no agreement there.

Iran\'s president says threats of a military option can not derail the process of nuclear talks between Iran and the permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany. Hassan Rouhani said Iran is after a win-win situation in the Geneva talks. Speaking at a cabinet meeting, the president added that Iran seeks peace and stability in the Middle East, and that all nations will benefit from successful talks on Iran\'s nuclear program. He said differences over the nuclear program should be resolved through international regulations, adding that Tehran will NOT give up its nuclear rights or cross the red lines set by the Islamic Republic. Regarding the previous round of talks in Geneva, President Rouhani said the two sides had made progress, but unfortunately irrelevant expectations derailed the negotiations, leading to no agreement there.

The Leader of Iran\'s Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei and President Hassan Rouhani have both hailed the nuclear deal clenched between Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany in Geneva. Ayatollah Khamenei thanked the Iranian negotiating team, saying they\'ve done a praiseworthy job. The leader described the Geneva deal as a success and called on the Iranian negotiators to resist any excessive demand in the future. Meanwhile, President Rouhani has said that under the deal, Iran can continue to enrich uranium on its soil. The president also said the nuclear deal with the P-five-plus-one will see the sanctions against Iran lifted step by step. Rouhani noted that if the P-five-plus-one group lives up to its obligations, Iran will also abide by the terms of the agreement.

A gesture of discipline by President Rouhani and his team; on Sunday Iranian lawmakers were surprised to see the President all prepared to defend his national budget bill for the next Iranian calendar year without a single moment of delay; something that had not happened for the past eight years.

The Afghan president calls for a quick end to the US drone airstrikes and military operations in his country. President Hamid Karzai renewed the demand during a meeting with a fact-finding team probing a recent US strike in the eastern Parwan province. The inquiry said earlier that the aerial attack killed 14 civilians, mostly kids. Anger has been simmering among the Afghan public and officials over an escalation in US-led strikes in civilian areas. Afghans have held numerous protests nationwide against such attacks. President Karzai has time and again slammed the drone strikes which mostly result in civilian deaths.

Egypt\'s military chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has held talks with Russia\'s President Vladimir Putin in Moscow. During the meeting, Putin said he will support Sisi\'s bid for president if he decides to run in Egypt\'s upcoming election. Putin also backed Egypt\'s new constitution. Sisi has yet to announce his candidacy for Egypt\'s presidential election. His visit to Russia comes amid continued protests in the country against the interim government, which Sisi installed after toppling former president Moahmed Morsi on July the third. Egyptian security forces have harshly cracked down on the demonstrators, killing hundreds of them.

[08 June 2014] President Rouhani congratulates Syrian counterpart\'s electoral win - English

[04 April 2015] Iranian president speech on mutual understanding reached with P5+1 (P.1) - English