Search This Blog


Tuesday, 14 January 2014

Palestinian Declaration


For the sake of historical truth,  and for defending, preserving and protecting the rights of future Palestinian children, we present this document:

  • Whereas, no foreign government, international institution or individual, has any form of legitimacy or jurisdiction to dispossess any other Nation by distributing their land and property,
  • Whereas, all colonial dealings regarding Palestine, whether by the “League of Nation” or the subsequent land confiscations by British colonial forces, as well as coerced transactions by early Zionists, did not invalidate the irrefutable fact that the Palestinian Nation is the sole indigenous people of Palestine, settled and anchored culturally to the land since times immemorial,
  • Whereas, the religious component of Palestine's cultural Heritage is central Heritage for 31 % of mankind who are Christians, 23 % who are Muslims, and the 0.2 % who are Jews, and the Jewish Zionists arguably attempting to usurp and destroy the Heritage of almost 55% of mankind, namely Christians and Muslims, contrary to the Palestinian society who was known for its social cohesion irrespective of religion, and for protecting all monuments and all worshipers of all faiths, prior to the Jewish-Zionist invasion,
  • Whereas, We the Palestinian Nation, sole indigenous people of Historic Palestine, had neither been consulted, nor did we agree to or undersign any partition of our Homeland Palestine, when the UN put for the vote in the General Assembly, and never done so thereafter,
  • Whereas, UN's General Assembly adopted  resolution (181) recommending the adoption and implementation of the Partition Plan, allocating to “Israel” a defined area significantly smaller than the areas conquered by Zionist Terror groups such as Irgun and Haganah by the use of ethnic cleansing, genocidal massacres, and massive destruction of over 530 Biblical villages and cities,
  • Whereas, the admission of "Israel" to UN was conditional to its implementation of  Resolutions 194, i.e  the cessation of aggression and the allowance of the return of Palestinian refugees to their homes and properties, as well as the implementation of Resolution 181 of the partition plan, to which Israel did not commit itself to any specific action or timeframe, and later on rejected the Resolutions all together,  
  • Whereas, the decision to partition Palestine was never passed through the UN Security Council, which renders it non-abiding, and only serves as advisory,
  • Whereas, Zionism, as materialised and manifested by the Jewish state of “Israel”, is a colonial racist ideology which advocates the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and the confiscation of their properties, abrogation of their basic rights, and the establishment of an exclusive Jewish state in Historic Palestine,
  • Whereas, seven decades on, Jewish-Zionist terrorism, massacres, torture, imprisonment of civilian populations, torture of children, collective punishment, theft, land robbery, destruction of Cultural Heritage, ethnic cleansing, and slow genocide, have only intensified,
  • Whereas, their offspring have had a full century (since the beginning of the first Jewish-Zionist invasion) to learn to coexist peacefully, yet they, along with the new-comers, chose to continue on the same path of aggression, oppression, exclusivity, and racism,
  • Whereas, the vast majority of Palestinians have been living in forced exile, forbidden to exercise their basic Human Right of Returning to their Homes in their own Homeland, and denied their basic Human Right of holding their National Identity,
  • Whereas, the entire humanity has the moral maturity which makes it unacceptable to acquire land and property by Wars of Conquest and Aggression,

  • Whereas, We the Palestinian Nation have been victims of almost one century of insanely sadistic cruelty, assassinations of pregnant mothers, torture of children, psycho-terror, loss of land, loss of Peace, security and independence, loss of health, destruction of our architectural and archeological cultural Heritage, loss of Collective and Personal Property, loss of economic means i.e. loss of earning and sustenance, etc etc, all this irrefutably at the hands and policies of a foreign and psychopathic body of Jewish terrorists and their international network of accomplices, since more than seven decades and ongoing on a daily basis,
  • Whereas, myriads of Jewish-Zionist Funds and Foundations continue to raise and collect enormous sums, in the billions, from international Jewish communities, to finance either overtly or covertly the destruction of our Nation and our Homeland, by means of full spectrum destruction, be it genocide, be it destruction of landscape, be it destruction of architectural and cultural heritage, be it imprisonment and torture of children, be it systematic programs of assassination of social and political leader, be it use of toxic weapons,
  • Whereas, calling “Israel” a mere apartheid system which could be “fixed” with some cosmetic arrangements such as granting Palestinians “Israeli” citizenship to “upgrade” their status from “occupied” to “slaves” in their own Homeland, and demanding marginal improvement of the treatment of Palestinians, while the usurpers occupiers demanding special privileges for themselves (keeping the loot and absolving of crimes) but calling them “equal rights”, does not constitute in any form or shape a realistic approach enabling a viable project wherein even the most elementary basis of Justice could be established,
  • Whereas, participating in absolving individuals guilty of Crimes Against Humanity and other ongoing crimes since over seven decades, and whitewashing these Crimes, is not only a betrayal to all things human and moral, but also is the fertile ground justifying future repetition and amplification of such crimes,
For those reasons, we hereby, the undersigned Palestinians affirm the following:

The Palestinian Nation, whether living in any part of Historic Palestine or in forced exile, are one people and shall not be divided.

The Palestinian Nation are the only people owning the Land of Palestine, with the Human Right of full and unrestrained Sovereignty over our Historic Land, Palestine.

Palestine is located from the Mediterranean Sea to the River Jordan and cannot be divided, leased, given away or sold.

The “Nakba” with its massacres and daily atrocities, continues to this day, and started with the forceful uprooting of our people by terror organizations such as Irgun and Haganah. The lapse of time since the beginning or this “Nakba” (the word means “catastrophe”) does not diminish our inalienable rights in Palestine, including the inalienable right to return to our homes and properties, and to participate in the re-building and development of our society and its institutions, and adopt any political, economic and Judicial system we Palestinians would chose.

Our people inside and outside of Palestine form one Nation, and yearn for their reunification in their ancestry Homeland, Palestine. Contrary to defamation we have been subjected to, we have always been an extremely tolerant Nation, and yearn to restore this quality to our land and country, for the benefit of our Nation, and of all mankind, irrespective of religion or cultural origin.

We Palestinians, just as any other Nation under attack and occupied, have the ultimate and unabridged right to define our aims, choose our strategy and tactics of resistance suitable for achieving our Liberation from the oppressor, and the reinstatement of rights, and the establishment of diplomatic and commercial relations with neighboring countries and beyond.

Palestinian have the moral and legal right to pursue the legal prosecution of the usurpers and destroyers of their land within the recognized International Laws.

It is ominously dangerous for the security of mankind, to refuse to prosecute perpetrators of Terrorism, Crimes Against Humanity, atrocities, and the systematic fomenting of wars and racial and religious hatred. It is ominously dangerous to step back from such prosecution under the ludicrous grounds that the perpetrators would merit leniency on the absurd grounds of being Jewish.

Only the Palestinian people through its legitimate institutions and elected representatives can speak for their rights and aspirations.

No organization, party, group or individual is empowered to cede our rights to historic Palestine. In fact we explicitly express here our intention, as soon as we recover our Rights, to prosecute anyone who would have engaged or attempted, to cede Land and Rights, without having any mandate to do so.

Only the Palestinian people gathered in Palestine and in exile can determine their future and the future of the country.

We the signatories of this document, call for either the creation of a new Liberation Party, or the rejuvenation of the PLO, as the only recognized and accepted legitimate organization of the Palestinian people. Such organization must be strengthened to unify the people and their capabilities, in order to be justified to speak on their behalf, and structure our fight for Liberation.

This party, whether called PLO or otherwise, must unambiguously stand for, and implement a program for Liberation of all of Palestine. It must be democratic, accountable, transparent and truly representative of the entire spectrum of the Palestinian Nation.

The aims and aspirations of Palestinians are not confined to a symbolic change of “Zionist regime” or the vacuous declaration of abandonment of Zionism by the Jewish-Zionist occupiers, but rather to the FULL Liberation of Palestine and the restoration of all their inalienable rights.

We call for a just and peaceful solution, we acknowledge that the only real road to Peace is a full and unconditional Liberation of Palestine, which also means liberation from the supremacist ideology that is imposing its cruel occupation, liberation from the racist Jewish-Zionist experiment, Liberation from the violence of colonizers and liberation from the perpetrators. That will inevitably mean a return to the original, peaceful society Palestine was before the Zionist invasion, albeit embracing all technological and societal developments. Our true and sincere aspirations are long lasting Peace, Justice and Freedom. We believe that this will restore of the true foundations of Palestinian society, and inscribe us harmoniously in the inter-national community, contrary to the present day occupation entity “Israel” which is the root cause of so many difficulties and excesses the world community is confronted to, whether in the UN or elsewhere, where “Israel” and its multinational lobby groups are fomenting wars and racial-religious frictions, making international cooperation extremely difficult.

As Palestinians, we are grateful and appreciative of the hard work of all supporters, however, we Palestinians are under NO obligation to hold back their march for freedom, to curtail our aims or to abandon our rights, just for the absurd sake of accommodating and not offending some of their Jewish supporters, or to adopt the aims and objectives of the anti-Zionist Jewish supporters instead of their own.

Palestinians have the ultimate right to choose their vision for their future, of FREE Palestine including the type of government, the writing of constitution, the construction and implementation of their legal and juristic system, which stems from and corresponds to their ethics and reflects and protects their culture.

It is the privilege of Palestinian to compile the legal framework and procedures of their own choice, upon which Laws of Immigration and Citizenship are defined, on the basis of which decisions as to who is granted, and who not, a Right to Remain in liberated Palestine providing s/he is able to respect Palestinian Law, and adopt a conduct respective of the community around.

All Palestinian refugees and their descendants have the unconditional right to come back home, they, the rightful indigenous owners are also entitled to the reinstatement of ALL confiscated (stolen) land and property, compensation for all their losses over the many years of exile, and they are also entitled to Palestinian citizenship wherever they are.

We Palestinians have not given up before, and have no intention to give up now. We will continue to pursue the course of JUSTICE and LIBERATION by all means deemed necessary and appropriate, by upholding Universal Humanistic ethics, within the frame of International Law.

Thus, our vision for a just and peaceful settlement entails:




The racist genocidal occupation entity is in breach of all foundational UN Charters, and has violated and defied more UN resolutions and charter principles than any other country. This illegitimate entity has none of the qualifications necessary, neither moral nor legal nor political, required to obtain and maintain UN membership. Its current membership represents a mockery of International Law, and is a disgrace on the face of humanity. Israel's UN membership should have never happened in the first place. The revocation of Israel's UN membership is a necessity, as a step towards the rehabilitation of the already battered framework of International Law. Concurrently, all of “Israel's” institutions, laws, policies and practices could be abolished, especially since they discriminate between people based on religion and ethnicity.


Palestine, known as “The Holy Land”, must be free from racist atrocities. Contrary to all failed attempts, road-maps and fake negotiations which serves as dilatory measures enabling more land grab and more atrocities to be committed, the concept of Full Liberation and Full Sovereignty for Palestinians carries only advantages, including the facilitation of prosecuting Crimes Against Humanity. To bring reason to the Holy Land, it is necessary to first recognize the fact that the Jewish-Zionist occupation is the sole reason there is strife in this land in the first place, and secondly it is necessary to look back at the status pro ante, to discover that a Liberated Palestine whose institutions will inevitably reflect Palestinian culture and social fabric, will be endlessly more apt to be a good standing member of the UN, and a good neighbor and partner to the world, contrary to the endlessly caustic “Jewish state” and its apologists.

FULL SOVEREIGNTY of the Palestinian Nation over their ancestral country:

The Palestinian Nation has like any other Nation the aspiration and the right to select a political system, to adopt a Constitution and re-construct their country. For the sake of International Peace and Security, I is time to return Palestine to its Peaceful owners.


plans of which should start immediately without delay, A Palestinian JUDICIARY and IMMIGRATION System, will respectively prosecute former “Israeli” criminals and their associates, and/or grant or decline on an individual basis, a Right to Remain, based on criteria solely to be defined by said Immigration and Integration Services.


Palestinian refugees have the unconditional Right of Return. Palestine and the Palestinian Nation at large, are entitled to full and unconditional Restitution of their land and property whenever possible, assorted with appropriate Compensation for more than seven decades of deprivation and slow genocide, Cultural destruction, and a whole array of atrocities and usurpation.


Inside of the state of PALESTINE, the future Unified Democratic state situated from Mediterranean Sea to the River Jordan, Palestinians are the rightful citizens. Palestinians include those who live in the occupied Homeland, and include all refugees living abroad and their descendants, all those have unrestricted right to Palestinian citizenship. For what concerns former “Jewish Israelis”, plans should be set on course to grant or decline on an individual basis a Right to Remain, based on criteria defined by an Immigration and Integration Service. Such criteria could take into consideration place of birth, and require irrefutable proof of non-participation in the former Israeli occupation apparatus, and the demonstration during a certain period, of the candidate's ability and willingness to be law-abiding, respecting land, culture and his/her compatriots irrespective of religion or race. Subsequently the Right to Remain would be followed by a unrestricted Palestinian citizenship, with equal rights. The whole procedure being within the future framework of Palestinian Laws of Immigration and Naturalization. Undoubtedly, Palestinian Immigration Policies will adhere to International Norms, in stark contrast to the sordid, racist, theocratic, ethnocratic, sociopathic Jewish-Zionist “Israeli” practice.

We hereby, call upon our friends and supporters -who hold the tragedy of Palestine, the dispossessing of Palestinians of their own ancestry’s land dear at their heart-, to reflect upon the meaning of JUSTICE in the context of a history saturated with War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity.

We consider any negotiations that do not lead to the implementation of the above as null and void. Also, we consider any and all individuals and institution that do not adhere to it as not legitimate representatives of our rights and people.

Thus, we call upon our people and institutions to rally behind this APPEAL and to work diligently to implement it.

We, also call upon our friends and supporters to join us in our Declaration and endeavour.

Furthermore, we call upon Jewish organizations and individuals, to take their responsibility seriously, we invite them to actively participate in restoration of justice, righting the wrong, and facilitating the peaceful resolve of this chronic injustice by engaging positively, effectively and wholeheartedly to bring REAL change of "facts on the ground", thus offering a remedy for healing of the Holy Land and its people, once and for all.

 Moreover, we suggest to them to create a new Jewish fund, being unambiguously destined, with agreement of every donor, to support the Full and Unconditional Liberation in an effort to begin the lengthy and inescapable process for Restitution, Reparation and Compensation for the Palestinians. A long overdue process, that will inevitably ensue the seven decades long and ongoing Jewish Crimes against the land of Palestine and its indigenous people.



1) Nahida Izzat (AKA Exiled Palestinian)      Al-Quds

Sunday, 17 November 2013

tumblr_lpgroyycno1qe25ajo1_500 Is it fair to abuse little girls like so, and push them to become sex objects?[/caption]

A view on the implication of politicisation of sexual behaviour/ orientation and its infringement on children's rights.


For whatever reason, I often find myself engaged in writing about taboo topics, very few willing to touch, and expressing "politically incorrect" views, no one willing to even ponder about, this article is just one of those. However, this article is not a condonation or justification of any form of discrimination or persecution against people with various sexual orientations or disorders, it is a mere expression of an opinion and sharing of concerns associated with promoting explicit sexual education amongst children and pressurising other societies to change their codes of ethics, thus destroying the cradle of child-protection, the family unit and the foundation of these societies.


As a mother and a grandmother with great love and devotion for children, as a human being with intense concern for children's welfare, and as Palestinian, with a deep rooted culture, in which FAMILY -not the individual, is the nucleus of society, I feel the need to drop my two cents on the issue of adult sexual behaviour and the need of child protection. Palestinian culture, being predominantly  Muslim, is in by large a culture of faith where believing in Creator, accepting that action have consequences and taking responsibility for people's own deeds sits at its heart. Most socio-dynamics in Islamic societies stems from that belief; starting with God-man relationship, ending with man-nature relationship, including all which is in-between. i.e. the boundaries of personal freedoms, and extents of responsibilities in the human-human relationship. Such traditional culture views society not as the sum of the individuals, as cells floating in a vacuum,  rather the very expanded social collective of families and extended families, the result is a neatly woven, well bonded social fabric, in which the welfare of the whole is understood to precede that of the individual. At the heart of such societies the concept of "All mankind are born free but OUR FREEDOM ENDS WHEN THE FREEDOM OF OTHERS BEGINS". Such culture puts very strong emphasis on the rule of traditional family in the upbringing, welfare, health and protection of its children (the nucleus family ; consisting of mother and father, and the extended consisting of relatives swell as neighbours and friends) Is it not only reasonable then to assume that any ideology or practices which prioritize the INDIVIDUAL might not fulfil the needs of a deeply religious, family oriented and tightly woven society? If Muslims choose freely to have some restriction upon themselves (like modest dress code, abstinence from consuming alcohol or self-discipline in sexual behaviour) in order to create a more attentive and more protective, more family oriented atmosphere for the sake of its most vulnerable members, namely children, what harm is there in that? If the support for human rights in Palestine or elsewhere in the world is conditional and dependent on the People denouncing their religion, cultural heritage, and social traditions and adopting new sets of social behaviour alien to them, which only mirrors that of the West; consequently denying them a most basic human right, the right to think, and live within a specific ethical code and legal system of their own choice. The East have different history and different experiences, different perspective on existential issue and different views of the world. It has different social structures, different ways of dealings with it's social wells and of healing its ills, thus it is nonsensical and rather presumptuous to assume that East and West share exactly the same problems, thus need the same solutions! TRANSFERRING the PROBLEMS of the West on the East, then JUXTAPOSING the SAME SOLUTIONS on the East is rather shortsighted and very condescending, IMHO. Trying to standardise and sum up humanity in the form of Western civilisation is a grave mistake. We can’t simply assume that what is good and right for the western culture is the norm, nor we can accept that it is superior to that of other cultures, and for me this is a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT. The Muslim world has suffered enormously from colonial imperialism, military and economic occupation, we are longing for FREEDOM, but the freedom that we long most for is the FREEDOM of THOUGHT. We have to come to common grounds of accepting that each culture and civilization has its own structure that depends very much on a huge heritage and millennia of accumulated experiences, understanding this and respecting it is vital for the future peaceful existence of human race.

Now, coming to the topic of homosexuality:

I don't think it is my business, or anyone's business for that matter to know what people do in their bedrooms, or to be exposed to such private matter, let alone be asked to support, object to , demonstrate for, or celebrate what people do in the privacy of their own homes. However, like every issue in the world, people are entitled to express an opinion or to have personal views on it, such views should not be considered as persecution, infringement, or  violation of the human rights of homosexuals.

For me personally, what makes me cringe about this issue :

it is the deliberate forceful insertion and  the politicisation of a private intimate bedroom act , pushing it to become one pivotal item on the global political agenda and one major factor in determining the "progressiveness" and "liberality" of any one political group, It is the premature relentless enforcement of sex education about adult sexual behaviour, on very small innocent kindergarten children as young as five, in the name of defending and promoting LGBT rights, It is  coercion, intimidation and imposition for the promoting and celebrating of a minority group's sexual behaviour on poor countries in exchange of aid and traditional societies under the pretext of "liberalism", even if it was against the will and welfare of those societies, It is the unfathomable defence and glorification and campaigning for the "rights" of convicted sexual predators and child abusers when they face courts of justice for their criminal molestation of children. (That does not necessity mean that I approve of such type of punishment, however I strongly disapprove of letting child molesters escape justice and roam freely, hurting ever more children). It is the use of the same methods of "activism" in which they managed to legalize and normalize what used to be classified as a sexual disorder, some are using their experience and "activism" to trivialiselegalise and normalise the molestation of innocent children. Enough to examine some of the names behind such movements, one cannot fail to notice that gay activists play key role in such promotion. For example political activist and historian of the gay rights movement and former president of  Gay Activists Alliance namely  David Thorstad was the founder of North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) . . [youtube=] All the above should raise red flags in any decent person's head, it should ring bells of alarm and concern to those who cares about children' welfare and wellbeing. [caption id="attachment_7201" align="aligncenter" width="460"]545922_4491836584076_1013787752_n-jpg Is this FREEDOM, or SLAVERY?[/caption] I see so much contradiction in dealing with these issues in Western societies: Encouraging children to be sexually aware, educated and active as young as possible, yet pretending to want to protect them from sexual abuse. Campaigning for human rights of one group yet being ever so quiet about other groups of similar tendencies. Trying to shelter children from abuse yet see nothing wrong in putting them in a situation where they might be emotionally, mentally and psychologically abused. Allow me here to storm your brains by throwing out some questions: Homosexuality is what it is, a sexual orientation, like any other, so why make it into a defining identity? Why should people be defined by such a narrow aspect of their behaviour, done in the privacy of their own bedrooms? Why should the rest of mankind -including their young ones, engage in promoting and celebrating the sexual act of some of its members? Why should humanity be split into two categories : hetro, homo, thus identified by such limiting and insignificant parameters? Can we tell how civilized a county is by the size of its pride parades? Is civility and respect of human rights measured by its celebration of how fast growing its homosexual population? Can we define humanity by those who love to sleep on their backs and those who prefer sleeping on their sides or tommies? Can we start having "Pride Parades" for left handed people, or for people who prefer using coloured tissue-paper in the bathroom, rather than the common white, for they too are minorities? Do the words "WE DO NOT CARE ABOUT WHAT OTHERS DO BEHIND DOORS IN THEIR BEDROOMS" mean anything to anybody? If this zealous support of homosexuality is all about human rights, why do people in the west favour to defend the human rights of homosexuals yet they are not so keen on the human right of: Paraphilias: Exhibitionism, Fetishism, incest, Frotteurism, Zoophilia, Mysophilia Necrophilia, Troilism, Coprophilia, Masochism, Sadism, Transvestitism, and Voyeurism? All the above display "less-common" sexual behaviours. Just like homosexuals, they too can not control the impulses and desires they feel, and they are only sexually fulfilled in their own different way, so should they be invited to schools to "educate" children about their sexual peculiarities? Should humanity celebrate a week "pride parade" for each and every sexual orientation or deviation there is? Why are the above –unlike homosexuals- still seen as sexual disorders  and given medical advice when needed? Why are they –unlike homosexuals- given medical advice and psychological treatment instead of being accepted as they are? Why are they forced by society to suppress their feelings and "live miserably" instead of promoting and celebrating their sexual habits in public? Who can define sexual disorder, or “normal” and “abnormal”, who is allowed to vote? Who has the right to draw the lines? Why is it that those who view homosexuality as a disorder are condemned and accused of being homophobes? Do exhibitionists have the right to fulfill their desires by imposing their nudity on society? Whose rights come first exhibitionists or society and its children? What about Zoophilia (people who are attracted to animals) or Necrophilia (gratification by having sexual contact with dead bodies)? Is a man entitled to marry a dog, a corpse, or a woman’s underwear in church? Why are such individuals not allowed to promote their sexuality, teach children about it and celebrate it publicly? Is it appropriate and healthy to have children reading stories titled "My daddy John and my mummy black & red underwear"? or "My daddy Harry and my mummy mountain goat"? Will there be human right groups calling for the right of those people to get married and adopt children? After all this person is only expressing his love and is harming no one in the process? Are we sure that teaching very small children all this intimate adult materials would have no negative effect on their emotional, psychological and mental state? It is clear that with paedophilia children’s rights are violated, because they are unable to give their consent as they are immature, vulnerable and unable to make good judgement. But why are we seeing individuals and groups trying to legalise and normalise such criminal activities? Who can decide who is a child then? Who can say who is a child? Who can define age of consent? Is a 16 year-old a child? Is 12, 13, 14, 15 year-old a child? Why then girls and boys as young as 12 are – by law- given contraceptive on demand? Is it ok for children to have sexual relations with mates of similar age or a few years older? How many years difference is deemed acceptable? What age difference makes the relationship unlawful and wrong (Paedophiliac)? Who can regulate and have the say on this? What about the rights of adopted children, what effect will have on their psychological health, having two mums or two dads, and not knowing their biological parents? Nowadays, where exactly is the persecution of homosexuals in the west, where is the abuse of their yuma rights? Where is it all heading? Is there an end to how far humanity would go in its abuse of children in order to gravitate its most primitive behaviour? Is expressing an opinion considered "infringement on rights"? Moreover, why impose on the rest of the world, Western definitions, Western values, Western problems, and inflict Western solutions upon them? Isn't that yet another form of imperialism, i.e thought imperialism? If Western countries along with gay-rights "activists" are so keen to help other "undeveloped" societies into "progress", wouldn't their help be much more appreciated when it gives the other the freedom they desire in devising their own social structure and the respect they deserve in choosing ethical codes of their own? [caption id="attachment_7205" align="aligncenter" width="468"]1239872_10151941433643185_1248239448_n They may never have experienced the so called "freedom" of having relationships
outside the frame of marriage, but they are committed, faithful and content[/caption] Wouldn't be more modest to learn about other cultures, how they function, how their people interact, and how they solve problems, resolve conflicts and deal with disagreements, before thinking of exporting ideas, educating their children and imposing solutions to imaginary problems? Do we have sufficient knowledge as to the effect of early exposure to certain explicit sexual materials or behaviour might have on little one? Who have the right to decide what is appropriate, descent, acceptable exposure for children? How do you feel if in other societies, majority of its citizens view homosexuality as a disorder? In societies where the welfare of the whole is much important than the individual, who are encouraged to practice self restraint, sacrifice, and altruism, rather than pursuing selfish fulfilment and egoism, if they willingly give up some desires in order to keep a healthy society and less traumatized children; why the obsession with imposing change? If some societies cherish family unit as foundations of a healthy society, protection, care and commitment as the finest expression of love, thus producing a socially cohesive and healthy society, where the weak is looked after and the needy is provided for, why attempting to replace it with failed experiments as documented in their own societies, where family unites are disintegrating and individualism is eating the fabric of their own societies away? Now, is the issue of promoting and celebrating homosexuality (again, I reiterate, a private act which should not be anyone's business)  related to the Palestinian struggle for Liberation? Are we obliged to start teaching our young Palestinian boys and girls and LGBT as to be "accepted" as being a "progressive" society worthy of support? Are we obliged to start competing with"Israel" which prides itself of being gay heaven in order for our supporters to be satisfied? Just like attempting to tie our Palestinian struggle for liberation with causes which only distracts us from focusing on our goals and deplete our energies, like "fighting antisemitism", "holocaust denial", or "conspiracy theories", pretending that this is the way for Palestine liberation, we refuse the imposition and the premises that the issue of "homosexuality is central to our cause", urgent to deal with in our community, or that it the most burning issue in our quest for justice and freedom. Moreover, this issue should be left to the Palestinians and other societies to examine, discuss and deal with, in its own time and in accordance with its own ethics and what is best for those societies. We refuse to be distracted and our aims obscured by side issues while we struggle for survival facing threats of genocidal magnitude. has no weight a It is more humanly decent and respectable to let various societies exercise their rights of freedom of thought, by following ethical code of their own choice and without manufacturing artificial consent imposed upon them by donor countries or any other pressure group. [caption id="attachment_7206" align="aligncenter" width="468"]1238770_619920118030233_1656407432_n copy They may be struck with extreme poverty, but they are protective of one another
They are bonded with love and commitment[/caption] My fear is that all this promotion and disproportionate importance given to homosexuality, would be used as the first crack in the foundational rock of human ethics which took mankind millennia of evolution and slow progress in order to fine-tune a complex and refined moral systems founded on justice and compassion, thus followed by all sorts of behaviours; child molesting, beastality, and incest would cause total regression and collapse of nucleus family units bringing us back to stone age. If prematurely and inappropriately and for selfish reasons, children are to exposed to all these types of adult sexual behaviour, are we not allowed to cry then, where is the their safety and protection? Isn't all this direct infringement on children's right? [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="343"]1012419_485433951539421_1843113735_n The wonders of purity and innocence of childhood is precious
Do not take it away[/caption] Conclusion It is more humanly decent and respectable to let children be children, do not rob them of their purity and childhood. Children are not meant to be exposed to concepts, images, words or acts which they are not ready for. Allow them time to enjoy being young and innocent and carefree, without having to be burdened with adult stuff. Allow them to grow up and mature in their own time. Allow them to play without concern, to run light heartedly and to laugh loudly when they slide or use a swing. Allow them to BE. [caption id="attachment_6316" align="aligncenter" width="468"]998681_10152051594795550_142965064_n Give them protection
Allow them to play
Allow them to jump and run
Allow them to have fun
Allow them freedom to BE[/caption] Disclaimer: This article is not a condonation or justification of any form of discrimination or persecution against people with various sexual orientations or disorders, it is a mere expression of an opinion and sharing of concerns associated with promoting explicit sexual education amongst children and pressurising other societies to change their codes of ethics, thus destroying the cradle of child-protection, the family unit and the foundation of these societies.

Saturday, 8 June 2013

Muslim Brothers : Lost On Their Way To Jerusalem


The March to Jerusalem- undertaken by the Muslim Brothers of
Jordan as part of the functions carried on by the Global March to Jerusalem starting on June the 7th- was something different this year . The Muslim Brothers of Jordan had already announced – as early as May the 23rd – their participation in the function with the blessings of their king …Abdallah and his permission .But instead of heading to Jerusalem they stopped in Sweyma -valley of Jordan – where they forgot about Jerusalem and al Aqsa and Palestine and started – as good Muslim Brothers- rallying against al Assad and screaming victory to FSA.
Not only this but they started insulting the Lebanese Resistance and – upon seeing the correspondent of al Manar TV- they attacked him and tried to confiscate his equipment .
This is how the rallying for Palestine and for the liberation of the Holy City changed into a demonstration in support of the FSA against the Lebanese Resistance . This is how the March for Jerusalem turned out to be the March for Israel since the cooperation between FSA and Israel has been disclosed in the number of Israeli weapons caught with the thugs of the opposition in al Qusayr and the hosting of Israel of the wounded and injured thugs providing them with medical care .
The Muslim brothers of Jordan must have caught the opportunity of this March to express their support for the thugs of the opposition and express- in open demonstrations – their sectarian hatred since such things are not allowed in Jordan .
We call for honest supporters of the cause and of the Resistance and who are part of this initiative like George Galloway and bishop Abdallah Hanna and Layth Shbaylat
to comment on this incident and give us an explanation.
This video shows what happened during the march

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Al Qusayr and al Qunaitra


The story of al Qusayr is something of the past, . The total region has returned to Syrian hegemony after spending two years under thugs’ rule . 10 thousand thugs were present in al Qusayr mostly from al Nusra , there were like in a forteress with the biggest arsenal, and the heavy sophisticated equipment they had , had no par , they had evolved means of transportation that range from motorcycles to cars and trucks and tanks , and they had Israeli weapons . They were trained troops of various nationalities that engaged in special operations and also snipers , they had dug kilometers of tunnels were they hid and from where they could get supplies even to Homs . The whole area of al Qusayr -which is the vicinity of Homs- has fallen into the hands of the Syrian army including al Mas’oodiyya and al Salihiyya and al Bouyeda ,these towns have fallen one after the other and the thugs have fled or get caught . Negotiations are taking place to hospitalize 400 wounded thugs in Lebanon . all talks about massacres happening in al Qusayr are mere lies . Not ONE innocent civilian was killed . The thugs got even to evacuate their families and were granted this permission that ended up to be very costly for the Syrian army and for the Resistance because -after letting out their families- the thugs did not surrender as promised but attacked the Resistance which caused many casualties . The head of the FSA Salim Idriss asked for the spread of UN forces on the Syrian/Lebanese border expanding their role as defined in resolution 1701 to include the northern borders, something that the FSA had no right to suggest according to experts since they do not represent a country .
As for the situation on Al Qunaitra in the Golan Heights, the thugs of the opposition had attacked- lately -the Syrian army at the borders with Occupied Golan. This come as a response to the defeat of al Qusayr. . There is fear that the thugs of the opposition will form like a militia affiliated to the Israeli forces the same way the Lebanese Southern army was affiliated to the IDF during the occupation of south Lebanon. This comes in handy, especially if the Resistance in Golan is to start soon. Israelis had opened their borders to the thugs to receive medical care on many occasions and the UN is considering evacuating its forces and Austria had taken the decision to withdraw from the UNDOV.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Thursday, 6 June 2013


Erdogan is going through a critical moment and has been exposed by the US administration- especially after his last visit the USA- where he was scolded and blamed for allowing Muslim fanatics and terrorists to move as they please in and out of Turkey. The majority of Turks that have taken to streets all over the country- in many protests and demonstrations against the government ...- are not affiliated directly to political parties , they represent different forces on the ground and they are between eighteen and thirty years of age , 70% of them are not affiliated to political parties but are students and actors and writers and intellectuals . Around 70% of the of the Turks oppose Erdogan’s external policy regarding Syria among them 40% of his own political party , the AKP. Not to forget that Turkey- labeled as a democracy by the western establishment - has the highest number of imprisoned journalists in the world .

Erdogan had invested a lot in his external policy in Syria and has introduced terrorists and weapons to Syria calling for deposing Assad and hosting - constantly - the Syrian opposition supplying it with most sophisticated equipment and training the thugs in the refugee camps of Hatay and recruiting fighters from all over the countries paying them in advance .. All this has turned Turkey into a thug state that has sacrificed secularism for an Islam compatible with the World Order Schemes and Israel. This battle against Syria seemed to be the battle of life and death for Erdogan and he was invited by NATO to play the most important PART IN IT . Still he was the first one to be sacrificed at the alter of the World Order defeat in al Qusayr. This defeat, in addition to this internal failures and acting as a sultan and a dictator, hastened his political defeat and exposed internally as well .

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Victory After Victory

The victory in al Qusayr achieved by the Syrian Army and the Resistance is more than a victory over the opposition , it is the victory of the axis of the Resistance over the World Order and Israel and this victory has more than one implication because it intrinsically means that the Political Islam of the Muslim Brothers and Erdogan- that ruled after the Arab spring- has bee...n defeated and will not recover from such defeat . It means also that the military Islam of al Qa’ida has been defeated as well. These two defeats will put term , on one hand, to the moderate Islam compatible with Israel and, on the other, to the schemes of partition and disintegration of Arab countries and societies that benefit NATO countries and Israel and started with the Arab Spring . True committed Islam incompatible with Israel comes out victorious, as well as all the forces opposed to Israel and the World Order. This victory has turned the page and a new chapter will start altogether whereby the axis of the Resistance will keep progressing and growing in the right direction , and will defeat consequently all the forces opposed to it.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Al Qusayr , The Real Story


More from al Qusayr . The reason why it took so long to enter al Qusayr is due to many reasons one of them that the thugs negotiated the evacuation of their families and their own surrender after handing in their weapons but , after committing themselves to the first part of the agreement and evacuating their families , they turned against their promise and fought instead of surrendering . This change was a set up and had for result to prolong the battle to a greater extent . Due to this, the Syrian army and the Resistance forces had to change their tactics in order to minimize their losses; they decided to encircle the place and cut off the supplies and enter it bit by bit cleansing one location at a time using heavy shelling .

The opposition who fought in al Qusayr were the FSA , the Muslim Brigades and the best forces of al Nusrat , very well trained with a very sophisticated equipment , especially communication devices, that the Syrian army was not able to penetrate in addition to the possession of evolved weapons that are not found everywhere . The thugs were not short of weapons but left behind them a great amount of these weapons. They belong to different nationalities and form a real army of mercenaries , they come from Afghanistan, Chechnya, Libya and Iraq and other countries and also from Australia , among them several women from Chechnya who worked as snipers . It is not known what caused them to flee the place at this point since they were not short of ammunitions and seemed to be determined to fight since they did not stick to their surrender agreement. Did they feel that their defeat was incumbent? It is almost sure that they had disagreed with each other to the point of shooting at one another maybe regarding the withdrawal from al Qusayr, or some other matter, whereby some of them accused the others of betrayal .

The conclusion is that they were defeated and fled the place and headed many kilometers further in al Dab’a among others where the battle is supposed to be resumed. Their losses amount up to one thousand casualties other than the injured ones and those who fled. One hundred martyrs fell in the other party.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Wednesday, 5 June 2013

Al Qusayr : The Third Victory Over Israel


Nothing will stop the Syrian army from cleansing the whole country from the thugs of the opposition . The Syrian flag now
has replaced that of the opposition in al Qusayr and is seen from far witnessing the victory of the Syrian army over the opposition and the thugs who were not captured fled to the town of al Dab’a to the east where they will be tracked and chased again .
All the strongholds of the opposition will thus fall one after the other until the country retrieves its sovereignty over the whole of its territory. The town of al Qusayr was one of the major strongholds of the opposition . Its importance comes from the fact that it is the opening door to Homs- which is the heart of Syria and from which the battle of Damascus could be carried on -and where all the supplies of food and equipment could be secured from Lebanon and the flow of thugs coming from the four corners of the world . It is from the Qusayr that the battle of Lebanon could be continued also against the Resistance.
Now this has stopped and the dream of taking over Syria and defeating the mighty Resistance is over . It is the Resistance that has won . Some do not want to see in this a victory because they call it a civil war or a sectarian war or even a revolution. Some ask why Hizbullah is fighting in Syria ? To those we say that this war in the first place was neither a revolution nor an uprising , not even a civil war or a sectarian struggle, This war is not against a dictator if dictator there is .

This war is against the armed Resistance of Hizbullah and the armed Resistance of the people and the armed Resistance against Israel ,it is not different from the Israeli assault on Lebanon in summer 2006 , it is using hired fanatic Muslims instead of Israelis . These fanatic Muslims- fueled with sectarian hatred- come from Chechnya and Afghanistan and Libya and Tunisia and everywhere and want to carry on the normalization with the Israeli State at a time when Israel has been already defeated .These coward Israelis needed others to fight their war for them , and thought these fanatic thugs can be equal to the fighters of the Resistance and the Syrian Arab Army .These thugs could not face the alliance of the Syrian army and the Resistance for how can fanaticism defeat true faith and courage , they can impose themselves on defenseless civilians but they cannot win against the Syrian army or the Lebanese Resistance.

Now , in al Qusayr, it is the third victory of the Resistance over Israel that should be celebrated . Many martyrs have fallen defending Lebanon and Syria and Palestine and Islam and defending people in general and their right to exist. And we were victorious and we have been promised victory by the most wise and truthful among people. This enemy who thought that al Qusayr is the stepping stone to cross to destroy Lebanon after destroying Syria has been completely defeated in al Qusayr. This victory is universal for it is not against a particular sect or enemy , it is against the global enemy of all peoples who came here after destroying many countries .If this enemy is a global arrogant power, it has come to know that our Resistance- though small – is universal and lives in the hearts of all peoples.

Now, a new chapter shall start ,the axis of the Resistance has been strengthened , the front of the Golan heights will be soon activated, and the Resistance and its allies of Iran and Syria will cooperate even more closely and Iraq is liable to join and Russia is satisfied to find strong allies who represent a real reliable presence on the ground. The Resistance and Syria – who have won the hearts of all conscientious people – will grow in strength and in impact .Nothing can stop such a Resistance.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!


Posted on May 30, 2013 by


English Transcript: Interview Given by President al-Assad to Lebanese Al-Manar TV
Interview by Batoul Ayoub Naim

May 30, 2013
DAMASCUS, (SANA)-President Bashar al-Assad gave an interview to al-Manar TV broadcasted on Thursday,  
Following is the full text of the interview:
Al-Manar: In the name of Allah, the 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?
20130530-220622.jpgPresident 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.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!