Thursday, November 26, 2015

"It Could Never Happen Over Here"

There was a time in Iran, when the state didn't tell you what you could wear, what religion you could follow, what music you could listen to, whose hands you could hold, who you could shake hands with or how you should piss, etc. 

During one of those days in Tehran, when Iranians still had their civil liberties, I was walking with my friends, after school had finished, towards the bus terminals in 24 Esfand Square along the wide pavements of the Shahreza Avenue that later become the scene of major protests against the Shah and is now called Revolution Avenue. On that day, our daily fun filled fifteen minutes walk was suddenly interrupted by a loud noise of glass shattering and chants of Allah Akbar. 

I saw some bearded young men hurriedly run into the side streets and some women wearing black chadors hurl some leaflets in the air before they too disappeared into the side streets. The bearded men had smashed the bank's front glass panel by throwing bricks at it, leaving the people inside the bank looking dazed and shocked.

The entire incident took a few seconds, like a temporary visual abberation. Once it was over, I asked my friends "what the hell was all that about?". One of my friends replied "They must have been Khomeini's supporters" and I asked again "who the hell is Khomeini?" 

Until then, I had never heard of Khomeini. When my friend explained Khomeini to be this cleric who had been exiled and wanted to turn Iran into an Islamic Republic forcing women to wear the veil and rule the country according to the Islamic Sharia, I laughed and said "Well that would never happen here!", what a fool I was!

Every time I hear the phrase "it could never happen here", I am reminded of that childhood incidence, but whereas I could be forgiven for being no more than a naive school kid, the politicians, statesmen and those responsible for the security of their citizens should not be forgiven for burying their heads in the sand and neglecting their responsibilities to safeguard their citizens.

Such manifestations of naivety amongst officials who should have known better was best demonstrated during the Carter administration years. 

Andrew Young, Carter's ambassador to UN at the time of Iranian revolution, described Khomeini as a “saint”.
Carter's national security adviser, Brezhinsky, thought “we can get along with Khomeini”.
Carter's ambassador in Iran, William Sullivan, referred to Khomeini as Iran's Mehatma Gandhi.

Those who had actually bothered to read Khomeini's books and had dared to tell the truth, were silenced and accused of being scaremongers. When three American newspapers published extensive accounts of Khomeini's writings, that revealed him to be as anti-Western and extremely reactionary, Henry Precht, the Head of US State Department's Iran Desk, said those newspaper accounts were severely misleading and likened the newspaper articles that revealed the true nature of Khomeini, as “at best a collection of school student notes and at worst a forgery”!

Well, hindsight now tells us who the "school students" were and which was a "forgery". If this bitter experience of Carter administration callowness and gullibility had taught the politicians and their advisors a useful lesson, it wouldn't be so bad, but unfortunately history keeps repeating itself and I keep hearing  "it will never happen here"  optimist rebuttals over and over again.

I remember in year 2000, I was describing a scene to a colleague that I had witnessed in the Speakers Corner, London, involving the Islamists there and expressing my concern over the rise of Islamic fanatics in the UK. My colleague's response was to shrug his shoulders and to reassure himself by saying the famous words "It will never happen over here"! 

It is probably unnecessary for me to list all the things that have happened here in UK since that casual conversation 15 years ago, perhaps its best to talk about why they happened here and why they will continue to happen and the only way that it can be stopped.

Extremism is not hard to define. Extremism is when a group of people become totally absorbed by an ideology to the extent that everything becomes justifiable for them to serve their ideology. They perceive their ideology as so great, so superior and so impeccable that any crime in the service of the ideology becomes justifiable for them. They will kill innocent civilians, they will kill women and children, because human life compared to their perceived sanctity and superiority of their ideology becomes totally insignificant, no matter how innocent. 

Extremism requires foot soldiers however. Extremists are not after winning the hearts and minds of the mainstream public, they are after brainwashing and recruiting foot soldiers as canon fodder. They are after brainwashing receptive minds of disgruntled individuals and recruiting  them to deliver violence, by turning ordinary individuals into zealot thugs, who misguidedly think their violence is for a good cause, they have an impact far greater than their numbers. Extremists want to seize power by whatever means available to them and not necessarily by a majority vote.

To do the above they need institutions, infrastructure and umbrella organisations and this is where the Western politicians have failed their citizens. In order to reach the highest common denominator for votes and attract as many votes from any quarter, they have preferred to ignore or simply not recognise how these building blocks function for breeding extremism.

For example it may surprise most readers that the Supreme Leader of Iran, who encourages his followers to chant death to England and burn the British flag, has a representative office here in London. Even when the Iranian embassy was closed in the aftermath of the attack on the British embassy in Tehran, the Supreme Leader's office in Maida Vale continued to thrive and carry on with its activities which include a Muslim school network that teaches its pupils loyalty to the Supreme Leader of Iran. The British Council in Iran however still remains closed. 

It may also surprise the readers, that a reactionary Ayatollah in Iran, Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi, a holocaust denier and someone who has issued a death fatwa against an Iranian rap singer in Germany has a registered charity in UK and also has a representative office in Harrow Road. Whats more, he has received financial aid and grant from Brent Council for "promoting religious freedom and tolerance"! The mind boggles at such stupidity and ignorance.

Throughout Western democracies and by using the loopholes in democracies, Mosques, Madressehs, book shops, charities, TV stations etc. are being set up by extremists as the breeding grounds they require to thrive. The existing laws often suffice in closing them down, but what is lacking however is the courage to apply the existing laws.

Extremism doesn't grow overnight, it needs to spread its seeds and then nurture them over the years through institutions and build an infrastructure that can thrive and spread. Until our politically correct politicians are reluctant to pluck the courage and dismantle these institutions and our voters don't push them into doing so, arresting and killing the perpetrators of terror acts, only creates martyrs who can easily be replaced by new more experienced and more hardened terrorists, as we have witnessed since the last decade.

Friday, November 06, 2015

An Ardent Follower of Imam "Romeyni" in Iran

This is a scene from Wednesday's annual organised nationwide rallies across Iran that marks the 36th anniversary of the takeover of the US embassy. They have found some disgruntled black man and shipped him to Iran to speak to the crowds outside the former US embassy in Tehran - ["The den of spies"].

As you can see from the video, he tells the crowds that if they remain united; then they will be able to "destroy America".  

The black man claims he is a follower of Imam "Romeyni" and that this mysterious Imam "Romeyni" was "one of the greatest leaders of the last time"!


Please note when he asks to "Destroy America" and chants "God Damn America", he probably means the 'policies of the US government' and it should not tarnish the Islamic Republic's sincerity in implementing the JCPOA.

Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Western Media Coverage of Gen. Hamedani, Copy/Paste of Official Iranian News

My main reason for starting this blog,  ten years ago, was my frustration at the way Iran related news was reported in the Western mass media. I felt the Tehran based correspondents  gave an unrealistic rosy picture of Iran so as not to upset the Iranian authorities and risk getting deported and I felt someone needed to tell the other side of the story.

Ten years on, with the advent of citizen journalism, social media and more news websites in English by other Iranians fluent in both English and Persian, we do not have to only rely on reading the news from media correspondents,  nevertheless it is still the mass media that has the largest readership and reading the mass media coverage of Iran news is still very frustrating at times.

One such recent sloppy news coverage was that of Brigadier General Hossein Hamedani, killed in Syria earlier this month.
Here is this ridiculous tweet by the Guardian's "Iran expert" who is responsible for making up and disseminating many current media myths and falsehoods about what is going on in Iran:

It is clearly obvious from the above, Saeed Kamali Dehghan had no idea who Brig. General Hamedani was and had never heard of him before!

The most important information that was not reported in the mass media's coverage of Brig. General Hamedani was that he was a commander of the Qods Force, the elite IRGC unit for overseas operations led by General Qassem Soleimani. In fact at times it seems the mass media in the West thinks the Qods Force is just made up of one person, Qassem Soleimani.

Also missing from the mass media coverage was Hamedani's prolific role in the crackdown on Iranian protesters in 2009, particularly on the Ashura uprising as the head of Tehran's 'Mohamad Rasool Allah Corps.'.
In his last media interview, Hamedani described how he had re-trained thugs and hoodlum who had been imprisoned before, for non-political offences, and had let them loose on the protesters. A crackdown method that has always proved very effective with the Islamic Republic ever since its inception.

Hamedani despised the leaders of the Green Movement. After Moussavi, Rahnavard and Karroubi, the leaders of the Green Movement, were imprisoned, Hamedani claimed "Even if they repent, they will not be forgiven".

In Syria he set up the National Defence Force, modelled on the Iranian ‘Basij’ militia". The NDF soon became another Islamic Republic engineered disaster in Syria. The indiscipline and lawlessness of the NDF not only led to much resentment by the regular Syrian military officers and the population but on 30th April this year, fighting broke out between the Syrian government security forces and the NDF outside Homs, resulting in several deaths.

Hamedani was blamed for much of Iran's failure  to bring the situation under control in Syria. He was recalled to Iran and demoted to be in charge of 'integrating the logistic equipments for Syria'.

News of his death was first announced by pro-regime journalists and websites, who said Hamedani was injured in a motor vehicle accident in Syria and died in the ambulance on his way to hospital:

The IRGC official statement that came out hours later said Brig. Gen. Hamedani was martyred while fighting IS forces. Of course to be killed by the 'Takfiri' infidels in battle is a whole lot more appealing than being killed in a road accident, but again the mass media bought the official Iranian line.

What we got in the Western mass media regarding Gen. Hamedani's death, was a more or less copy/paste of the official Iranian news, an Iranian IRGC "advisor" was killed by ISIS in Syria!

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

David Shariatmadari’s links with Iranian regime and the Guardian’s credibility gap

David Shariatmadari, the Guardian editor who recently authored a much-derided hatchet-job on the leading British Muslim liberal Maajid Nawaz, has long been something of an enigma. Homosexual and a self-described “sort of pan-theist”, he has nonetheless regularly painted a rosy picture of Iran’s theocratic government and has also, according to a variety of Muslim liberals, blocked reformist voices and those who are critical of the Islamic Republic of Iran from writing for Guardian's "Comment Is Free". 

Born in London to an English mother and an Iranian Muslim father, educated at the exclusive Christ’s Hospital School in Lincoln, Shariatmadari attained a degree in Arabic, Persian and Linguistics at Kings College, Cambridge, and subsequently a Linguistics MA at SOAS in London. On the way, he flirted with the right, including penning a sub-Rod Liddle diatribe against ‘diversity’ and civil service waste for the Spectator (“You can hardly move for diversity action plans and diversity monitoring grids”) and for the corporate world, writing for BP’s in-house magazine Horizon.

So far so typical of the Guardian’s upper-middle class commentariat. However, Shariatmadari also seems to harbour a dark family secret that he has never revealed publicly. His father’s brother, who he has described fondly in the Guardian itself, is directly implicated in some of the 20th century’s worst human rights abuses in the name of Islam, a fact never unacknowledged publicly by Shariatmadari. In one 2009 reminiscence for the Guardian on the 1979 Iranian revolution, Shariatmadari wrote lightheartedly of his childhood encounters with his unnamed Iranian uncle:

"My uncle, who sent us boxes of 'gaz' - a Persian delicacy from Isfahan - and pistachios every so often and had been put in prison by the Shah (three months solitary confinement for attending a protest against French actions in Algeria), started working for the new government. He came to see us when I was about three, with "protection" in tow. This man appears sheepishly in some of our photo albums. He was a student and assistant really, but in family myth he became a bodyguard with a gun"

In another article, he again casually references meeting this, still unnamed, uncle on a visit to Iran, writing of his “a simple trip to see my uncle and aunts, the town my dad grew up in, my grandfather's grave”.

Who was this mysterious, un-named but clearly powerful uncle, who arrived escorted by a bodyguard, who David so coyly describes as “working for the new government” of post-revolutionary Iran?

It can now be said with a high probability of certainty that Dr Ali Shariatmadari, one of Ayatollah Khomeini’s closest political lieutenants and the man entrusted with purging the country’s universities of suspected secular and ‘un-Islamic’ intellectuals, and particularly Leftists, is his mysterious uncle.

A former school teacher, university lecturer and a committed Khomeini zealot, who was indeed jailed briefly under the Shah, Ali Shariatmadari was initially appointed as Minister of Science in Iran’s relatively moderate and inclusive post-revolutiona interim government in 1979. 

However, once Khomeini’s Islamists took full control of the government later in 1980 and launched their assault on their erstwhile Left-wing allies, Shariatmadari was appointed Minister for Higher Education. Soon afterwards, in June 1980, Khomeini personally appointed him to co-establish the country’s Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution, the unelected body which to the present day imposes draconian restrictions on Iran’s cultural, educational and intellectual life in the name of revolution and Islam. 

Khomeini’s statement announcing this on 12 June, reads in part:

"Hence, their Excellency Mr. Mohammad Javad Bahonar, Mr. Mehdi Rabbani Amleshi, Mr. Hassan Habibi, Mr. Abdulkarim Soroush, Mr. Shams Al-e Ahmad, Mr. Jalaleddin Farsi and Mr. Ali Shariatmadari are made responsible to establish a headquarter and invite committed experts among Muslim professors, committed employees and other educated, committed and faithful layers of the society to form a council being charged to take measures in planning for various courses and for the cultural policy of the universities in future on the basis of Islamic culture and through selection of efficient, committed and vigilant professors and for other issues relevant to the Islamic academic revolution.”

In this dual role on the Supreme Council and as Minister for Higher Education, acting under Khomeini’s personal orders, Ali Shariatmadari led the Islamist regime’s purge of Iran’s intellectuals; universities were closed in 1980 for two years to facilitate the purges, over 800 lecturers and academics were dismissed, many into lives of poverty or exile, and others – including intellectuals, academics and poets – were jailed or executed after often cursory show-trials. An estimated 8,000 people, men, women, old and even teenagers were executed by the regime during the eighties.

While others on the Council grew uneasy and resigned, some such as Abdol Karim Soroush even later becoming opposition, David Shariatmadari’s gift-bearing “Uncle Ali” remained steadfastly loyal to the most conservative elements of the regime, being reappointed to the Supreme Council by Ayatollah Ali Khameini in 2007. Indeed, he 

continues to sit on the council today, a fact which David Shariatmadari has strangely never acknowledged in his numerous articles for the Guardian on Iran – even ones that directly reference his uncle!

No-one should be held guilty of the crimes of others. However, it is legitimate to ask to what extent David Shariatmadari’s family ties to the senior Iranian government officials impact his reporting on Iran in the Guardian? In one of his articles on the subject of Iran’s government, David Shariatmadari has made some lukewarm criticisms of the regime, referencing ‘the executions’ in passing, before issuing this spectacular cop-out:

"But who am I to talk with any authority? I experienced the Iranian revolution at one remove and was in no position to make sense of it. Even now it's impossible to give a judgment; there were millions of revolutions, experienced in millions of different ways." !!

Has moral equivocation ever been so immoral? The Iranian ‘Islamic’ revolution, partly thanks to the actions of David’s own ‘Uncle Ali”, has led to judicial stonings, the execution of adulterers, the public hanging from cranes of those guilty of ‘apostacy’, the discriminations against homosexuals, the systematic restriction of women’s rights, the casual routine execution of political prisoners (5,000 in 1988 alone) but who is David Shariatmadari, the nephew of Dr Ali Shariatmadari, to judge? How much do his family ties prevent him from reporting on the true nature of Iran’s government?

In other instances, David Shariatmadari has gone further than sitting on the fence and has actively defended the regime, perhaps out of misplaced familial loyalty. For instance, in one 2009 piece on Iran’s presidential elections, he said had voted for the more moderate candidate, Hossein Mousavi, and then concluded with a woefully inaccurate rose-tinted analysis of the situation in Iran:

"Iranian democracy is far more than the regime-orchestrated sham many westerners assume it must be. It falls short on two crucial measures: all parliamentary and presidential candidates are vetted by the conservative Guardian Council, and the supreme leader of the nation is, of course, unelected. But there is no denying that in 2009 we have had a real contest; the candidates have been exposed to scrutiny, there is significant difference between the policies on offer and the results are, as yet, anyone's guess."

Within days, however, Iran’s conservative faction had effectively rigged and stolen the election, arrested the winning candidates, and then cracked down violently on the resulting protests. As “many Westerners” – and many better informed Iranians – had correctly surmised, “Iranian democracy” was indeed a “regime-orchestrated sham”. Undeterred, rather than apologising for his woeful analysis, he soon after published a lengthy denunciation of Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) the Leftist Islamist opposition/rival group to the mullahs who helped the mullahs come to power in 1979 but then fell out with them when they received no share of the power. 

Now, if David Shariatmadari wishes to defend elements of the Iranian regime and to attack Muslim liberals and to block them from writing for his employers at the Guardian, this is his personal choice. However, it seems only fair for Guardian readers, and would-be liberal Muslim contributors, to know of his links to the regime and of his uncle’s role in the systematic persecution of Iran’s intellectuals. Indeed, given David Shariatmadari’s close family ties to Iran’s brutal theocratic and massively corrupt rulers’, his recent snipes at Maajid Nawaz for his “closeness to the law-making elite” can also now been seen as exposing jaw-dropping level of hypocrisy.

In his recent article on Nawaz, Shariatmadari took aim at what he calls Quilliam’s “credibility gap”. Maybe his next article should ponder his own deliberate silence over his uncle Ali’s role in the bloody persecution and the silencing of Iran’s leftwing and liberal intelligentsia, and then consider why The Guardian, like so much of the British Left, has its own “credibility gap” with Muslim and secular Iranians.

Before writing this post, I emailed, messaged and phoned David Shariatmadari to give him an opportunity to deny Ali Shariatmadari is his uncle, but he refused.

Thursday, August 20, 2015

Khomeini's Damnation of Mossadegh

What happens when the management of a company choose bad advisors? Well usually bad advise leads to undesirable consequences and the company suffers, but when the management is the US administration that appoints bad foreign advisors, then the undesirable consequences become global catastrophic calamities!

I am still so infuriated about Obama apologising to the mullahs in Iran for the toppling of Mossadegh in 1953. It shows that none of the things we talked about or wrote about after Madeline Albright made the same mistake,  including articles written by the likes of Ray Takeyh, are reaching the US administration which is more hell bent on listening to advice on Iran from their NIAC advisors, considered by many as a lobby group for the Islamic Republic. 

So it is with little hope that I am writing this post, except that this is not my opinion or that of a learned person's accurate recount of what really happened in 1953. This is Khomeini's damnation of Mossadegh in his own words. Perhaps by watching this, the future US administrations will learn that they need not apologise to the mullahs for the events of 1953 in Iran or consider it a reason to justify the actions by the mullahs today!

Perhaps Ayatollah Khomeini's damnation of Mossadegh will make the US administration realise that they really are listening to very bad advise!

"right from the beginning when Ayatollah Kashani saw that they [Mossadegh supporters] are misbehaving and spoke against them, what they [Mossadegh supporters] did was to put a pair of glasses on a dog and named it Ayatollah [audience cries]..this was at a time when his [Mossadegh] supporters speak so proudly of him, Mossadegh was not a Muslim either. That day I was in the house of one of Tehran's high ranking clerics, when I heard the news that they have put a pair of glasses on a dog and are walking him in the streets calling the dog, Ayatollah. I told that high ranking cleric that I was with at that time, this is now no longer a matter of personal animosity with Mossadegh, he will be slapped for this, and it wasn't long before he was slapped, and had he [Mossadegh]  remained in power, he would have slapped Islam"

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Baseless Concerns on How Iran's Unblocked Assets Will be Spent

There were immediate grave concerns by many on how Iran will be spending the $120 Billion it was to get back as is stipulated in the Vienna JCPOA. These concerns centred on two issues, the Islamic Republic was getting this windfall without having to implement anything in return and that the regime was most likely to spend this money on its proxies such as the Hezbollah, the Syrian regime, the Houthis, the Hashd Al-Sha'abi etc.

John Kerry made an unconvincing rejection of the above concerns in his interview with the BBC World by saying, Iran will only spend some of this on its proxies and in any case it would have carried on spending money on its proxies regardless of the windfall!

Well there is good news for those who became even more concerned after John Kerry made those statements and started questioning the sanity of the US secretary of state. Evidence has come about that Iran will spend some of that $120 Billion windfall on development and construction within Iran to improve the lives of ordinary Iranians.

Last week the revolutionary guards, amidst much pomp and ceremony, opened a new bridge in Deh Darreh, in the Lorestan province, West Iran. See picture of the opening ceremony:

There were huge banners of the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini and the current Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei erected for the purpose of the opening ceremony. The banners praised Ayatollah Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei as representatives of God on earth and all their services for building a better Iran.

All the key officials, including the local MP, who thanked the revolutionary guards for this impressive construction project, were there. 

A local beneficiary of this magnificent piece of engineering was asked to cut the tape to demonstrate the regime's grass root popular support, with a revolutionary guard doing his best to keep the tape steady while it was being cut. See picture:

Finally, the picture below shows the full extent of this 3 metre bridge which could become listed as the eighth wonder of the world:

The revolutionary guards generously paid for half the cost of building the bridge [$3000], while the other half was collected from the local inhabitants.

Picture of the first car to cross the bridge, without the bridge collapsing or showing signs of wobbling. Three Islamic Republic flags adorn the full length of the bridge on both sides. See picture:

Friday, July 17, 2015

Who Has Obama Been Listening to?

What does it tell you when the US president justifies the behaviour of the clerical theocracy in Iran with the toppling of Mossadeq in 1953 and thinks the United States should apologise to the mullahs for the overthrow of a "democratically elected regime in Iran"??!!!

Watch Obama's apology here:

It proves beyond any reasonable doubt that NIAC have got as far as the president's bedroom, right in between his bed sheets actually, and the likes of Mehdi Hasan have been teaching him the wrong history of Iran!

Read my article published in the commentator about the toppling of Mossadegh and why the clerics in Iran are the last people to apologise to for this:

Listening to Obama is like listening to NIAC

In response to Obama's pathetic uninformed apology about the 1953 events, Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khamenei, made the following reference to Obama's interview with Thomas Friedman during his important speech on Saturday:

"he [Obama] admitted to America's past mistakes. Of course, he said a hodgepodge of things. He admitted that the Americans made a mistake in Iran on the 28th of Mordad [Toppling of Mossadegh]......I would like to offer a friendly word of advice to these excellencies: today - after the passage of many years from the 28th of Mordad, the eight-year war and the defense that the Islamic Republic put up there - you acknowledge that you have made certain mistakes. I would like to say to you that you are making a mistake in the present time as well..."

It may also be a good idea to include the full translation of the Supreme Leader's speech, copied exactly from Ayatollah Khamenei's website. It is extremely well translated and accurate. 
In contrast to a weak, apologetic US president, the Supreme Leader is defiant, resolute and strong.
Unlike Western Media's translation of the speech, Supreme Leader never once refers to a "deal" but consistently calls it a document and that is the most important thing about the Supreme Leader's speech:

"In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings be upon our Master and Prophet, Ab-al-Qassem al-Mustafa Muhammad, and upon his immaculate and infallible household. And greetings be upon the Imams of Muslims and supporters of the oppressed, especially upon the Commander of the Faithful, the Mistress of all women, Hassan and Hussein - the children of mercy and the Imams of the guided - Ali ibn al-Hussein Zayn al-Abidin, Muhammad ibn Ali, Ja'far ibn Muhammad, Musa ibn Ja'far, Ali ibn Musa, Muhammad ibn Ali, Ali ibn Muhammad, Hassan ibn Ali and Hujjat al-Qaem al-Mahdi, Your representative among Your servants and trustworthy ones in Your land.
The first thing that I would like to say in the second sermon is to greet and congratulate all the brothers and sisters who say prayers and to advise them to observe piety.
The events that occurred in our region during the month of Ramadan and before that, were and still are bitter events. Unfortunately, some vicious hands made the blessed month of Ramadan bitter for the regional peoples. Many Muslim peoples in Yemen, Palestine and Syria experienced difficult days and fasts because of the evil plots of the enemies. All these events are important to our people.
Another issue is a domestic one: the issue of the nuclear negotiations. I deem it necessary to raise a few points in this regard. The first point is a word of thanks to officials in charge of these long and arduous negotiations - the honorable President and particularly the negotiation team who really made great efforts and worked hard. They will certainly be divinely rewarded whether the document that has been prepared will- through its determined legal procedures- be ratified or not. We have said this to those brothers in person as well.
Of course in order to ratify this document, there is a clear legal procedure that, by Allah's favor, has to be taken. We expect that these officials take the interests- interests of the country, interests of the people- into consideration by paying careful attention, so that when they deliver the matter to the people, they can do so with their heads held high in front of Allah the Exalted as well.
The next point is that by Allah's favor and grace, no one will be allowed to take advantage of this document in any way and to undermine the fundamental principles of the Islamic Republic whether this document is ratified or not. The defense capabilities and the security area of the country will- by God's grace- be protected although we know that the enemies have placed great emphasis on these areas. The Islamic Republic will never give in to the enemy's greed in the area of protecting its defense capabilities and security- particularly in this environment filled with the enemies' threats.
The next point is that whether this document is ratified or not, we will not abandon our regional friends: the oppressed people of Palestine, the oppressed people of Yemen, the people and government of Syria, the people and government of Iraq, the oppressed people of Bahrain and the sincere mujahids of the Resistance in Lebanon and Palestine. These people will always enjoy our support.
The next point is that our policy towards the arrogant government of America will not change in any way despite these negotiations and the document that has been prepared. As we have said many times, we have no negotiations with America on different global and regional issues. We have no bilateral negotiations with America. Sometimes, we have negotiated with them in exceptional cases such as the nuclear issue and we have done so because of our interests. The nuclear issue was not the only case. There were other cases as well which I have referred to in my previous public speeches. The American policies in the region are 180 degrees the opposite of the policies of the Islamic Republic. The Americans accuse Hezbollah and the Lebanese Resistance - who are the most self-sacrificing forces in their country in the area of national defense - of terrorism. There is no injustice worse than this. This is while they support the terrorist child-killing government of Zionism. How can one do business, negotiate and reach an agreement with such a policy? There are other cases as well and I will expand on them in other speeches.
Another point is about the Americans' blustering in recent days. In the recent days that the negotiations have been concluded, the American excellencies - their male and female officials - are busy blustering. Each of them is blustering in a different way. Of course, this is alright with us. Their domestic problems force them into blustering. They claim that they have dragged Iran towards the negotiating table, that they have made Iran surrender, that they have obtained such and such concessions from our country and other such claims. However, the truth is something else. They say that they have prevented Iran from building nuclear weapons, but this has nothing to do with our negotiations with America and other countries. They themselves know this and sometimes they have spoken about the importance of the fatwa that bans nuclear weapons.
According to the commands of the Holy Quran and Islamic sharia, we consider building, keeping and using nuclear weapons as haraam and therefore, we will not do so. This has nothing to do with them and with these negotiations. They themselves know that this is the truth. They know that what prevents the Islamic Republic from building nuclear weapons is not their threats and intimidating behavior. There is a religious barrier behind this and they know the significance of this fatwa, but they still claim that it was they who prevented Iran. They are not honest with their own people and they do not tell them the truth. On various other matters, they say that they have adopted such and such a measure about Iran's nuclear industry and that they have forced Iran to surrender, but they can only see Iran's surrender in their dreams.
From the beginning of the Revolution until today, five other U.S. presidents died or were lost in history dreaming that they would force the Islamic Republic to surrender. You too will enjoy the same fate. You too will never achieve the dream of forcing the Islamic Republic to surrender.
There was one point in the statements that the American president made in recent days: he admitted to America's past mistakes. Of course, he said a hodgepodge of things. He admitted that the Americans made a mistake in Iran on the 28th of Mordad. He admitted that the Americans made a mistake in helping Saddam Hussein. He admitted to two, three mistakes, but he did not mention tens of others. He did not speak about the 25-year oppressive and treacherous rule of the second Pahlavi monarch. He did not speak about the many instances of torture, looting, massacre, disaster and calamity that were caused by America. He did not speak about the destruction of the Iranian peoples' dignity and America's efforts to trample upon their domestic and foreign interests. He did not speak about the Zionists' domination, the killing of Iranian passengers on a passenger plane and many other things. Nonetheless, he mentioned a number of mistakes.
I would like to offer a friendly word of advice to these excellencies: today - after the passage of many years from the 28th of Mordad, the eight-year war and the defense that the Islamic Republic put up there - you acknowledge that you have made certain mistakes. I would like to say to you that you are making a mistake in the present time as well. In the present time too, you are busy making mistakes in different places in the region and particularly towards the Islamic Republic and the people of Iran. In a few years, someone else will turn up and show you your mistakes, just as today you are admitting to the mistakes that your predecessors made. You are making mistakes as well. Therefore, you should awaken, correct your mistakes and understand the truth. You are making grave mistakes in the region.
What I want to say to the people of Iran is that by Allah's favor and grace, the Islamic Republic has become powerful and strong. It has become stronger on a daily basis. It is 10, 12 years now that six great global powers - which are among powerful countries in the world in terms of economic wealth - have been sitting in front of Iran, trying to prevent it from pursuing its nuclear industry. They have said this openly. Their real goal is to open the nuts and bolts of the nuclear industry. They have said this to our officials many years ago. In the present time too, they pursue the same dream. The result of a 10, 12-year struggle with the Islamic Republic is that they have been forced to tolerate the operation of several thousand centrifuges in the country. They have been forced to tolerate the continuation of this industry in our country. They have been forced to tolerate the development of this industry and the continuation of research on it. Research and developing the nuclear industry will continue. The cycle of the nuclear industry will continue.
This is what they have been trying to prevent for many years, but today they have signed on paper that they have no problem with our nuclear industry. Apart from the power of the Iranian people, what other meaning does this have? This has been achieved because of the people's resistance and steadfastness and our dear scientists' courage and innovation. God's mercy be upon the likes of Shahriari, Rezainejad, Ahmadi Roshan and Ali Muhammadi. God's mercy be upon our nuclear martyrs. God's mercy be upon their families. God's mercy be upon a people who stand by their truthful claims and rights.
I would like to raise another point which is the last one. An individual has said that he can destroy Iran's army. Our predecessors used to call such statements, "boasting among strangers" [audience laughs]. I do not want to say anything more in this regard. If those who will hear this statement want to know the truth and if they are willing to use their experiences correctly, they should know that should any war break out - of course we do not welcome and begin any war - he who will emerge humiliated [literally: "head-cracked"] out of it, will be transgressing and criminal America."