THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO resistancenews.org

jeudi 7 décembre 2017

Hassan Nasrallah on Trump's decision regarding Al-Quds (Jerusalem)

Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah Speech on December 7, 2017. 

Hassan Nasrallah described Trump's announcement as a 'second Balfour Declaration', coming 100 years after the first, when Britain declared its aim to establish "a national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine.




Transcript:

[...] O’ brothers and sisters, as was said yesterday in several places within the Arab and Islamic world, we feel as if we are before a Balfour Declaration – a second Balfour Declaration. Now whether it is a coincidence, or whether it was planned, that 100 years after the first Balfour Declaration, the second Balfour Declaration has come to us…

The American stance use to form a barrier – in one way or another – before Israeli efforts to gain absolute control, and to fully implement the Zionist project, for al-Quds (Jerusalem). If we pay attention to this point, then we will understand the danger of this new American decision. Because what did Trump say to them? He said to them: this (city) of al-Quds (Jerusalem), all of it, (including) its western and eastern (parts), this al-Quds (Jerusalem) is yours. This is your land. This is your capital. This is under your sovereignty. Okay then, its finished, the tactical American barrier, which was related to diplomacy, and political administration of the negotiations, and the balancing of stances between the Zionist entity and Arab/Islamic states, all this fell yesterday following a fatal blow. Today, the enemy’s government (Israel), Netanyahu and his group, have no barrier before them after this American stance. [...]

We can frankly say after this announcement that the Islamic and Christian sanctities are (now) in great danger, and we must raise the alarm, yet what is in greater danger is the al-Aqsa Mosque itself – the al-Aqsa Mosque itself, which some day, no one should be surprised if we wake up and they say to us ‘there were some excavations under the al-Aqsa Mosque, and (God knows) what happened, (we were making) a tunnel or demolishing a wall, and the Mosque collapsed, it was just a mistake’. This can happen any night and at any moment. [...]

(The city) of al-Quds is the heart of the Palestinian cause, it is the centre of the Palestinian cause, the axis of the Palestinian cause, the essence of the Palestinian cause. When al-Quds is removed from this cause, then what remains? Nothing is left. What is Trump saying today to the Palestinians, the Arab and Islamic worlds, and the whole world? ‘There is no more Palestinian cause, this issue is over. (Rather), there are some people, Palestinians, some of them are present within Israel – according to his terminology – and some are present outside (of Israel), we need to find a solution for them’. ‘We need to see where we’re going to place them, maybe to Jordan, or perhaps give them Sinai, give them self-administration perhaps, what do we do with them in Gaza’, that’s the extent of the issue.

As for a Palestinian cause, and the heart and essence to this cause which is al-Quds (Jerusalem), as far as America is concerned, this came to an end yesterday. [...]

Let alone the fate of a (possible) Palestinian state, an independent (state) with the holy al-Quds (Jerusalem) as its capital. Okay where is al-Quds anymore according to the Americans, so that you can negotiate – the Palestinians are unanimous, regardless of whether they demand from the river to the sea, or accept the 1967 borders permanently or temporarily, (they are unanimous) that the capital of their Palestinian state, no matter what its size, must be east al-Quds (Jerusalem). The Americans today have crossed out this issue for good. If the Americans…who were the sponsors and guarantors – meaning the sponsors of the negotiations and the guarantors of agreements if they occur – (the Americans) are saying to us all and the Palestinians, that al-Quds (Jerusalem) is not part of the negotiations. That’s it, this issue is non-negotiable, nor even the subject of discussion. We can speak about other things – if you wish to continue negotiations – we can speak about other things. However, we will not discuss al-Quds (Jerusalem). [...]

At least apparently, all world states reject this decision, and do not support it, with varying language used. Also apparently at least, all Arab and Islamic states reject this decision and do not support it. Okay, that means that the world – all world states – are saying to Trump that we reject this decision, some say ‘reject’, some say ‘we’re regretful’, some say ‘we do not support’, some say ‘we denounce’, some say ‘we condemn’, the various terms and language of each stance. Therefore (Trump) does not care about anyone, nor does he accept from anyone, nor does he respect anyone. Neither his European allies, nor his allies in the Arab and Islamic world, nor the so-called international community. If all these states are not the international community, then who is the international community? Washington? And you know that the Americans sometimes wage war on nations and governments under the pretext that they do not respect the will of the international community. Okay, where is (Trump’s) respect for the international community, his respect for the international will, and his respect for world states? [...]

What we saw yesterday is contempt and disregard for all states, capitals, and governments of the world, for the sake of Israel, which we’ll get to at the end. This is one. Furthermore, (Trump) knows, and those in his administration know, that in this decision is an insult – not just disregard – rather an insult and attack on the feelings of 1.4-1.5 billion Muslims in the world at least, and with them also hundreds of millions of Christians who do not agree with this step and feel insulted and incited (by this decision). Okay, we don’t want to add up a huge number, (at least) hundreds of millions of Muslims and Christians yesterday felt insulted, that the city they sanctify, which contains their sanctities, and their religious and civilizational identity, and which represents their long and illustrious history, was just given away, just like that, to a manufactured Zionist state, and all of this history, values, and meanings were confiscated. [...]
 
All forms of protest, condemnation, denouncement, outcry, and denunciation across the Arab and Islamic worlds, rather across the world, must occur in order to be heard by the American administration, and felt by the usurping entity (Israel). [...]

The cutting off of diplomatic relations with Israel, the closing of its embassies and the expulsion of its ambassadors. This is the least (a state) can do. This is al-Quds (Jerusalem), this is al-Quds (Jerusalem), meaning this is the end of the line, this is the last thing that the Arab and Islamic worlds could expect. (Furthermore), ceasing all steps (aimed at) normalisation (of ties with Israel), which have begun taking place in more than one country in the Arab and Islamic world, and particularly in the Gulf. (Steps being taken) on social media, and (mutual) visits, meetings, and (on the) media level. All this must stop. And any step (towards) normalisation today is the greatest betrayal of al-Quds (Jerusalem) after what occurred yesterday. [...]

lundi 27 novembre 2017

Hassan Nasrallah: the US keep supporting ISIS in every possible way

Speech by Hezbollah Secretary General Sayed Hassan Nasrallah on November 20, 2017, following the victory of Al Boukamal and one day after the meeting of the Arab League which again designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization



Transcript:

[...] When we get to the point where Iraqi leaders will announce their final victory against ISIS and Syrian leaders will announce the final victory against ISIS, we will have to sit and talk, we will need to make calls, organize conferences and studies...

Of course, we will also need real festivities to celebrate the victory because it will be a great victory, a victory against the organization representing the greatest danger (for all) that soiled more than anyone the religion of Muhammad b. Abdillah, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, since 1,400 years. This will be the victory of humanistic and moral values against horrific bestiality, cruelty and violence. A victory that will have a huge impact on the cultural, religious, humanitarian, military, security, political levels, as well as on the very image (of Islam and Muslims) and at all levels.


And at that moment, we will have to repeat that the Iraqi people, the Syrian people, the Lebanese people, all the elites and all the leaders and peoples of the region should reflect, weigh and return to the question of the identity of the creators, supporters, advocates and promoters of ISIS, that enabled them to commit these terrorist massacres [US, UK, France, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar...], and the identity of those who have stood against ISIS, fought them, offered martyrs in this fight [Iran, Syria, Irak, Hezbollah, Russia] and inflicted a defeat on ISIS and all those who stand behind them. This is a discussion to be held with depth and strength so that the (Muslim) believers do not become victims twice of the same ills.


Returning to the victory of Al Boukamal [last important ISIS bastion in Syria, retaken by Syrian, Iran, Hezbollah and Russian forces]. What did the Americans do? As this will also be useful in the discussions that will take place then. In the battle of Al Boukamal, Americans did everything they could to help ISIS, except for one thing: open fire directly on the allied forces who worked for the liberation of Al Boukamal. It's the only thing they have not done, they did not open fire on us. The US Air Force did not hit the Syrian and allied forces liberating ISIS – sorry, liberating Al Boukamal from ISIS. Let's see some examples of what they did.

First, they provided air cover to ISIS throughout the whole region east of the Euphrates River, between the river and the Iraqi border. In this region, ISIS moved freely and openly with its strengths, tanks, heavy weapons, missiles, front lines, everything was secured by the Americans. The US Air Force has never struck them, while they claim to be at the head of an international alliance to fight ISIS, and they prevented the Russian and Syrian aircraft from approaching the area. And they threatened that in case of Russian or Syrian strikes East of the Euphrates, they would strike West of the Euphrates and therefore hit the allied forces attacking Al Boukamal. That is the first point: US coverage and comprehensive aerial protection for ISIS East of the Euphrates, and thus their front lines during our attack and when they retreated.

Second, the Americans sent their drones over the Allied forces that liberated Al Boukamal and provided – these are not frivolous charges, but clear data and highly sensitive information – ISIS with accurate information which then allowed them to hit the targets identified by the US drones.

Third, they conducted an intense electronic warfare that worked to blur all electronic devices used by offensive forces.

(Fourth), when finally ISIS was defeated in Al Boukamal, they did everything they could to help ISIS to withdraw, to protect them and save their lives. It's always the same story, it's not worth repeating. All they could do to facilitate and protect the retreat of ISIS, its officers and capacities from Al Boukamal to the East of the river, the Americans did. And ISIS was also welcomed and advised in areas controlled by the Kurds, the so-called Syrian democratic forces.

Sidebar: we will have to – it is a legitimate hypothesis – expect in the more or less far future that ISIS residues are reformed and become battalions of the “Syrian democratic Forces” directed, supported and now led by US forces in Syria.

And finally, during the battle and after it, US helicopters landed in the ISIS regions and extracted leaders, people (among the ranks of ISIS to save them). We should wonder about their role, their actions, the orders they received from Americans with ISIS. And it happened in many places and many times, especially in Deir Ezzor and in Iraq. This is what the Americans did.

And their real concern was that ISIS resists at Al Boukamal until the end, and that this offensive from Syrian and allied forces against Al Boukamal fails. And this is further evidence of the extent of US interference, of their support and protection for ISIS as long as possible.

We should remember that the Americans said that eliminating ISIS will require 30 years according to some, 25 years according to others, and 10 years for the most optimistic, but the Resistance Axis in the region managed to inflict a (near-final) defeat to ISIS in just a few years. This is a humiliation for American leaders and US policy. And this highly harmful interference continues until now. These American lies and deception must be revealed publicly to our peoples.

A few days ago, a friend and ally of the United States – it is not an Iranian official –, the President of Turkey Erdogan, openly accused the United States to continue to financially support ISIS. I tell him that they do not only help them with money. But let us be content with this statement. He is the President of a large and powerful state, and stated publicly, in a speech before the people – these are not the statements recorded in secret – that the United States continue to this date to support ISIS financially because the United States is still committed to using ISIS.

And the danger is that ISIS is restored again by the Americans in the next stage, with a new name, new slogans and new forms to accomplish the same missions accomplished by ISIS. [...]

jeudi 16 novembre 2017

Hassan Nasrallah: are Saudi Arabia and Israel preparing a war against Hezbollah?

Speech of Hezbollah Secretary General, Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, on November 5th, 2017, after the resignation of Lebanon’s Prime Minister Saad Hariri

Original videos deleted by Youtube. See Kafka 2.0: How Youtube’s Political Censorship is Exercised




Transcript: 

[…] My speech tonight will be devoted exclusively to this point (the resignation of Prime Minister Saad Hariri). In order not to begin by analysis or not simply rely on (disputable) analyzes, I want to start with (well-established) facts and data. Facts known by all ministers of the current government, that they heard directly from him, the head of government, and especially the ministers who gathered at the Council of Ministers responsible for implementing the (new) election law. 

What I will say now is (already) widespread in the media, but I want to stress it because our ministers have also heard directly and witnessed the whole process I am about to describe. And that is why we consider this as data, facts, and not an analysis made by far. 

You know that a few days ago, a Saudi official spoke and made long and acrimonious statements against Lebanon and Hezbollah, and spoke about hunting Hezbollah from the government and denied the intention to bring down the government. He made threats, solemn promises, vituperation, ranting, and it was then said that the head of the (Lebanese) government was quickly summoned to Saudi Arabia. And it is absolutely reliable information because he has canceled all his appointments and went to Saudi Arabia. The whole country – the leaders, ministers, political forces – were awaiting the outcome of this visit. I mean the first visit, and not the second, during which he announced his resignation. And everyone was awaiting the result.

Of course, during that first visit, everyone expected that pressure be exerted on Prime Minister Saad Hariri for him to resign and thus bring down the government. But when the Prime Minister returned from Saudi Arabia, and the Minister’s Council met, as well as the various ministerial committees, along with all the guests who met him, this is something certain and known to all, he said to all, and he also announced it in different ways, that Saudi Arabia supported the stability and security in Lebanon, the maintaining of the current government and dialogue among the Lebanese, and more, that he had obtained promises of very substantial subsidies, that they were prepared to set a fourth Paris Conference, and that we would get further aid for the Lebanese army. He said all this (many times and to different people, publicly and privately). He was comfortable, enthusiastic, and his behavior showed it clearly, and he announced for Monday or Tuesday a meeting of the Ministerial Committee responsible for implementing the (new) election law. 

Then again, the Prime Minister traveled to Saudi Arabia, and he announced his resignation from there. This is (indisputable) data. 

Naturally, you have seen the announcement of his resignation, its form. First, the news was broadcast by the (official Saudi) channel Al-Arabiya, and not by Future Movement’s (Saad Hariri's party) channel or by the Lebanese official channels. And secondly, the statement was recorded by Al-Arabiya channel, and other channels have only rebroadcasted it. The form of the statement, how this statement was read (laboriously and without any conviction from a printed paper), its content and scope, that you all saw, I will return to it shortly.  


I wanted to begin with this introduction that summarizes the facts. These are the facts. 

So far, no one knows exactly what happened. The government leader Saad Hariri visited Saudi Arabia, and during the 24 hours that followed, no one knows yet what exactly happened, and we must ponder over it. 

Between (the announcement that) Saudi Arabia supports the maintenance of the government, stability and security in Lebanon, the preparation of the 4th Conference of Paris, assistance to the Lebanese army, etc., etc., etc., until the sudden resignation in this way, (what happened?). 

All this data leads us to clear and absolutely certain conclusions, not assumptions. 

The decision was a Saudi decision imposed to Prime Minister Saad Hariri that he was forced to accept, and resigning was neither his intention nor his desire nor his will nor his choice. Final point. 

And I consider that all the Lebanese, be they politicians or journalists or (ordinary citizens) who followed the case agree with this conclusion.  

So. Even the way (which was made this resignation confirms that) the statement was from Saudi Arabia. Why was the man not allowed to return to Lebanon and to announce his resignation from Lebanon? It also raises a question mark. Even the written text (confirms it): we Lebanese know our (local and national) customs and expressions, we know the formulas that Prime Minister Hariri was using, written or unwritten. 

This text (resignation) is not a Lebanese text. This text was written by a Saudi, this style of expression is a Saudi style and the head of government has only read it. This is also clear (and undisputable). And everyone was surprised in Lebanon. 

Now, if someone says he expected it, he (may have) expected it in politics but certainly not in this way, not at this time and not so quickly. Everybody was surprised: the President of the Republic, the President of the Council, who are most concerned by this, the (various) political forces, and even the leaders, MPs and ministers of the Future movement (led by Hariri). 

There is no doubt that this resignation has created an atmosphere of anxiety in Lebanon and especially the analysis, slogans and threats that accompanied it. It calls on all Lebanese political groups to announce their interpretation, position and views on how to take action towards this important political event. That's why we Hezbollah tonight, declare the following: 

First, we in no way wanted the resignation. In all sincerity. We saw that things were moving in a reasonable manner. I'm not saying that all was well for everyone, but in general, things progressed reasonably, everyone met in the government, in ministerial committees and on the sidelines of the ministerial committees... The various issues were discussed, perhaps with some difficulties emerging in the discussions and for which outcomes were sought in order to go on, and that is why very important achievements have occurred since the formation of the government and so far as part of the current agreement (which allowed its constitution). And we consider that the government had the ability to maintain and achieve new accomplishments until the next legislative elections. The government was even able to organize the next elections. The atmosphere in the country was reasonable. That's the first point. 

Second, we ponder over the way the resignation was announced, and what it (clearly) shows. What (I'm about to say) has already been said in Lebanon, sometimes in an acerbic manner, sometimes not, but I'll just say it in two sentences: we ponder over the form in which the resignation was announced – the form, place, manner – and what it actually contains of evidence relating to the sovereignty and honor of Lebanon, as well as the honor of the head of government himself. Because even if he was forced to resign, it would have been more suitable and preferable that this man be allowed to return to Lebanon, to present himself to His Excellency the President of the Republic and to hand him his resignation, announcing it from the Baabda Palace, and then may the best happen by the grace of God. And this is not the first time a head of government resigns. 

Anyway, this resignation in this form reveals how the Saudi interference in Lebanese internal affairs and processes is, while Saudi Arabia calls and attacks others (Iran) on the pretext that these countries interfere themselves in Lebanese, Arab or other internal affairs. This is a clear proof. This is striking evidence of the extent, magnitude and shape of the Saudi interference. Even in this unseemly and insulting form. 

Thirdly, about the contents of the statement read by the Prime Minister (Hariri), we will not comment on them, and will not discuss its political content, despite the fact that this is a very violent statement with very serious and very dangerous accusations, but I will not get into a debate, and Hezbollah as a whole will not enter into any argument about the political content of the resignation announcement. Because we believe that this text is a Saudi text, a Saudi statement. And therefore, if we get into a debate on its political content, it would lead us to speak directly to Saudi Arabia. The adverse party would not be Saad Hariri or the Future Movement (to which he belongs). Because we believe, as I said, that this statement is not his. And what is written in that statement is (fundamentally) different from all that has been said by Saad Hariri since he became Prime Minister: the vocabulary he used, the expressions used, the way of thinking and acting, the political path taken since are totally inconsistent with the text and content. 

Fourth, we must all be patient and weigh our reactions: nobody should rush into analysis, (global) understanding, positions to take, nor the measures and plans of action, with the exception of those that maintain peace and security in the country, because what is required first is to understand the reason (of this resignation).  

So far, up to now, we are in contact with everyone, and we listen and gather information, we consult, and so far from what I know, in Lebanon no one has understood the real reason for the resignation. Everyone in Lebanon is surprised by the resignation and did not understand its real reason. Understanding the real reason is the key to the proper reaction to this development and to the steps that will follow. 

That is to say: For example, was the forced resignation of the head of government caused by reasons internal to Lebanon? In all certainty, no. And I consider that the Lebanese are unanimous on this point. The man did not want to resign, it went well, he spoke and exchanged with everyone, met everyone... He was active and had a positive role in both government meetings and ministerial committees. So there was no inside reason (in Lebanon) calling for the resignation. 

Some people in Lebanon, to settle small and petty accounts, will tell you that the head of government was upset by this or that party, this or that minister, this particular official... This does not constitute a reason to resign. These are just a settling of (intra-Lebanese) scores. There is no internal reason to resign. We must find the reason in Saudi Arabia. 

Well, then consider Saudi Arabia, and what might be the reason (of the resignation) from there. Is it an internal struggle in Saudi Arabia between princes, a struggle for the throne between the crown prince and (other) children in the (Saud) family? Is it a struggle between (different) political lines? Is it a financial struggle? Is it to get its hands on the wealth of so and so amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars or so-and-so amounting to tens of billions of dollars from the son of the ruling family, as is happening now? Is (the resignation) related to the internal struggle between the princes, and therefore, Prime Minister Saad Hariri was let go in the melee? Is it why he had to report to such and such a prince, to a particular line? There are legitimate questions. 

Or maybe the reason has nothing to do with the internal struggles (in Saudi Arabia) but is due to the fact that Saudi Arabia is not satisfied by the behavior and policy of Saad Hariri and wants to replace him with a Prime Minister who considers himself a hawk (more aggressive) that will be committed to the Saudi policy more closely and will take the country where (the Kingdom) wants to lead it? It is also a (legitimate) question. This may be the reason (of the resignation). 

Or maybe the reason is that Saudi Arabia has a plan to attack Lebanon, because it spoke of Hezbollah, Iran, (increasing) Iranian influence and the Iran-Saudi struggle. And it would therefore be a first step announcing a great battle (to come).  

To answer these questions, we must wait to see what it is all about and know the real reason that brought Saudi Arabia to impose on the head of the government to resign, why it took place in this way. And in addition to this (humiliating) form of resignation – for indeed, today, when certain information, analysis or rumors in Lebanon speak of the person of Saad Hariri, worrying about his fate – where is he now, is there under house arrest, is he imprisoned –, these are legitimate questions. Can he return to Lebanon, is he allowed to do so? These are perfectly legitimate questions, and this is not a Lebanese exaggeration. 

Because when you hear the news that Prince Mut'eb b. Abdullah b. Abdelaziz, son of the previous king, and Turki b. Abdullah, also the son of the King Abdullah I think, and Walid b. Talal b. Abdulaziz, the Minister of previous guards, constituting a considerable army in Saudi Arabia, the great princes of the royal family, the most prominent son and grand-son of the Kings who had the highest responsibilities within the Kingdom, and have huge networks and fortunes, when such persons are thrown in jail, it is our right to worry and say “O my brother, let us see our Prime Minister who resigned, where is he, what is his fate?” This concern seems perfectly legitimate to me. 

And that is why we must find the real reason, because this is clearly a Saudi initiative, a Saudi measure, but in what framework was this measure taken? Is it about replacing the Prime Minister? Is it to bring down the government and prevent a government being formed in Lebanon? Is it hitting the stability and security of Lebanon? Is it to launch a war such as Saudi Arabia triggered in Yemen and elsewhere, and supported in Syria and Iraq? In what context (does this resignation fit)? Is it in the framework of personal struggles, and therefore unrelated to Lebanon, the Lebanese government or government policies and practices of Prime Minister Hariri, and only due to internal problems in Saudi Arabia? 

All this, if the Lebanese manage to understand it in the coming days, I think it will help us to determine how to respond to the next step.  

Based on everything I just mentioned, we in Hezbollah call for the following: 

First, to stay calm, to patience and moderation, until the picture becomes clearer, until the situation becomes clearer and the real reasons are revealed. And therefore, we must not rush to (false) rumors, analysis, intimidation and slogans, and I will comment on a few shortly, only two. That's the first point. 

Second, we in Hezbollah confirm our primary commitment to the security, stability and civil peace in Lebanon. I call on all Lebanese not to worry, not to be afraid. There is nothing that justifies anxiety. At least on our part. If anyone thinks that what Saudi Arabia is going to do or say, or what she did or said, will take us to a virulent reaction, or bitter, violent actions, he is dead wrong. We will behave with full national responsibility and with the utmost calm, and we call on everyone to stay calm, and to act for the preservation of what is the dearest to us today in Lebanon, namely security, stability and civil peace in the country, in a region (the Middle East) to fire and sword, as you see, and that lives many political and security crises.  

I therefore add my voice to all the voices, and I say to the Lebanese and to all who are in Lebanon: stay calm and moderate, see how to respond to this question in a reasonable and prudent manner, balanced and responsible. We are a country, we have a State (apparatus) and institutions, a constitution and constitutional bodies, officers and judges in the country, and for sure we can overcome this ordeal. […] 

Is it anyone's interest [in Lebanon] to return the country to the situation it was in the past [lack of government]? In all certainty, there is no interest there [for Lebanon]. And any party, any person, any political leader or arrogant stubborn wishing to upset the situation in Lebanon and wants to return Lebanon to the previous situation (of institutional paralysis) should be accused (of treason by all Lebanese) because certainly he would not act in the interest of Lebanon but for foreign interests, in the interest of his masters who want to destroy this peaceful, stable and secure, confident and reasonably confident country.  

Sixth and finally – after the 4th and 5th points – the slogans that have been launched in the last two days are very strong. I said that I wanted to comment on two, but in fact I will comment on three. The first slogan is – and this, unfortunately, His Excellency Prime Minister Saad Hariri has a responsibility on this – that (in his statement), perhaps in order to justify the fact that he was not allowed to return in Lebanon, Hariri said he had begun to feel personally targeted in terms of security, etc. 

Then, the Al-Arabiya channel is the only one that broadcast news saying that the security services in Lebanon had uncovered an assassination attempt against Prime Minister Saad Hariri. Only Al-Arabiya channel. Then, the internal security forces in Lebanon have denied this, saying they had no knowledge of these (alleged) information. The Lebanese army and the General Security also issued statements or informed that such information did not exist, nor about Hariri, nor about any (other) political assassination (project). Nobody has given any indication or suggested such a thing. 

Perhaps they did that so that when asked why you forbade the resigning Prime Minister to return to Lebanon, they may argue that there is information that he was threatened with assassination, a pretext to keep him away from Lebanon. It is a likely hypothesis. 

Similarly, other people in Lebanon have joined them in this trend and began to speak categorically about political killings that will happen in Lebanon and they also determined which political parties will be affected by these murders, naming personalities from the March 14 movement (party of Saad Hariri). If in Lebanon there is judicial and security bodies, I hope they will summon (the author of these words) – he's a well known former minister – and say, “Well, you hold such words, what are your informations? Because your statements have (a very bad) influence on the atmosphere of the country, civil peace, security for all, prosperity, the economy...” They should summon him and ask him what is his information, what data he has. And if it is all idle talk, it is necessary to call him to account. For truly, when speaking of political killings in the country, he plays with people's blood, the blood of the people. 

That's the first point. It's not for me to confirm or deny, because it is the responsibility of the State, and the State has said through its military and security offices that there is absolutely no basis to these allegations (of planned murders). 

The second point that was also discussed, and which caused some anxiety in the country, is that the resignation of Prime Minister is the first step of triggering an Israeli war against Lebanon. Similarly, it has created concern in Lebanon.  

I want to say to the Lebanese, and I have talked at length about this on many occasions, that Israel is not working for Saudi Arabia. Israel is obviously working for the Americans, and obviously working for its own interests. An Israeli aggression against Lebanon, no one can deny its possibility categorically, but that it happens or not depends only on Israeli calculations, calculations (exclusively) Israeli. Israelis are unanimous on these calculations, they are unanimous since the 2006 war. Namely that Israel will launch a war against Lebanon if it is guaranteed that this war will be quick and brief, decisive, and with an (Israeli) victory clear and manifest, a low price and high gain. This makes unanimity in Israel. 

And Israel fears to embark on a war that does not fulfill these criteria because its impact on the Zionist entity and the price it would cost him on the material and moral aspects would be very high, and the strategic consequences for the very existence of the Israeli entity would be very serious. And that's why they scare and intimidate continually, but let us consider the Israeli language from 2006 until today: “If Hezbollah did this, if Hezbollah does this, we will do such a thing, we will launch a war, and the war will be such and such...” Israel always speaks in the conditional. 

Today, I will neither deny nor confirm (the possibility of an imminent Israeli aggression), but I tell you that in these calculations and measuring elements there is absolutely nothing about the presence or absence of a government in Lebanon, the identity of the head of government in Lebanon, the political line to which it belongs. These political factors have absolutely no impact on Israeli calculations when making the decision to attack Lebanon. Therefore, nobody should exploit this event and make it fit in a question that goes far beyond the resignation of the head of government, or the maintenance of the government, or the fall of the government.  

Today, more than ever, Israeli calculations regarding aggression against Lebanon also take much into account the regional and international developments who have become completely different from what they were during the July 2006 war. And on that as well, there is no need to expand. This is a concern for the Lebanese. If there are other areas of concern on this point, look in the Israeli calculations. 

And the third slogan, which I left to the end because it needs attention in a way, is that information reports – I do not know if it's true or not – say that the Saudi crown prince gathered or requested a meeting of the commanders of the armies of the Declared Alliance, which brings together thirty to sixty countries (God knows how many) and that it would coincide with the resignation of the head of government, and that Saudi Arabia was preparing a “Decisive Storm” (name of the Saudi aggression against Yemen) against Lebanon. 

Of course, in order not to give too much importance to this, it is not clear that anyone (in Saudi Arabia or elsewhere) has formally said so. There are some analysis and some slogans and even some hope (to this effect) on the part of some people in Lebanon, who maintain such hopes, but these are rumors that are not corroborated by any (proved) data and absolutely baseless and senseless. Saudi Arabia wants to gather its allies and launch an offensive against Lebanon, a “Decisive Storm” against Lebanon? 

I am one of the Lebanese who cannot very well understand this. Because yes, Saudi Arabia is launching an aggression against Yemen, but this is understandable, as it is a neighboring country and Saudi Arabia can therefore gather its armies and those of its allies to attack Yemen (as has been the case for over two years).   

But how such a thing would be possible in Lebanon? From what territory would they attack Lebanon? From Syria, where their project failed? Unless they want to come from occupied Palestine, and attack us from there? Or maybe they want to come from the sea (Saudi Arabia has not fleet). In military logic, even the average person can understand that these words have no meaning, no chance. How could this happen? 

Anyway, I do not consider that such an attack is possible, and more than that, if such and such Army Commanders could really be helpful to the (Saudi) data in any way, they should therefore help him (to extricate himself) from Yemen. In the war in Yemen, they are completely stuck, and they are completely overwhelmed by this battle because of the courage and endurance of the Yemeni people, its sacrifices and heroism, despite the pulverized bones, killings of children and the daily massacres in Yemen. Today there was a massacre, and every day there is a massacre. Let Saudi Arabia thus end up with its “Decisive Storm” in Yemen before speaking of a similar offensive against Lebanon. 

Before even talking about what may be the plan of Saudi Arabia against Lebanon, what they think and what they want to do, I think everyone should first wait to see what will become of Saudi Arabia itself. Because the scale of arrests and the names that were mentioned as having been arrested with their fortunes seized are not small names. It is not known when is Saudi Arabia going. I do not want to talk or give an assessment because I have not (yet) accurate data or information on this subject. Before discussing the measures and Saudi Arabia plan against Lebanon, let us look first what happens in Saudi Arabia, and of course what happens in the region, and then we wll be able to speak with some confidence. 

Meanwhile, and in the coming days we are going through, I call on all Lebanese and all residents in Lebanon (Palestinian refugees and Syrians expatriates ...) to peace and quietness, to protect the current stability, to dialogue, to avoid any political escalation, not to worry. It is obvious that no one (in Lebanon) has any interest in going in that direction. We should wait for the national measures liable to be taken (at state level) by His Excellency the President of the Republic Michel Aoun in consultation with the President of the Chamber of Deputies, political parties (represented in the government) and all political forces in Lebanon. And God willing, all together and with mutual support and sense of responsibility, we will manage to overcome this crisis and this step. 

May God grant you success and health. May God's peace be upon you and His mercy. 

lundi 9 octobre 2017

Farewell letter from the martyr Ernesto 'Che' Guevara to Fidel Castro

Address of Commandante Fidel Castro Ruz, Prime Minister of the Communist Party of Cuba and Prime Minister of the Government of the Republic of Cuba, to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba in Havana on October 3rd, 1965Published on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of Che's assassination for the CIA, on October 9th, 1967

Source : http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/1965/esp/f031065e.html


Translation: http://walterlippmann.com/fidel-castro-speech-october-3-1965, http://sayed7asan.blogspot.com
  
The farewell letter of Commandante Ernesto Che Guevara was read by Fidel Castro on October 3rd, 1965 in Havana, in front of the Central Committee of the Cuban Communist Party and before the cameras. After his return from Africa in February 1965, the Che disappeared from the public scene without official explanation, causing questions in Cuba and especially abroad. The rumors evoked disputes between Fidel and the Che, and even a real purge. This letter, written by the hand of the Che, proves the unfounded character of these calumnies, which the reactionaries (and pseudo-revolutionaries) continue to propagate to this day in order to discredit Cuba.

Even before the beginning of the Cuban Revolution, Che, a convinced internationalist, had pledged himself alongside Fidel Castro on the condition of being free to pursue his revolutionary and anti-imperialist struggle under other heavens after the Victory in Cuba. His experiences in Congo and Bolivia were known only after his death, with the publication of his War Diaries by the Cuban government.



Original videos deleted by Youtube. See Kafka 2.0: How Youtube’s Political Censorship is Exercised

Transcript:

[...] There is an absence in our central committee of one who possess all the merits and all the virtues in the highest degree to belong to it and who, however, is not along the members of the central committee. 

Around this the enemy had been able to weave a thousand conjectures. The enemy has tried to confuse and to sow discord and doubt. And patiently, because it was necessary to wait, we have waited. That is the difference between the revolutionary and the counterrevolutionary, between the revolutionary and the imperialist. We revolutionaries know how to wait. We know how to have patience. We never despair and the reactionaries, the counterrevolutionaries, the imperialists continue in perennial desperation.

They live in perennial anguish, in a perennial lying of the most ridiculous, of the most childish. When we read some of the things about those officials, come of those Yankee senators, one asks: “But how is it possible that this gentlemen is not in a stable instead of belonging to what is called a “Congress.” (applause) Some of them speak veritable barbarities. Any they have a tremendous habit of lying. They cannot live without lying. They live in anguish. If the revolutionary does something, which is what Cuba was always going, such as that to which I referred at the beginning, they see truculent things, terrible things, a plan behind all that. How ridiculous. In what fear, they live.

One asks oneself: “Do they believe that?: “Do they believe that?: “Could they believe all they say?” “Do they have a need to believe all they say or can they not live without believing all they say or do they say all that they do not believe?” It is difficult. It would be a question for doctors and psychologists. What do they have in this minds? What anguish is that? They see a maneuver in everything, a truculent, dark, terrible plan. And they do no know that there is not better tactic, nor a better strategy than to fight with clean weapons, than to fight with the truth, because those are the only weapons which inspire trust. They are the only weapons which inspire faith. They are the only weapons which inspire safety, moral dignity. And it has been with those weapons that we revolutionaries have been vanquishing and crushing our enemies.

You will never here a lie from the mouth of a revolutionary. There are weapons which do not benefit any revolutionary, and no serious revolutionary needs to resort to lies–ever. His weapon is reason, (word indistinct), the truth, the ability to have an idea, a purpose, a position; in short, the moral spectacle of our adversaries in truly lamentable. And thus, the diviners, the interpreters, the specialists in Cuban affairs, and the electronic brains have been working incessantly to solve this mystery, whether Ernesto Guevara has been purges, (applause) whether Ernesto Guevara was ill, whether Ernesto Guevara had had differences, and other questions of the same ilk.

Naturally, the people have confidence. The people have faith, but enemies will say these things, especially abroad, to slander him and the communist regime, dark, terrible things: men disappear, they do not leave a trace; they do not leave prints; there is no explanation; and we told the people at this time, when the people began to note this absence, that in due time we would talk. We would have some reasons to wait, we are developing surrounded by the forces of imperialism.

The world is not living in normal conditions. As long as the criminal bombs of Yankee imperialists are falling on the people of Vietnam, we cannot say that we are living under normal conditions. When more than 100,000 Yankee soldiers land there to try to smash the liberation movement, when the soldiers of imperialism land in a republic which has equality of rights, judicially, as do all the rest of the republic of the worlds, as in Santo Domingo, to trample its sovereignty, (applause) the world if not living under normal conditions. When around our country, the imperialists are training mercenaries and organizing vandalic attacks, in the most unpunished manner, as in the case of (few words indistinct), when the imperialists threaten to intervene in any country of Latin America or of the world, we are not living under normal conditions.

And when we were fighting in clandestine conditions against the Batista tyranny, we revolutionaries did not live in normal conditions. We had to adjust to the struggle. In the same way, although the revolutionary power exists in our country, in regard to the realities of the world, we do not live in normal conditions, and we shall have to adjust to this situation. And to explain this, we are going to read a letter here, in handwriting, here copied by typewriter, from Comrade Ernesto Guevara, (applause) which is self-explanatory.

I thought of telling the story of our friendship and our comradeship, how it began, under what conditions it began and how it developed, but it is not necessary. I am going to restrict myself to reading the letter. It says:

Havana–The date was not written down because this letter was to be read at the moment we felt it most convenient, but keeping to strict reality, it was delivered on 1 April of this year, exactly six months and two days ago, and it says the following:


Havana, Year of Agriculture [1965].


Fidel, 

At this moment I remember many things: the day I met you in the house of Maria Antonia, when you asked me to come with you [to participate in the Cuban Revolution] and all the tension of the preparations.

One day they came by to ask who should be notified in case of death, and the real possibility of this (death) struck us all. Thereafter, we knew it was true, and that in a revolution one triumphs or dies, if it is true. Many comrades fell on the road to victory.

Today, everything has a less dramatic tone, because we are more mature; but the event repeats itself. I feel like I have accomplished the part of my duty that tied me to the Cuban revolution in its territory, and I take my leave of you, of the comrades, of your people who is now also mine.

I formally resign my positions in the leadership of the Party, my position as Minister, my rank of Commander and my Cuban citizenship. Nothing legal binds me no longer to Cuba, except the links of another kind that cannot be broken, unlike titles or ranks.

Reviewing my past life, I believe I have worked with sufficient honesty and dedication to consolidate the revolutionary triumph. My only fault of some seriousness, is not having had more confidence in you from the first moments in the Sierra Maestra and not having been able to discern quickly your qualities of leader and revolutionary.

I have lived magnificent days, and I felt at your side the pride of belonging to our people in the luminous yet sad days of the Caribbean [Missile] crisis. Rarely, a head of state was as bright as you were in these circumstances. I am also proud to have followed you without hesitation, to have fully adhered to your way of thinking, and to have been able to see and appreciate the dangers and principles the way you did.

Other nations of the world summon my modest efforts of assistance. I can do what is denied to you due to your responsibility at the head of Cuba, and the time has come to part.

Know that I do it with a mixture of joy and pain. I leave here the purest of my hopes as a constructor and the dearest of all the ones I love. And I leave a people who adopted me like a son. It tears a part of my soul. On the new battlefields, I will bring the faith that you inculcated me, the revolutionary spirit of my people, the feeling of accomplishing the most sacred of duties: fighting against imperialism wherever it may be. It comforts and heals advantageously the deepest wounds.

I repeat once again that I free Cuba from all responsibility, except that which emanates from its example. If one day, in other lands, occurs to me the fateful hour (of martyrdom), my last thought will be for this people and especially for you.

Thank you for your teachings and your example to whom I will try to stay true to the last consequence of my actions. I was always in total agreement with the foreign policy of our Revolution, and I still am. Wherever I find myself, I will always feel upon me the responsibility of being a Cuban revolutionary, and I will behave as such. I leave nothing material to my children and to my wife, and this does not grieve me. I am happy that it is so. I ask nothing for them, because I know that the State will give them what they need to live and get an instruction.

I have much to say to you and to our people, but I feel that it is useless, because words cannot express what I would like to say, and it's not worth blackening more paper.

Until victory, always.

Homeland or Death !

I embrace you with all my revolutionary fervor.

(Signed :) Che.”