Speech of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on Martyr's Day

I take refuge in Allah from the stoned devil. In The Name of Allah, The Most Compassionate, The Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, The Lord of the World. Peace be upon our Master and Prophet – the Seal of prophets – Abi Al Qassem Mohammad and on his chaste and pure Household, his chosen companions and on all prophets and messengers. Peace be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessings.

First, I would like to welcome you and thank you for your attendance. On Martyr's Day, we without fail would like to pay a special salute to the families of the martyrs who offered their dear sons for the sake of Allah Al Mighty. Today we gather to mark the anniversary of these dear ones.

In the time limit, I will try Inshallah to tackle several points and relevant issues. I will start with what is directly linked to the anniversary – with the Martyr's Day which is marked on 11/11.

Indeed everyone knows that on this very day – on November 11, 1982, the qualitative self-martyrdom operation was executed by the Prince of Self-Martyrs Ahmad Qasir. Last year, we said that the operation was the most powerful. A year later, we again say that it was the most powerful in the history of Arab-Israeli struggle. It had the most powerful consequences and repercussions, and it set the most powerful foundations. This operation broke the barriers of fear. Going back to 1982 and the atmosphere which was prevailing then, we say that this operation broke the barriers of fear and the chains of despair. It gave a totally different scene. It changed the faces as well – meaning the faces of people - namely Sharon and his allies. It marked the onset of a new era which started to come into sight. It is the time of defeat for the enemy and victories for the resistance.

On this very day every year, we meet to mark the anniversary of all martyrs at a time. On this very day, we recall all martyrs. Their faces and smiles are portrayed before our eyes. Thus our minds, hearts, memories and consciences recall their words, memories and wills. Thus mixing emotions pervade us. We feel sorrow and joy. We feel sad. That is normal because we are human beings. We feel sad for the departure of the dear ones: the father, the son, the brother, the uncle, the son, the husband and the wife. We feel happy for marking the thirtieth year for the achievement, the victories they made by their blood. We feel happy for they have performed their jihadi obligation with the first bullet and the first onset. We feel happy also for them enjoying heaven and proximity of the King of kings and the Lord of lords. This takes the reigns of our minds and hearts and makes us more determined and willing to carry on their way and to achieve their goals and guard their wills and to be faithful as they were so and to be truthful as they were so and to make sacrifices as they did and to belittle difficulties as they did and to adore those they adored as they did… so that Allah reward us with dignity and happiness as He rewarded them.

We salute the martyrs: Peace be on our dear martyrs. Peace be on your souls and bodies. Peace be on your faces and names. Peace be on your tears and blood. Peace be on your woes and yells. Peace be on your pains and aspirations. Peace be on your prayers and fasting. Peace be on your patience and tolerance. Peace be on your truthfulness and faithfulness. Peace be on your chastity and purity. Peace be on your happy honorable ending. May Allah unite us with you and offer us your intersession and the intersession of your masters - Mohammad and his chaste Household (Peace of Allah be on them all).

Brothers and sisters! On this Martyr's Day, the Islamic Resistance has fully completed its thirtieth year. So we are talking about 11/11/1982, and we are now on 11/11/2012. So they are 30 years. Indeed, I am talking about the history of the Islamic Resistance. Indeed, there are other resistance movements which existed before us and are thus older than us. We respect and highly esteem them. Islam also teaches us to respect whoever is older than us in age and in experience. However, today we are talking about a young man who belonged to us. He staged the operation 30 years ago. We must pose for a while on this past through which we will usher into the future. They are 30 years of hard work, sleepless nights, industrious persistence, exhaustion, blood, tears, anxiety, dangers and difficulties. They are also 30 years of achievements and victories. We are indeed talking about 30 years and many men in this resistance whether martyrs or those who are still alive. First, how old were they? They were 18, 19 and 17. Martyr Ahmad Qasir was 18 years. Today we are marking his anniversary. Many of the martyrs as well as the fighters who are still in the battlefield are of this age. What the Prince of Believers (Peace be upon him) says about himself in the Speech of Jihad applies on them: "I started the jihad while I was not yet 20, and here I am about to be 60". This is the case of many of my brethren resistance men who became white-haired. I too have become white-haired too. However, this resistance has always expressed a renewing generation…. Today it includes men of 60 and young men of 17, 18 and 19. This is the strength and the vitality of this resistance.

Indeed we adhere to this past. We are before 30 years of full experience - our experience: what took place in the country during these 30 years, the stances, the forces, the events, and the developments since June 1982 till this very day…. We adhere to this past and to this part of our history. That's because the present is the outcome of the past, and it sets the foundations of the future. The past for every person is a source of inspiration and morals from which man benefits from his points of strength as well as from his points of weakness, from his mistakes and bad deeds as well as from his correct and good deeds. If he was a reasonable human being, he learns from his experiences and the experiences of others. It is possible through benefiting from the past and the morals of the past to understand the future and thus build the future.

Some people want us to forget this past – our past. Some people want the Lebanese and the peoples of the Arab and Islamic countries to forget our past too. This very group of people wants us to forget their past too and the Lebanese and the Arabs to forget their past as well to be before a present which is ruled with deception, falsification and an overthrow of norms and considerations. Thus the historical fighter becomes a collaborator or at least his nationalism and Lebanese identity are suspected, while the historical collaborator becomes a national Lebanese who is asked to give certificates in nationalism. Thus the committed careful person becomes a criminal killer based on a sheer political accusation while the person with a history of killing, crimes and perpetrations in broad daylight which need no evidence or judicial investigation an honorable moral person who lectures on chastity.

If we want to refuse this status quo and we don't want this status quo to be consecrated, this must remain clear before our eyes.

Today, we find it difficult when someone asks for certificates in nationalism for those who have fought, offered sacrifices and whose bodies were shattered, for those who offered their children, for those who spent their prime days in resisting the occupation, for those who resisted, liberated Lebanon and made Lebanon proud, defended Lebanon and the dignity of all the Lebanese and saved Lebanon from the Israeli conspiracy and the Israeli era, from those who were in 1982 and for long years allies to Israel, collaborators for Israel, cooperators with Israel, fighting next to Israel, breaking into Lebanese cities and villages and Palestinian camps, shedding blood and spying for Israel and acting as a prison guards under the Israelis.

It is very painful that in 2012, this be the state of the country. The platforms are open before those people to give certificates. It is difficult for us that for years we were asked to sit on the dialogue table so that others discuss with us the defense strategy, how to defend our people, honor, country, our country's wealth and the sovereignty of our country while some people in the other party have all this history. We find that very difficult on us. This will be the foundation for a point later; so I am not only saying so to express emotions. No I will build on it a stance.

Thus I say as we usher to the present, when we want to approach the present and evaluate its events and personalities, the past must remain before our eyes. We do not want to remain adherent to the past. We do not want to freeze in the past. We do not want to destroy the country for the sake of the past. No! However, it is not allowed to overlook this past when we evaluate personalities, stances, events and backgrounds. When we want to comprehend where this country is being pushed to, where they want to take Lebanon to through the internal and regional situations. If we locked out this past, we will make wrong evaluations and comprehensions. Consequently, we will take wrongs stances. Here, I am talking about the Lebanese people as a whole. I hope I will be able to address the entire Lebanese people through this platform. I will come back to this point and I would like to base on it a stance.

I will talk now about the resistance which is the entity, framework, track and project of these martyrs. I want to assert on Martyr's Day that we are continuing in our performances in the resistance, in increasing our readiness to defend or country, in developing our capacities, expertise, and human and materialistic capabilities. On all levels, we will carry on working without stopping or tedium. Let no friend or foe imagine that what is said in Lebanon and the region and what is taking place or what is evoked would influence our will, determination, resolution and work day and night as far as the resistance is concerned. This is another point of research. Moreover, with a clear viewpoint and very great expectations for the future, today we reached a place in the resistance – with the blessing of these martyrs – in which the enemy is acknowledging the actual status of the deterrence power which was found by the resistance in Lebanon. I do not care if some of the Lebanese acknowledge the deterrence power or not. If they acknowledge, that would be great. I care whether the enemy feels that there is a deterrence power or not. The goal is defending Lebanon and the people of Lebanon. I would like to defend my country, my people and my family as one of them. This is my religious, moral, humanistic and national obligation. What is important is whether the enemy acknowledges this fact or not.

I may clearly and frankly tell you that following July War and after all the developments that took place afterwards and through the new formulas which were imposed and which the Israelis know one way or another or were revealed, the Israelis today indeed take the fact of deterrence of the resistance in Lebanon for granted. This is achieved. This is a point of consensus among the Israeli political, military, security leaders, parties, media figures, experts and public opinion. No one in the Israeli entity says today that there is no deterrence in Lebanon. No! There is deterrence. There is deterrence both sides. Israel has deterrence power, and this is not something new. This has been true since 1948. It deters all Arabs and all Muslims.

What is new is that Lebanon has found a deterrence formula. This is what is new. Some say that Lebanon is deterred. It is deterred before I was born and before the birth of all the martyrs whose memory we are marking today. Lebanon is deterred and the entire region is deterred by the Israelis. The new strategic factor is that the resistance in Lebanon could find a new deterrence formula. This new deterrence formula is being consecrated, deep-rooted and established firmly through the army-people-resistance-formula.

In this framework, Ayoub drone was an advanced step in this track and new evidence on this determination and will. Everyone knows, the military generals know and today all the people know the importance of information in any military battle. If you have an army with marvelous capacities – air force, tanks, cannons, rockets – but which lacks information about the enemy, it would be as a blind elephant which slaps right and left. It would lose its capacities and capabilities and efforts in the wrong place. One of the simplest factors in any battle is that the one who is fighting in one front has precise, clear, overt and true information about the other front. Today the resistance is taking great steps forward in this domain. The Israeli enemy knows what it means that the resistance has true and precise information of this kind. This might not be known by those who do not want to know. However, we are in a battle with an enemy. Thus you let him know this so that his deterrence increases.

Some would ask: What does Ayoub drone have to do with deterrence? Ayoub drone has to do with deterrence in the sense that if you have a definite missile power and you say the airport for the airport, the seaport for the seaport, the power plant for the power plant, Tel Aviv would be hit not only if Beirut was hit but also if Dahiyeh was hit and that as a resistance I can hit precise targets, the Israelis would say if you have rockets but no information that this is meaningless. If you have rockets but you lack precise facts, your threat would be groundless.

The rocket integrates with precise information. Ayoub drone and its likes besides other sources provide precise information. This is the weigh of Ayoub drone in the deterrence formula.

Some would ask that you dispatched a reconnaissance plane. Is this deterrence? No! This is part of an integrated system which leads to deterrence with the enemy. Well, if we took this development into consideration, I will comment on it for a while and then I will add it to the first point which I mentioned.

How did the Israelis deal with Ayoub drone? Since then, I did not give a speech.

When the incident first took place, at the very first day and hour, Netanyahu and Barak said this was a dangerous incident and we will punish who caused it. Indeed, they waited for the first, second and third day to know where it came from. There were several possibilities and suppositions. However, for the first impression, they supposed that it was heading from Gaza or Sinai. That's why Netanyahu lifted the ceiling of his threats. Why is it so? That's because Gaza is daily under aggression and bombing and shelling and this is its case today. During these days it is being under more aggressions and it is offering martyrs and wounded. He said we would pour our anger on Gaza. Well, he did not get any information about its source. Then we announced our responsibility. So it is not he who held us responsible. We rather said we are responsible and Gaza and the resistance in Gaza are blameless. We are responsible of the drone, and we assume the responsibility of the drone. What did the Israelis say then? What did they do? Nothing. It's similar to the colloquial saying: He packed his things and left. Why was it so? Today there is a difference status quo in Lebanon called deterrence power – it is not easy thus for the Israelis to step in Lebanon, strike, demolish, aggress and ruin. Things are not that easy anymore. The Israelis remained silent. On the contrary, Israeli comments went in the direction of showing the seriousness of this issue, this drone and its background, what the resistance seeks from this drone, where did it reach, how it penetrated, and the Israeli failure. Here the story ended.

However, on the Lebanese level, what took place? That's the lesson to be drawn on the Lebanese level too. March 14 Bloc started yelling and lamenting and wailing. They issued collective and individual statements. They marked the first week following the incident and the fortieth day of lamentation on the Israelis. The Israeli condolence was over. Still condolences for March 14 Bloc were not over yet.

On the contrary, notice the language they used. This is a violation of Resolution 1701. This is an aggression. This makes Lebanon fall in trouble. This gives the Israelis the right to strike. They said so while the Israelis did not say so. They themselves said this gives the Israelis the right to wage a war on Lebanon.

By the martyrs whose memory we are marking, I swear that some of them – as I do not to say all of them – were whole-heartedly praying Allah saying: O Allah! Let the Israelis strike and stage an aggression. The Israelis failed them, and this is not the first time the Israelis do not live up to their expectations. That's because the Israelis work according to their project; they do not work under March 14 Bloc. They work for their project and interest. In July War and following the capture of the two Israeli soldiers, the war came to be a US project executed by the Israelis. This was later made clear through documents and books. So the project was not even an Israeli project. It was a US project in which they engaged the Israelis within the Neo Middle East Project.

How are we to interpret this stance taken by a Lebanese party from a Lebanese development on the level of defense and deterrence? How are we to comprehend it?

The launching of the drone must have rather been a source of pride to them as Lebanese. They must have instead said: "That's great! May Allah bless you and your minds, seriousness and efforts. If anyone assisted you, we are grateful to them too. However, please this needs lengthy discussions and a dialogue table and a defense strategy." That would have been fine. However, it is really noticeable when such a development made by the resistance becomes a source of condemnation and sorrow for a Lebanese group.

Indeed, this day after day asserts that this group does not in fact believe in the resistance and has never believed in it one day. Allow me to divide them into two groups: A group of them never believed in the resistance. They were with Israel and an ally to Israel. The other group was with Syria and is now with March 14 Bloc. This group did not believe in the resistance even when they were an ally to Syria. They are rather with the side that meets their aspirations. They change their skin to match the circumstances and conditions.

This is the truth. We are before a group that does not believe in the resistance.

Those who are arguing about the defense strategy do not in fact believe that Israel is an enemy. They do not believe in resisting the enemy as a Lebanese choice. They rather believe in the other choice – negotiating with Israel and succumbing to Israeli conditions. For thirty years, they have been talking as such. Perhaps some one might say: O Sayyed where do you get this from? Thirty years? Add them. The stances, biographies of the personalities and political forces and the events and developments say so.

Based on these two points, history takes thirty years of such stances into consideration. As such we take the stance of the resistance into consideration too.

Here I want to mention two results. The first outcome is an idea or a choice. Someone may say: Let's see. What will we do? I tell all the Lebanese: Put these thirty years – from 1982 to 2012) before your eyes. What took place in them as far as the Israeli issue, the Israeli project, the Israeli occupation, and the Israeli hegemony are concerned and then came the resistance, May 17th, the pullout from Beirut, the withdrawal from Sidon, Tyr, Nabatiyeh, West Bekaa until reaching the borderline in 2000, the war of 2006 until this very day. So we are talking our experience as Lebanese. This is our experience. We are not talking about the experience of our Palestinian, Syrian, Jordanian, or Egyptian brethrens or October War or the like. We are talking about our experience as Lebanese. We have went through this experience with our sweat, blood, efforts, and sleepless nights. This has led to the demolition of our houses, the mining of our fields, and the whipping our skin by the Israelis and their collaborators in Khiam Detention Center and other prisons. We have passed through all this experience ourselves. Take this into consideration with its victories, and the achievements it made to the effect of liberating, defending and empowering Lebanon.

Look at all what took place in our surrounding and what is taking place now. I will not talk extensively. Gaza is being bombarded daily. Martyrs are falling every day. There are tens of martyrs and scores of wounded. So what is the formula? Following the same sequence I say where the Arab League is. They would tell us again this is the united Arab strategy. This is the same speech which was being said in 1982. Were we to wait for the Arab League, settlements would have been erected by now not only on the borderline but also in Mount Liban. Where is the Arab League? Where is the Organization of Islamic Cooperation? Where is the international community? Where are the Arab countries? Where are the Islamic countries? I would like to tell you even more. What is taking place today in Gaza is a tough trial to the Arab Spring countries. May Allah help them. They are now before a trial. How will they act? How will Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, and the Islamic and national liberation movements which now succeeded the regimes act? How will they act as far as Gaza is concerned?

This is a tough trial and a tough stance. This is Gaza. Let's take another example. Sudan is an Arab state with sovereignty. It is a member in the Arab League. It is a member in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. Israel stroke Khartoum – a military plant in it. "What's wrong in that?" Israel violated the Arab sovereignty. "What a big deal?" Israel stroke. "So what?" Israel destroyed an Arab military plant. "So what?" people were martyred and injured. "So what?" Isn't this the case? Where is the Arab League? Where is the Organization of Islamic Cooperation? Where is the Security Council? A usurper country - They call it a state – stages an aggression on a sovereign state. Where is the reaction? There is no reaction. There is nothing of this sort. I will go a bit farther. Everyday we here about massacres against Muslims who belong to a definite race in Burma. What did they do? They issued statements. Where massacres halted? No! Did displacement stop? No! Did they guard the people against massacres? No!

Where is the Arab world? Where is the Islamic world? Where is the Arab league? Where is the nation? Where are all of these? This is a question.

I have more to say. The Prophet of Islam was humiliated. What did they do? What did the Arab League do? What did the Organization of Islamic Cooperation do?

Well, the Americans were afraid from the reaction of the peoples. Well they gave some events other titles. However, the Americans were never, for one moment even, afraid from governments, states, and regional and international institutions. The Americans were afraid from the people who grew angry. How would they behave? Doesn't that give us a lesson when we view the past in an integrated way? Here we are not talking about controversial issues. I am not saying what the Arab League is doing concerning the issue of Bahrain. Well, there is an argument over the issue of Bahrain. What is the Arab League doing concerning the issue of Syria? On the contrary, the Arab League is working day and night on the Syrian issue. What is the Arab League doing concerning the Palestinian issue? What is it doing concerning Gaza? What did it do concerning Sudan? What did it do concerning Burma? Nothing! Where would the conclusion lead me? We will reach a conclusion I always mention. However on the Martyr's Day, I will reassert it: O Lebanese! Doesn't the proverb say: Nothing scratches your skin like your very own nail? I would like to tell you. Nothing guards your skin as your own nail which America, Israel, the west and March 14 Bloc are trying to trim. However, that is not to take place. They would never trim it.

It's the Lebanese man – the resistance, the army and the people - who protects Lebanon, the people of Lebanon, the land of Lebanon, and the state of Lebanon, the sovereignty of Lebanon, the borders of Lebanon, and the entity of Lebanon.

If the Lebanese man does not want to guard his country, no one would protect it. In fact, nobody cares about Lebanon and the Lebanese. Nobody cares. Nobody ever cared and nobody cares now. Thus we have the choice of resistance and adhering to the resistance and the arms of the resistance. This is a humanistic, rational, and moral choice, and abandoning this choice is mere insanity, and suicide. It is abandoning one's duty. It is abandoning human morals. This is the evaluation.

This is the first point. The second point is that we as Lebanese are saying that we are concerned. There's the national defense strategy. Great!

Based on the scene we gave for the thirty years – on the first point I tackled – today there is a national dialogue table which discusses the defense strategy apart from the fact that some people are boycotting it and taking a stance from it.

We all know that specific circumstances imposed forming the first dialogue body. Other specific circumstances imposed the formation of the current dialogue body which was expanded. Consequently, several parties sit on the table today to discuss the national defense strategy.

Here I want to pose two questions:

The first question is: Is it fair that some of the sides who sit on the table have this thirty-year-history we talked about? These very people want to sit and discuss the resistance, the defense strategy and how to defend Lebanon against Israel.

The political circumstances in the country imposed that the dialogue table be as such. What does this indicate? With utmost clarity, I would like to tell you this indicates the supreme status of the resistance, the high morals of the resistance, and the sense of devotion the resistance has to the effect that O people, we do not want problems in the country; we do not want divisions; we do not want tension. Well let even those who have this history in the struggle with Israel and in their relation with Israel attend the table. Thus I would like today to address some of those who put conditions to come to the dialogue table or to boycott it: There is no need to put conditions. It's because of our high morals that we accept to sit with you on the dialogue table. It is from our high morals and supreme status that we accept to discuss with you the resistance and the defense strategy in Lebanon. This is because of our high morals. As our morals are high, we accept this. We will see what would happen later. So there is no need that anyone put conditions. Whenever you wish to come to the dialogue table, you are welcome. If you don't, it's up to you. There is no problem both ways. Do they believe that people are having sleepless nights because they boycotted the dialogue table? Never! This is not the case. Let no one be mistaken. Let no one believe this is a point to press us with. You do not press anyone with it. Press yourself with it instead.

The second question is: Is it fair that such sides be on the dialogue table while other factions– I am talking about Lebanese factions - which have resisted, fought and offered martyrs from among its leaders, cadres, resistance men and fighters do not share in the dialogue table to discuss the national defense strategy? When talking about forming a Lebanese government, you would say they have deputies or they don't. When talking about a national defense strategy, these factions which fought against Israel for over thirty years must be the first to share in the dialogue table. They are known. Indeed I can't count them all. However, so that they would not say I mean March 8 Bloc only, I would mention the Lebanese Communist Party. It is undisputable that this is a resisting party. Why doesn't the Lebanese Communist Party share in the dialogue table to discuss the national defense strategy? Well, some parties share in the dialogue table which did not exist before.

The Islamic Group in Lebanon is outside our political track. On the contrary, it sat by your side on the intermediary meeting. However, to be fair, if we are to discuss the national defense strategy, the Islamic Group in Lebanon must share in the dialogue table. Their vision might be different from ours. However, I am talking about being fair. The Islamic Tawheed Movement has the right to share in the dialogue table because it fought and offered martyrs. The Nasseri Popular Movement has the right to share in the dialogue table because it fought and offered martyrs. Well, if we are to make a list, it would be a long one. Let no one sitting in the front row get angry with me!

Well there are Nasseris, Syrian Baathis and many national and Islamic forces which offered martyrs and fought. They are Islamic sides and groups. We are talking in general. How is it that the first group shares in the dialogue table and discusses the resistance and the national defense strategy and how to defend the country while these are not allowed to share in the dialogue table? Is this just and fair?

Anyway, as I have not discussed this issue with my brethrens, Inshallah I will present it to Hezbollah leadership and to our allies. Perhaps as the others have the right to put conditions to come back to the dialogue table for example, why don't we have the right to put conditions too? Why?

Hereof, I want to move to the latest political and security events and developments before tackling the government and wrapping up my word with handling the regional situation.

Brothers and sisters! Now as always Lebanon is passing through successive and incessant crises. Some might tell you there is a national crisis in Lebanon. There is always a national crisis in Lebanon for which solutions and ways out are sought.

What has been taking place for years is a succession or a sequence of crises, events and developments.

No doubt the crime of bombing in Ashrafieh which led to the martyrdom of General Wissam Al Hassan weeks ago hurled Lebanon into a new scene and not into a new crisis because the crisis exists and is ongoing. It grows tenser with sharp division and acute tension.

Well, when events with this magnitude and of this level take place, what is required? It is required from all political leaderships, the state, and parties and the people to act with national responsibility because any wrong action might explode the country.

There is something which everyone must keep in mind whether at the level of the state, the political forces and the people. I do not refuse that. It is a fact. It's that there is a tense region. All our neighboring surrounding is under tension. In Syria, there is a bloody war every hour, every moment and every day. The entire region is under tension. In fact, Lebanon is under tension. When the region was calm, Lebanon was under tension. When Syria, Egypt, Libya and the entire region was calm, Lebanon was under tension. Today we see the entire region under tension and Lebanon under tension too. In case any incident takes place, if we do not act with precise responsibility, the country might explode.

I am giving a description. Nobody is to say that I am threatening of exploding the country. Never! We are the most concerned in keeping the country integrated, stable and secure. I am warning and drawing attention. This requires acting with extraordinary responsibility and not with an opportunity-seizing soul in the sense that an incident takes place; let's invest it without reservations, limits and conditions to serve a definite political target even if that leads to the explosion of the country.

Unfortunately, in Lebanon there is a group of people who act as such.

Well, we do not want to tackle past incidents. We will talk about the recent events.

Following the crime of assassinating General Wissam Al Hassan, indeed some officially accused Syria without evidence or data or anything. However, they are accustomed to political accusation. Somebody came and told them: "Control yourselves. The situation is difficult. Finger point at Syria." However, they have their own project. They can't but finger point internally towards Lebanon. Thus they unleashed themselves and started finger pointing at Hezbollah. Thus we came back to the very old story. Here I want to talk about the Sunni-Shiite issue. The most senior security officer in the Lebanese state is Sunnite – with our respect to the General Manager of the Internal Security Forces. However, that's how they depicted things. This senior security officer was killed and his killer is a Shiite. Well, he who said in the first hour or couple of hours that Hezbollah is the one who killed General Wissam Hassan, where does he want to reach? I am talking and I like the Sunnites to hear what I am saying before the Shiites. Where does he want to reach? And if he was from among the faces I was talking about a while ago – a history of ties and intelligence with Israel – why do they in particular say so? Where do they want to reach? Do you have evidence? Where is this evidence? Hand it to the investigation? Do you have tangible evidence? Do you have even a circumstantial evidence? Hand it in please.

Do you have a political analysis? There are thousands of political analyses. With little logic and mind, someone must say there are suppositions in analysis. I do not give in. I do not accept that Hezbollah is a supposition. However, let's say that it's a supposition. Anybody can put a supposition including Hezbollah, Israel (You say that he dismantled 35 Israeli spying nets), international intelligence game…. Another supposition is that some people around the world are seeing that Sunnites and Shiites are in more than one country around the world geared up for an ordeal. Thus he decided to hurl them in an ordeal among themselves. Al Qaeda is another among other suppositions.

So let's say there are five or six suppositions; one of them is Hezbollah. If you think as such I would say that you are rational and fair. However, what is weird is that following the first hour after the assassination no one accused Israel. That means that this group is committed to defending Israel. Consequently, whom did they accuse of the assassination? Hezbollah!

Well, on what bases do they accuse? The brethrens were saying that we must suit a case against all those who accuse us or harm us. However, the case is that when we are to wait for the Lebanese courts as others do, we will have to wait for 50 or 60 years. Well our choice is that we have to tolerate. However what is more important isn't that we tolerate; it is that people have to be cautious.

Well, they took the decision from the very beginning to a political accusation. They ruled out all accusations. They anticipated all possibilities. They anticipated the investigation and finger pointed at Hezbollah. A clever person said there are footages and photos for figures. Well, hand them to the investigation as long as you have them. Political repercussions followed the accusation. They accused the Premier. He became the killer. The government is the killer. They called for toppling the government. They boycotted the dialogue table. They boycotted the Parliament.

Well, this is an opportunity-seizing stance. That's because since the first moment of forming the government you gathered and announced your war against it. You called on PM Mikati to resign, you sought to topple it, you convened and formed delegations to convince the international community to boycott it, and you provoked the international community against it saying it is the government of Hezbollah. Well, no one in the international community is convinced that it's the government of Hezbollah. No one in the government is convinced that it's the government of Hezbollah. By those who begot me and you, you too are not convinced that it is the government of Hezbollah. This is a part of the lying and misleading scenario which is a political means you resort to and which you are skillful in. Well, you resorted to political accusation and set consequences. This is normal and expected. Well, I do not have enough time to say more. You want to shut the parliament and you did. There is much difference between the current government and the former government. There isn't much time to talk to this effect because this needs more dialogue than a political speech. What is even more dangerous is that you headed to the street game – sectarian and factional mobilization. Media outlets and platforms observed no limits to mass the largest number possible in the martyr's funeral. Well, you did not make it, but you mobilized the country. Armed men blocked roads. It is not true to say Sunnites blocked the roads in Lebanon because those who blocked the roads are several persons. Ten here; twenty there; thirty there. Count them they do not mount up to 200 or 300 persons.

Anyone can gather 200 to 300 persons and arm them to blaze tires and block the roads and even ask for the identity of the passengers in cars. Well, where to do you want to take the country? Fighting took place in Tripoli and fighting was about to be brought about in Tariq Jadida, Wata Museitbe and Shiah. For whose interest is all of this?

Indeed on the other hand, a great section of the Lebanese people regressed whether from March 8 Bloc and others. They sat and observed. They did not participate. They did not block roads. They did not share in gatherings. It was supposed to be a funeral to a martyr; they turned it to a political occasion. They even stormed into the Saray. However, the other street showed much control because what took place over three days which included blocking roads, aggressions, opening fire, and bringing about fighting was unbearable.

Here I would like to laud and speak highly of the great awareness of this group of people who could contain the events of three days – which is not really to be compared to some of the opportunity-seizing political leaders – and wasted the chance of exploding the country. This awareness among the people wasted the chance of exploding the country. Not only the political leaderships in the other group but also people belonging to March 14 Bloc were waiting to see how fights are to break in Tripoli, Beirut, Saida and the South Highway so as to make their settlements.

Well, the chance was wasted. Today all the facts and political, security and field data assert that there are political sides in Lebanon – with the accomplice with foreign forces – which want to push the country towards exploding. Allow me to say that it is not Syria or March 8. It is the other bloc. I do not want to say all in the other bloc. In the other bloc, there are some who want to push Lebanon towards exploding. Here it happens that they don't meet with the Americans, the French, the Westerners and the British. They disagree. It's not that the latter group is with the government of Hezbollah. No! The former group knows that the latter group is not with the government of Hezbollah. The Americans and the westerners do not want to explode the country according to their considerations and vision which say that this serves Syria. Well, let them see things as such. However, some in Lebanon have other considerations. They believe that an explosion in Lebanon serves in more than one direction. Well, the explosion is to take place between which two parties? Here too I will be transparent and clear as I am being from the very beginning. They want an explosion between Shiites and Sunnites.

Today, some are talking about the previous stage. They evaluate it and reconsider it. Listen to me very well. Some people – more precisely some Christians in March 14 Bloc - want to drag the country to a Sunnite-Shiite sedition. Do you want me to be clearer? Indeed some people in the Future Movement say that the country is mobilized, the region is mobilized; this is our chance; let the Sunnites and the Shiites slaughter each other. Thus the tone of sectarian and factional provocation increases following any simple incident instead of acting with wisdom as religious authorities did whether His Eminence the Mufti and His Beatitude the Patriarch among other religious authorities. They asked people not to make haste and promote the political accusation which destroys the country. They asked them to have patience and to wait for the investigation. There are people who want to push the country in that direction and to exploit any incident - whether relevant or irrelevant – in the framework of this battle.

See what took place yesterday in Sidon. I do not want to tackle its details. I will rather make a general hint in this framework:

Sidon is the capital of the South, and it will remain the capital of the South.

Sidon is the capital of the resistance, and it will remain the capital of the resistance.

Sidon is the city of coexistence between Muslims and Christians with all their various sects.

Sidon is the city of senior martyrs, senior leaders and senior scholars.

Sidon embraced and still embraces and will always embrace Palestine, the Palestinian cause, and the Palestinian refugees in camps.

Someone wants to take this Sidon towards sedition? To whose interest is this?

Everyday he invests a battle, a title, and a slogan under the silence of many and a semi-abandonment from the state to its responsibilities – that's not to say total abandonment. Some insist on pushing things in this direction in Sidon and in other cities all over Lebanon.

The Martyr's Day is the day of the resistance, the day of Palestine, and the day of Lebanon. This day is the day of dignity, unity, love, altruism, sacrifices and loyalty. On this day, it is indeed our responsibility to address all the Lebanese who are concerned in this incident and not only the Sunnites and the Shiites – though I want to make a special address to Sunnites and Shiites. This is a very critical stage which requires a high level of awareness, caution speculation and attention. No one can force others through fanaticism, provocation, misleading, lying and rumors. Today more than anytime in the past we must resort to the Ayah that says: "O ye who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with a news, ascertain the truth."

Be sure first. Investigate to see the validity of the data and then take a stance. However, be sure first. Do not be taken by rumors and lies. Do not be drifted by provocation campaigns. There must be counseling and communication between leaderships, scholars and political forces whether locally, in the town or city, between mayors and social dignitaries and figures. They must communicate with each other. We must all talk with each other whether on the phone or through meetings and try to address our problems. We try to address this problem. If there is a mine there, we dismantle it. If there is an ambush there we try to contain it. Today, all of us as Lebanese – especially Shiites and Sunnites - must act accordingly.

This also requires patience, endurance and self-control even if there are mistakes. Should anyone curse you day and night or curse your wife day and night or curse your family day and night or curse your martyrs day and night or curse your sanctities day and night, just never mind. I told you previously and today I tell you again. Patience and tolerance are required. If Shiites made mistakes, I call on the Sunnites to have patience and tolerance and to address things among each other rationally. As Shiites and Sunnites we must communicate and advices each other. We must be sure and verify information. We must have patience and tolerate and address crises. The state must also assume its responsibilities. When somebody blocks the road, the state must reopen it. When somebody attacks you, the state must defend you. We insist that the state assume its responsibilities. With this kind of incidents which took place and with any incident that might take place in the future, this approach must be adopted.

As far as the government is concerned, today there are calls for a neutral government, a technocrat government, a new government and the like. Following this approach, I tell you: Brothers and sisters! O Lebanese! Since 2005 until this very day – let's not talk about what took place before 2005 – there are two tracks. Here there is no Syria so that you tell me Syria did and formed and set. We as Lebanese who are in this country, in the parliament and outside the parliament…. have two approaches. There is an approach which calls for the most possible broadest national participation in the country. The other approach tries to annul and eliminate others. This is a claim I make, and here is the evidence. As far as the other party is concerned, I accuse it saying: this party has an approach of annulment and elimination. In 2005, you formed a government. There was a fourfold alliance. It was not fivefold or six fold. We did not agree on the Christian ally. You were the majority. You formed a government in which Amal and Hezbollah partook. However, we did not form the government. It was you who did so. There weren't Shiites other than us to let them share in the government. This is the status quo of the country. You said come in. However, following all what took place in Lebanon in 2005, if there was national mentality the government must have scored the broadest participation possible. Still General Michel Aoun was ruled out knowing that the elections of 2005 proved that he is the number one Christian leader and he is still the number one Christian leader according to all facts. It is not I who is nominating him the first leader. The Christians are the one who are nominating him. You ruled out all of Syria's allies whether Christians, Sunnites or Druze. You formed an eliminating government. We were part of the government. We were not rather part of the eliminated section. We were part of the government from which following July War we stepped out and it carried on without us contrary to the National Accord. This is the difference between the two governments. You carried on and you did not ask about anyone. All the Shiites were outside the authority and you did not ask about anyone. Essential components in the country were outside power. Still you carried on until Doha Agreement. Then under pressure you partook in a national unity government. You did not partake in it with pleasure because these aren't your convictions and political mentality.

A first and a second national unity government were formed in Lebanon. Then things ended in the problem it ended in. The government was toppled. There is no time to recall all of these events. PM Mikati was charged of forming a new government.

From the very first day, our bloc said we agree on a national unity government. We agree on participation. It is you who did not agree. For a month and two weeks, PM Mikati tried to talk to you and convince you. See how patient he is. This psychological characteristic is adherent to his physical characteristic. He is very tall and very patient! The man sat for negotiations for a month and two weeks. However, you did not accept. You do not want participation with anyone. It is either you or no one. Isn't this the case? In 2005, you acted as such when you were forming the government. When PM Mikati wanted to form the government, you acted as such. However, we in Doha called for a national unity government. With PM Mikati we called for that too. We told him: Go for a national unity government and may Allah be with you. Still, it is you who go for elimination. When you were in the government, you boycotted dialogue. Today you are in the opposition and you boycotted dialogue. You do not seek a dialogue which yields results.

Thus there are two approaches in the country. This exists and this is a fact. Even today they tell you: We in March 14 Bloc when we win in the upcoming elections, we will form a March 14 government. This asserts annulment and elimination and that there is no partnership in the country. We never had any problem in forming a national unity government. Indeed some people said in the past couple of days: We – March 14 Bloc – would win in any election law. That is great. If they are that much self-confident, do accept relativity law and the districts as presented by the Lebanese government. Over what do we argue then? If you are to win in any election law, why do you cause a problem concerning the election law.

As for the approaches, there are two samples, brothers and sisters. O Lebanese people! I am talking about two Sunnite Premiers without mentioning names. A million demonstrators hit the street and called on one Premier to leave his office. Then the number gets down gradually to hundreds of thousands, tens of thousands, thousands and hundreds before the story comes to an end. What does he do? He says: "My eye will never twitch!" He is that much clinging to his office. Another Premier sees that there is an incident in the country. People are holding a funeral. People are sad and sorrowful. He says I do not cling to my office. Go and agree on any government that saves the country – a national unity government under me or under any other premiership. I have no problem in that. This is one approach, and that is another. This is one mentality, and that is another. The Lebanese have to agree on the mentality that guards the country, security and stability internally and externally, develops the country, and develops the country. It is the mentality of partnership. As for the mentality of elimination and annulment which is ready to demolish everything to be in power, it is a mind that is not to be entrusted the country, honor, wealth, stability and security. We have tried it in economy too.

Under such a status quo, we say the following: The government that exists is legitimate and constitutional. It is in office, and it will go on in office. Talking about a neutral government in Lebanon is useless. There are no neutralists in Lebanon. Politics is in everything in Lebanon; even the small children are politicized; football is politicized; art is politicized; everything is politicized.

Talking about a technocrat government in Lebanon is useless. There is no technocrat in Lebanon. This country is politicized to its very essence. Nothing works in this government but a political government. Now the government exists. Some are talking about a new government or a national unity government. Well, let's meet at the dialogue table. There we would sit and talk. Everyone will say his viewpoint, and we will say our viewpoint. Is there any need to change the government, or there is not? If there is a need, what would be the nature of the alternative government. Any other approach is not accepted. Let everyone say what he wants then, and the country will carry on in office as is the case now and we must all cooperate to transcend this stage. All of these experiences must after all verify for us this status quo.

As for Syria, we assert the relevance of the stance we have always expressed all through the past stages. A political solution, a settlement, and stopping the fighting in Syria are a must and are for the interest of the Syrian people and Syria.

On the other hand, where to are others pushing things? Clinton said that the National Syrian Council in Istanbul does not make any representations anymore. Seek a broader framework. The National Council thunders and stresses that its decision is independent. Great! They gathered all the concerned people in Doha and locked them in a hotel for seven days. They worked on a new framework as Mrs. Clinton said. Let's read the message from its beginning and not from its end. Well, she called for a new framework. Well, they formed a new framework, a new leadership and a new title. However, what is more dangerous in this new framework is that the opposition sides who gather in Doha unanimously agree on refusing dialogue and unanimously agree on refusing a political settlement. Well, where do they want to go? They want to move towards more killing and demolition. For whose interest is this? This is for the interest of America, Clinton who is outgoing now, Israel, some spiteful Arab, and some regional ambitions. Is more killing and blood shedding to the interest of the Syrian people or heading towards a political solution and a political settlement?

Anyway, we assert our call in this direction. This was and is still our stance.

Indeed as far as Bahrain is concerned, the people there are abandoned and oppressed. If a bomb explodes, they say these are Hezbollah's fingers and fingerprints. Are our fingerprints that much powerful to reach there? Indeed we issued a statement and said that these are the fingerprints of the Bahraini intelligence.

The authority in Bahrain has a true problem with the peaceful nature of the Bahraini opposition. In as much as the leadership of the Bahraini Opposition and the Bahraini people who are demonstrating are patient, the authority has grown impatient. The authority is searching for a pretext to strike, kill, arrest and jail the opposition because the peaceful opposition has embarrassed them though the aim of the opposition is clear, announced and known.

Now they have resorted to depriving from the Bahraini nationality. So in addition to the demographic change they were talking about through naturalization, the Bahraini is being deprived of his nationality. They do not leave any person from Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Mid Africa, or South Africa without offering him the Bahraini nationality and the full rights of nationalism. This also needs a stance to be taken.

Anyway, in the general framework, we call in Lebanon and in the region and while taking into consideration what is taking place in Gaza, Syria, Lebanon and the whole nation for more awareness, reflection, calmness, not making haste in analyzing, and not making haste in taking decisions. We must know that we are in the era of ordeals that are approaching as the dim night. We are at a time in which it is no longer right to hide our heads in the sand and say we are not concerned.

It is rather right to open our eyes, ears, and minds and to be loyal and to try to differentiate between what is right and what is wrong and what is good and what is bad to lead our nation and people towards what is to the good of their religion, life and Hereafter. This is our responsibility all of us especially at this stage.

We renew our oath to our martyrs, our leader martyrs, Sayyed Abbass, Sheikh Ragheb Harb, Hajj Imad and the establisher of the resistance Imam Sayyed Mussa Assader. We renew our oath and promise with them all and say that we will always remain in the posts of resistance, patience, tolerance, steadfastness and adherence to unity until Allah rewards us with one of the two good endings or both of them: martyrdom or victory. May Allah bless you to what is good for you. Peace be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessings.