*watch interview HERE
*from ~1:00 Dr. al-Ja’afari:
“…There is a kind of misunderstanding, with regard to Russian moves in combatting terrorism in Syria. There is a big problem between the western approach and the Syrian-Russian approach. Its with regard the definition of terrorism: who is terrorist and who is not terrorist? For us in Syria, all those who are fighting the government are terrorists. Of course here we are excluding the national Opposition, those who are not using arms against their own country and their own people.
So, for the Russians, when they say they are fighting ISIL and ISIS and all the affiliated groups of ISIS, which all derive from al-Qaeda, as you know–whatever the label they call themselves is, they are all deriving from al-Qaeda. So we are here fighting the same enemy, theoretically speaking, with the Americans…and the US-led colation to combat terrorism.
So, …we should be specific about…what would be the targets of the Russian-Syrian move in combatting terrorism.”
[MSM puppet ‘journalist’: blah blah, barrel bombing by the ‘regime’…]
“Humbly speaking…we are not a ‘regime’, we are a legitimate government of a sovereign country-member of the United Nations. We are a government equal to other governments including the American administration.”
“blah blah bomb civilians”
“…What we are talking about foreigners, about mercenaries mobilized, sent, trained by foreign powers, foreign intelligence. When the Syrian government attacks these terrorists in Syria, wherever they are, we are not attacking the civilians. On the contrary, the problem we are facing is that we cannot liberate, for instance, huge cities such al-Raqqa in Syria, which is the capital of ISIL. The reason is very simple: its because there are 800,000 civilians inside. So, ISIL is taking the civilians as human shields. So we cannot attack this city, heavily speaking, in order to kill 3000 terrorists from ISIL… the price would be highly costly. We are talking about almost 1 million civilians living in al-Raqqa.”
MSM script-reader: blah blah (insert standard question about President al-Assad stepping down)
“The idea of stepping-down, for any president in the world, including the American president, is up to the people… No president should step down just because a foreign power is asking him to do so. This is wrong, this is illegal, unlawful.
…President Assad was elected by the Syrian people, and its up to the Syrian people to decide for his destiny. Any interference, in this regard, from any foreign power, is an interference into domestic affairs. And this runs against international law.
We in Syria, yes, we are open to any political settlement, based on the following principles:
-First, respecting the sovereignty of Syria, territorial integrity and the principle of not interfering into our domestic affairs.
-Second, the settlement should be done by Syrians themselves, led by the Syrians….which is in accordance with Geneva Communiqué 1 as you know.
-Third, the priority of all priorities is to exert pressure on the neighbouring countries of Syria to shut down their borders with us and to stop the infiltration of thousands of terrorist-foreigners, mercenaries, gathered from all over the world and sent to Syria through our joint borders with neighbouring countries. All these strategies should stop, in order to give the Syrian people and the Syrian leadership and the international community–and Mr. de Mistura–the possibility to go ahead with the political settlement.”
“It’s not only against ISIL. I don’t know why people only use this. Why do they forget Jebhat al-Nusra although Security Council resolutions considered Jebhat al-Nusra and ISIL as terrorist organisations. And besides these there are tens of terrorist organisations in Syria. There are thousands of mercenaries and terrorists coming from all over the world.”
“The problem right from the beginning was not Assad, and the target was not Assad. Just as Libya is destroyed now and they were talking about Gaddafi, and Iraq is destroyed and they were talking about Saddam Hussein or about (WMDs). These concepts..floated in the media, they are only used in order to destroy our countries, in order to destroy our civilization, in order to destroy our people.”
“…to be honest, when they record interviews, I speak for 20 minutes, then they show only 20 seconds, 10 seconds, whatever fits their agenda. You saw what happened with Anderson Cooper, Christiane Amanpour, and others. They always try to manipulate the facts, and they do their best to deviate from the direction of the conversation into little, negative, details, so that the audience will have a negative idea of what I am saying. Simultaneously, as I am speaking, they show a negative video clip on what’s going on in Syria, accusing the government of doing so and so. Which means that they are indirectly telling viewers that this ambassador is not telling the truth. You see how they manipulate?
Christiane Amanpour was lying when she was interviewing me on the so-called chemical weapons. She was lying, not telling the truth at all! This is why I told her, “You know what? You also may be a weapon of mass destruction, because you are poisoning public opinion and deviating from the main points I’m making.””