Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Israel honors cyber-terrorists behind May attack on Iranian port

PressTV – June 26, 2020

The Israeli military has honored units, which had been involved in a May cyberattack against Iran’s Shahid Rajaee port on the coast of the Persian Gulf near the Strait of Hormuz.

The units that took part in the terrorist operation against the Iranian port have received “certificates of appreciation” from the head of Tel Aviv’s military intelligence apparatus Tamir Hayman.

The elements honored by the Israeli military include troops in the regime’s Unit 8200, which is Israel’s cyber spy agency.

A statement by the Israeli military claims that the cyberattack, carried out on May 9, has yielded “a unique and impressive operational achievement.”

However, Iranian officials said at the time that the attack briefly knocked computers at Shahid Rajaee port terminal offline.

Mohammad Rastad, managing director of the Ports and Maritime Organization of Iran, said the terrorist attack “failed to penetrate the PMO’s systems and was only able to infiltrate and damage a number of private operating systems at the ports”.

According to intelligence and cybersecurity officials, cited by the Washington Post, the attack was carried out by Israeli operatives. It came after the occupying regime said it had been the target of an attempt to penetrate the computers that operate water distribution systems in Israel.

The sprawling Shahid Rajaee port facility is the newest of two major shipping terminals in the Iranian coastal city of Bandar Abbas, on the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran has been the target of US and Israeli cyber terrorism for a decade, including attempts to remotely sabotage the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program.

In 2010, US and Israeli intelligence agencies unleashed a computer worm called Stuxnet on Iranian uranium-enrichment plants in an attempt to disrupt Iran’s nuclear program. The Washington Post reported two years later that the US National Security Agency (NSA), its spy service CIA, and Israel’s military had worked together to launch Stuxnet against Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The attack was followed by Mossad’s assassination of several Iranian nuclear scientists.

Iranian officials have said the attacks worked to the US and Israeli detriment, helping improve the Islamic Republic’s readiness against acts of sabotage.

June 26, 2020 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , | 1 Comment

Iran ready for coop with IAEA as long as it retains independence: Rouhani

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani
Press TV – June 24, 2020

President Hassan Rouhani says Iran is prepared, as before, to continue its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as long as the UN nuclear watchdog does not deviate from the legal frameworks and does not fall under Israeli and American influence.

“Iran is prepared to take the agency’s legal inspections and engage in close cooperation with it within the framework of the [standing] regulations,” Rouhani said, addressing a cabinet session in Tehran on Wednesday.

“For us, cooperation with the agency has always formed the basis,” he said, adding, “We will maintain this [principle] today too.”

He said the Islamic Republic has invariably enjoyed a “friendly” relationship with the watchdog, whose inspectors have examined the country’s nuclear facilities regularly and confirmed its non-diversion from a 2015 nuclear agreement between Tehran and world countries in more than a dozen reports.

The president, however, cautioned that “the agency too should pay attention not to deviate from its legal path.”

On Friday, the IAEA’s Board of Governors adopted a resolution — drawn up by the UK, France, and Germany — that called on Iran to allow access to two sites that Israeli intelligence services claim are related to Tehran’s nuclear program. Tehran has condemned the resolution, rebuffed the allegations, and reminded the agency that it cannot request inspections based on accusations made up by intelligence agencies.

“I fear these charlatans may tarnish the agency,” Rouhani said, referring to the Israeli regime and the United States that changelessly backs the regime’s stances and allegations. “They dupe the agency and push it away from its course.”

“The agency’s task consists of reporting on the manner of application of nuclear materials. That is what the agency is supposed to do,” the president said.

He, accordingly, urged the IAEA to act justly in its assessments and retain its independence.

Rouhani, meanwhile, berated the European trio for their falling under Tel Aviv and Washington’s pressure in devising of the anti-Iranian resolution, while praising Russia and China for their decisive stance against the resolution.

On US offer of talks

Separately, the chief executive referred to the United States’ new offer of talks with Iran.

The Islamic Republic is always prepared for negotiations as soon as the US renews commitment to the international regulations, he said, adding that it was Washington that left the negotiation table in the first place by reneging on its commitments.

Washington left the nuclear deal in 2018, although the accord has been endorsed by the UN Security Council as a resolution.

“They were the ones, who created trouble, broke the negotiation table, and tyrannized the Iranian nation,” Rouhani said.

He also urged that the US apologize to the Iranian people for the economic damage that it has tried to afflict on them through the sanctions that it reinstated after leaving the deal, and compensate the nation.

June 24, 2020 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , | 1 Comment

Iran has ‘no problem’ talking to US if it apologizes & offers refund over nuclear deal – President Rouhani

RT – June 24, 2020

Nothing is preventing Tehran from engaging in talks with Washington, provided that it comes up with apologies – and reimbursement – for losses in the 2015 nuclear pact America walked out on, President Hassan Rouhani has said.

“We have no problem with talking to the US,” Rouhani declared, in a nationally-broadcast speech on Wednesday. The only condition is that “Washington meets its obligations under the nuclear deal, apologizes and compensates Tehran for its withdrawal from the 2015 pact,” the president said, as quoted by Reuters.

Rouhani made it clear, however, that “these calls for talks with Tehran are just words and lies.” US President Donald Trump has previously offered to negotiate with Iran without any preconditions and to meet with Rouhani in person.

Washington repeated the offer of “serious talks” this January – but the timing of this couldn’t have been more questionable, as it came on the heels of the death of Qassem Soleimani, a renowned Iranian military leader, in an American missile strike.

Tehran, for its part, has consistently ruled out dealing with Washington under pressure, or trading vital national interests.

Last year, however, Foreign Minister Javad Zarif announced that he pitched a suggestion to the US, under which Iran would permanently accept international inspections of its nuclear program, in return for the lifting of US sanctions.

Following his pattern of being suspicious towards Iran, Trump green-lighted the pullout from the hard-earned nuclear pact in 2018. Shortly after the US formally ceased to be a member, it slapped Iran’s oil trade, finances, investment activities, and other crucial sectors with sweeping penalties under the so-called “maximum policy pressure.”

This week, Washington will try to secure a UN backing for an indefinite extension of an embargo that bans countries from selling or transferring arms to Iran unless approved by the Security Council. In order to pass, their draft resolution requires nine votes in favor and no vetoes from China, Russia, Britain or France – a quartet of countries still adhering to the 2015 nuclear deal.

June 24, 2020 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | 2 Comments

Iran parliament: IAEA resolution proof of structural discrimination within UN nuclear watchdog

Press TV – June 21, 2020

The majority of lawmakers at the Iranian parliament have denounced an anti-Iran resolution recently passed by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors, saying the document is another indication of “structural discrimination” within the UN atomic watchdog.

In a statement read out on Sunday by Ali Karimi Firouzjaee, a member of the parliament’s presiding board, 240 MPs argued that the IAEA resolution — introduced by the three European signatories to a 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, namely France, Germany, and Britain — explicitly demonstrated the trio’s “excessive demands.”

The Islamic Republic has voluntarily implemented the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and allowed the IAEA to conduct the most rigorous inspections of its nuclear sites in the history of the Vienna-based agency, read the statement.

The lawmakers further complained about the hypocrisy of the European trio, saying they devised “the illegal anti-Iran resolution” contrary to their claims to remain committed to the Iran deal and to make efforts to salvage the deal.

The IAEA resolution clearly indicates, the MPs warned, that the three European states “have once again fallen into the trap of the United States and the Zionist regime, and joined forces with them in the failed US project of exerting maximum pressure against Iran, hence dealing another blow to international multilateralism.”

Passed by a 25-2 margin with seven abstentions, the IAEA resolution called on Iran to “fully cooperate” with the IAEA and “satisfy the Agency’s requests without any further delay,” including by providing “prompt” access to two nuclear sites.

Tehran has rejected allegations of non-cooperation with the IAEA, arguing that the mentioned sites are totally irrelevant to its current nuclear program, and that the agency’s insistence on inspecting the two locations comes on the basis of fabricated information provided by Israel.

“Iran’s parliament strongly condemns the IAEA Board of Governors’ resolution, which was adopted against Iran’s national interests based on a proposal by three European countries, Britain, France and Germany, under pressure from the US regime and the fake Zionist regime on June 19, 2020,” the statement read, adding that the resolution was “another sign of structural discrimination within the IAEA.”

The Iranian lawmakers also expressed their gratitude to China and Russia for voicing their opposition to the biased resolution, which they called “an obvious attempt at political extortion.”

“In addition to expressing gratitude to the states that did not support the move, the parliament considers the non-binding resolution another sign of the culture dominating the IAEA, which allows nuclear-armed member states not honoring their own NPT commitments to block other states’ access to peaceful nuclear technology.”

June 21, 2020 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

France’s test of nuclear-capable ballistic missile inconsistent with NPT obligations: Iran

Press TV – June 20, 2020

Iran has voiced concern over a recent test-firing of an intercontinental nuclear-capable ballistic missile by France, saying the test is in clear violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and inconsistent with the European country’s commitments vis-à-vis nuclear disarmament.

“The government of the Islamic Republic of Iran expresses its concern over the move and believes that the French government should not overlook its international obligations enshrined in Article 6 of the NPT and the NPT Review Conferences,” Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Abbas Mousavi said on Saturday.

He added that France must fully comply with its international obligations regarding nuclear disarmament.

The Iranian spokesperson emphasized that nuclear weapons pose a threat to global peace and security, and said testing such weapons would undermine the NPT as the basis for international non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament.

The French Ministry of Armed Forces announced on June 12 the launch of an M51 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) from Le Téméraire, a Triomphant-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine.

“The nuclear-powered Le Téméraire successfully fired an M51 strategic ballistic missile off Finistère,” Defense Minister Florence Parly announced in a Twitter post.

The launch was carried out without a nuclear warhead off France’s Western coastal region of Brittany. The missile was tracked throughout its flight phase by radars and by the missile range instrumentation ship Monge (A601), landing several hundred kilometers away in the North Atlantic.

The M51 – which replaced the M45 in 2010 – weighs 52,000 kilograms with a 12-meter length and a diameter of 2.3 meters. Its operational range is reported to be 8,000 to 10,000 kilometers with a speed of Mach 25. The three-stage engine of the ballistic missile is directly derived from the solid propellant boosters of the European Ariane 5 space rocket.

Moreover, the M51 carries six to ten independently targetable (Multiple Independently targeted Reentry Vehicle) TN 75 thermonuclear warheads which, since 2015, have been replaced with the new Tête nucléaire océanique (TNO or oceanic nuclear warhead) warheads. The new warheads are reportedly maneuverable (Maneuverable Re-entry Vehicle) in order to avoid potential ballistic defenses.

June 20, 2020 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Trump’s Refusal to Bomb Iran ‘Disproves’ Bolton’s Memoir, His Ex-Chief of Staff Says

Sputnik – 20.06.2020

John Bolton, Donald Trump’s hawkish former national security advisor, is set to release a damning memoir about his White House stint. It is widely believed that he was ousted after sparring with the president over US policy on Iran.

Fred Fleitz, John Bolton’s former chief of staff, believes that Donald Trump’s decision not to go to war with Iran negates the premise of Bolton’s upcoming book.

“When we hear that the president doesn’t have principles [and] he’s not qualified to lead, this incident that Bolton puts forward as the turning point for his relationship with President Trump,” Fleitz told Fox News’ Martha MacCallum on Thursday. “In my mind, it disproves the whole book.”

The United States and Iran were on the brink of war last summer after a US drone was shot down after allegedly violating Iranian airspace. Donald Trump reportedly approved a retaliatory strike in June 2019 but abruptly backed away.

He said he had made the call with 10 minutes to spare after being told that it might kill as many as 150 people. The decision has also been attributed to his broader unwillingness to entangle the United States in another protracted military conflict.

John Bolton, one of the key architects of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and Donald Trump’s hardline Iran policy, quit the administration in September 2019. He was said to have had disagreed with the president on many foreign policy matters, and media reports at the time linked Bolton’s dismissal to him going against the planned easing of Iran sanctions.

“The job of these senior advisers is to work with the president, not to fight with them and implement his policies,” Fleitz said. “And I’m very sorry that John Bolton couldn’t figure out how to do that.”

Bolton has kept a low profile since his departure. He refused to testify during Trump’s impeachment inquiry in the House and indicated he would speak at the Senate trial, but Republicans voted against bringing in witnesses.

He is scheduled to publish a memoir next week, titled The Room Where It Happened. According to excerpts published in the US, the book contains several damning allegations against the president, including one that he asked China’s Xi Jinping to buy US agricultural goods to help him get re-elected this year, and another that he defended the Saudi crown prince after Jamal Khashoggi’s murder to distract from his daughter’s email scandal.

This week, the Trump administration sued Bolton, alleging unlawful disclosure of classified information and breach of contract, in a bid to prevent him from publishing the book.

June 20, 2020 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , | 4 Comments

Russia: UN chief report blaming Iran for attacks on Saudi oil facilities not based on convincing evidence

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova
Press TV | June 17, 2020

The Russian Foreign Ministry says the UN chief’s report on Iran’s involvement in the last year attacks on Saudi oil facilities is biased and not substantiated by facts.

“What we surely won’t argue with is, unfortunately, that the report can hardly be called balanced and calibrated,” the ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said during a press briefing on Wednesday.

She added Russia will present a “detailed analysis” of the UN report during the relevant discussion at the Security Council later on June 30.

“We can also speak about a lack of impartiality and the absence of strong facts to support the accusations leveled at Iran,” she noted, stressing “Nobody has ever presented any convincing evidence of Iran’s violations to the Security Council members.”

The Russian official said that the report was not valid, arguing the “self-appointed inspectors” had claimed based on their “personal observations” that what they saw was “roughly reminiscent of what Iran had once demonstrated at arms exhibitions.”

Last week, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said in a report to the Security Council that cruise missiles used in attacks on oil facilities and an airport in Saudi Arabia last year were of “Iranian origin.”

He also said the “items may have been transferred in a manner inconsistent” with UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which endorses the international nuclear deal – officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – signed between Iran and major world powers in 2015. The allegations were roundly rejected by Iran’s Foreign Ministry.

The ministry said in a statement that the claims appear to have been made under political pressure from the US and Saudi regimes.

“Preparing reports with political motivation will not change the facts and it is clear to all that the current circumstances in the region have directly resulted from the wrong policies of the United States and the child-killing Saudi regime,” the statement said.

The ministry highly recommended that the UN Secretariat not play into the hands of the US in its “pre-planned scenario to annul the cancellation of Iran’s arms embargo.” It also warned the UN against contributing to such a dangerous trend by preparing illegal reports.

Separately, Iran’s UN Mission also responded to the report on Friday, saying, “Iran categorically rejects the observations contained in the report concerning the Iranian connection to the export of weapons or their components that are used in attacks on Saudi Arabia and the Iranian origin of alleged US seizures of armaments.”

US President Donald Trump withdrew Washington from the JCPOA in 2018 and reinstated Washington’s unilateral sanctions against Tehran. His administration has also been piling up pressure on the United Nations to extend and strengthen the embargo on Iran, which is set to expire in October under the nuclear deal.

Washington seeks to restore all Security Council sanctions lifted against Iran if the 15-member body fails to preserve the UN ban on selling conventional arms to Iran.

June 17, 2020 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Iran: E3 unconstructive draft resolution at IAEA meeting mockery of international rules

Press TV – June 16, 2020

Iran has condemned as “unconstructive” a resolution reportedly drafted by the three European signatories to a 2015 nuclear deal for a vote at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)’s governing board meeting, saying such a resolution makes a mockery of international rules.

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s permanent representative to Vienna-based international organizations, urged France, Germany and the UK — also known as E3 — not to complicate the situation surrounding the Iran deal if they cannot fulfill their end of the bargain and help salvage the accord.

The comments came as IAEA Board of Governors started a four-day meeting on Monday, with Iran on the agenda.

According to a Bloomberg report, the resolution prepared by the European trio urges Tehran to “fully cooperate” with the IAEA investigation of its nuclear facilities. It came after the nuclear watchdog’s inspectors claimed they had not been given access to two locations that may have hosted atomic activities two decades ago.

The resolution will have to be presented during the meeting and is expected to win Washington’s backing.

During the Monday session, the IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi claimed that for over four months, “Iran has denied us access to two locations and that, for almost a year, it has not engaged in substantive discussions to clarify our questions related to possible undeclared nuclear material and nuclear-related activities.”

Gharibabadi dismissed the claims in the reported resolution and said, “While Iran is cooperating extensively and constructively with the agency, submitting a resolution with the purpose of asking Iran to cooperate and fulfill the two demands of the IAEA is regrettable and a totally unconstructive move.”

He criticized the European trio’s double standards on Tehran’s nuclear program and said such a resolution is being put forth by the countries that “either possess nuclear weapons or play host to such destructive and deadly weapons.”

Such a move, Gharibabadi said is “a mockery of international norms and rules governing disarmament and non-proliferation regimes.”

Gharibabadi also called on all members of the IAEA Board of Governors to exercise vigilance and avoid taking any “political and hasty” measures in order for Iran to continue cooperation with the Vienna-based agency.

“Naturally if such a resolution, which clearly serves American goals, is approved, the Islamic Republic of Iran will have to take the necessary measures accordingly,” he noted.

The Iranian envoy further stressed that the new IAEA request is founded on the claims raised by the Israeli regime, which is an enemy of Iran.

Tehran’s transparent cooperation with the agency “does not mean that we should agree to every request from the IAEA on the basis of delusional claims of our enemies,” he emphasized.

Iran signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with six world states — namely the US, Germany, France, Britain, Russia and China — in 2015.

However, Washington’s unilateral withdrawal in May 2018 and the subsequent re-imposition of sanctions against Tehran left the future of the historic agreement in limbo.

Iran remained fully compliant with the JCPOA for an entire year, waiting for the co-signatories to honor their commitments.

As the European parties failed to do so, the Islamic Republic moved in May 2019 to suspend its JCPOA commitments under Articles 26 and 36 of the deal covering Tehran’s legal rights.

June 16, 2020 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Iran warns IAEA against taking Israeli intelligence report about Tehran violating nuke deal at face value

RT | June 15, 2020

Tehran called on the international nuclear watchdog to maintain neutrality and refrain from “unconstructive” decisions based on a biased Israeli intelligence report that claims Iran may be violating its international nuclear deal.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) met on Monday to discuss a report alleging that Tehran is violating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action by continuing to enrich uranium beyond the agreed level. Iran claims that the data was supplied by Mossad.

Should the IAEA Board of Governors be taken in by “Israeli fabrications” underlying a recent report that claimed Iran was violating the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal, it would “complicate Iran’s cooperation with the agency,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi said during a press briefing on Monday as reported by Tasnim, hinting at a “proportionate reaction.”

“They can probably guess what Iran’s reaction will be.”

Mousavi called on the IAEA to maintain neutrality instead of acting on “allegations made by the Zionist regime,” citing Israel’s long history of producing unsubstantiated claims about Iran’s nuclear activities and warning the agency against issuing any resolution against Iran in reaction to the report.

The report claimed Iran has “for months blocked inspections at two sites where nuclear activity may have occurred in the past,” continued to build up its uranium stockpile, and upped enrichment levels past the limits set out by the JCPOA nuclear deal. Israel demanded “paralyzing sanctions” be levied on the country in response.

However, Iran only began exceeding the terms of the JCPOA a year after the US unilaterally pulled out and reimposed crippling sanctions in 2018 despite what was at the time full compliance from Iran, and the other signatories have refused to cross the US in order to hold up their ends of the deal.

Iran has rejected all allegations of non-compliance with the IAEA, and Mousavi on Monday called on the agency to base its actions on legal facts rather than the claims of obviously-biased international actors.
Also on rt.com Iran slams Washington’s ‘unlawful’ nuclear moves in letter to IAEA officials

Mousavi pointed out that caving in to US and Israeli “pressure” and punishing Iran based on the report’s claims amounts to reopening a probe into “possible military dimensions” of Iran’s nuclear program that was resolved in the country’s favor in 2015. The IAEA at the time concluded Iran had never diverted its peaceful nuclear activities, despite spurious allegations to the contrary.

The spokesman also slammed US threats to extend an arms embargo due to expire in October, pointing out that Washington was no longer a signatory to the JCPOA nuclear deal and thus has no legal standing to extend the prohibition. An extension of the embargo would be a “red line,” he warned.

June 15, 2020 Posted by | Deception, Wars for Israel | , , | 1 Comment

America’s Supernational Sovereignty

Iran and Syria again on the receiving end of sanctions

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • June 15, 2020

One of the most disturbing aspects of American foreign policy since 9/11 has been the assumption that decisions made by the United States are binding on the rest of the world, best exemplified by President George W. Bush’s warning that “there was a new sheriff in town.” Apart from time of war, no other nation has ever sought to prevent other nations from trading with each other, nor has any government sought to punish foreigners using sanctions with the cynical arrogance demonstrated by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. The United States uniquely seeks to penalize other sovereign countries for alleged crimes that did not occur in the U.S. and that did not involve American citizens, while also insisting that all nations must comply with whatever penalties are meted out by Washington. At the same time, it demonstrates its own hypocrisy by claiming sovereign immunity whenever foreigners or even American citizens seek to use the courts to hold it accountable for its many crimes.

The conceit by the United States that it is the acknowledged judge, jury and executioner in policing the international community began in the post-World War 2 environment, when hubristic American presidents began referring to themselves as “leaders of the free world.” This pretense received legislative and judicial backing with passage of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987 (ATA) as amended in 1992 plus subsequent related legislation, to include the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act of 2016 (JASTA). The body of legislation can be used to obtain civil judgments against alleged terrorists for attacks carried out anywhere in the world and can be employed to punish governments, international organizations and even corporations that are perceived to be supportive of terrorists, even indirectly or unknowingly. Plaintiffs are able to sue for injuries to their “person, property, or business” and have ten years to bring a claim.

Sometimes the connections and level of proof required by a U.S. court to take action are tenuous, and that is being polite. Suits currently can claim secondary liability for third parties, including banks and large corporations, under “material support” of terrorism statutes. This includes “aiding and abetting” liability as well as providing “services” to any group that the United States considers to be terrorist, even if the terrorist label is dubious and/or if that support is inadvertent.

The ability to sue in American courts for redress of either real or imaginary crimes has led to the creation of a lawfare culture in which lawyers representing a particular cause seek to bankrupt an opponent through both legal expenses and damages. To no one’s surprise, Israel is a major litigator against entities that it disapproves of. The Israeli government has even created and supports an organization called Shurat HaDin, which describes on its website how it uses the law to bankrupt opponents.

The Federal Court for the Southern District of Manhattan has become the clearing house for suing the pants off of any number of foreign governments and individuals with virtually no requirement that the suit have any merit beyond claims of “terrorism.” In February 2015, a lawsuit initiated by Shurat HaDin led to the conviction of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization of liability for terrorist attacks in Israel between 2000 and 2004. The New York Federal jury awarded damages of $218.5 million, but under a special feature of the Anti-Terrorism Act the award was automatically tripled to $655.5 million. Shurat HaDin claimed sanctimoniously that it was “bankrupting terror.”

The most recent legal victory for Israel and its friends occurred in a federal district court in the District of Columbia on June 1st, where Syria and Iran were held to be liable for the killing of American citizens in Palestinian terrorist attacks that have taken place in Israel. Judge Randolph D. Moss ruled that Americans wounded and killed in seven attacks carried out by Palestinians inside the Jewish state were eligible for damages from Iran and Syria because they provided “material support” to militant groups Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The court will at a future date determine the amount of the actual damages.

It should be observed that the alleged crime took place in a foreign country, Israel, and the attribution of blame came from Israeli official sources. Also, there was no actual evidence that Syria and Iran were in any way actively involved in planning or directly enabling the claimed attacks, which is why the expression “material support,” which is extremely elastic, was used. In this case, both Damascus and Tehran are definitely guilty as charged in recognizing and having contact with the Palestinian resistance organizations though it has never been credibly asserted that they have any influence over their actions. Syria and Iran were, in fact, not represented in the proceedings, a normal practice as neither country has diplomatic representation in the U.S. and the chances of a fair hearing given the existing legislation have proven to be remote.

And one might well ask if the legislation can be used against Israel, with American citizens killed by the Israelis (Rachel Corrie, Furkan Dogan) being able to sue the Jewish state’s government for compensation and damages. Nope. U.S. courts have ruled in similar cases that Israel’s army and police are not terrorist organizations, nor do they materially support terrorists, so the United States’ judicial system has no jurisdiction to try them. That result should surprise no one as the legislation was designed to specifically target Muslims and Muslim groups.

In any event, the current court ruling which might total hundreds of millions of dollars could prove to be difficult to collect due to the fact that both Syria and Iran have little in the way of remaining assets in the U.S. In previous similar suits, most notably in June 2017, a jury deliberated for one day before delivering a guilty verdict against two Iranian foundations for violation of U.S. sanctions, allowing a federal court to authorize the U.S. government seizure of a skyscraper in Midtown Manhattan. It was the largest terrorism-related civil forfeiture in United States history. The presiding judge decided to distribute proceeds from the building’s sale, nearly $1 billion, to the families of victims of terrorism, including the September 11th attacks. The court ruled that Iran had some culpability for the 9/11 attacks solely based on its status as a State Department listed state sponsor of terrorism, even though the court could not demonstrate that Iran was in any way directly involved.

A second court case involved Syria, ruling that Damascus was liable for the targeting and killing of an American journalist who was in an active war zone covering the shelling of a rebel held area of Homs in 2012. The court awarded $302.5 million to the family of the journalist, Marie Colvin. In her ruling, Judge Amy Berman Jackson cited “Syria’s longstanding policy of violence” seeking “to intimidate journalists” and “suppress dissent.” A so-called human rights group funded by the U.S. and other governments called the Center for Justice and Accountability based its argument, as in the case of Iran, on relying on the designation of Damascus as a state sponsor of terrorism. The judge believed that the evidence presented was “credible and convincing.”

Another American gift to international jurisprudence has been the Magnitsky Act of 2012, a product of the feel-good enthusiasm of the Barack Obama Administration. It was based on a narrative regarding what went on in Russia under the clueless Boris Yeltsin and his nationalist successor Vladimir Putin that was peddled by one Bill Browder, who many believe to have been a major player in the looting of the former Soviet Union. It was claimed by Browder and his accomplices in the media that the Russian government had been complicit in the arrest, torture and killing of one Sergei Magnitsky, an accountant turned whistleblower working for Browder. Almost every aspect of the story has been challenged, but it was completely bought into by the Congress and White House and led to sanctions on the Russians who were allegedly involved despite Moscow’s complaints that the U.S. had no legal right to interfere in its internal affairs relating to a Russian citizen.

Worse still, the Magnitsky Act has been broadened and is now the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act of 2017. It is being used to sanction and otherwise punish alleged “human rights abusers” in other countries and has a very low bar for establishing credibility. It was most recently used in the Jamal Khashoggi case, in which the U.S. sanctioned the alleged killers of the Saudi dissident journalist even though no one had actually been arrested or convicted of any crime.

The long-established principle that Washington should respect the sovereignty of other states even when it disagrees with their internal or foreign policies has effectively been abandoned. And, as if things were not bad enough, some recent legislation virtually guarantees that in the near future the United States will be doing still more to interfere in and destabilize much of the world. Congress passed and President Trump has signed the Elie Wiesel Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act, which seeks to improve Washington’s response to mass killings. The prevention of genocide and mass murder is now a part of American national security agenda. There will be a Mass Atrocity Task Force and State Department officers will receive training to sensitize them to impending genocide, though presumably the new program will not apply to the Palestinians as the law’s namesake never was troubled by their suppression and killing by the state of Israel.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

June 15, 2020 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | 1 Comment

Iran to react if US prevents lifting arms embargo as per nuclear deal: President Rouhani

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani addresses a cabinet session in Tehran on June 14, 2020. (Photo by IRNA )
Press TV | June 14, 2020

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani says the country will not remain indifferent and will show suitable reaction if the US tries to prevent lifting of arms embargo against the Islamic Republic, which will end this year in accordance with the landmark nuclear deal that Tehran clinched with six world powers back in 2015.

During past months, Washington has stepped up calls for the extension of a UN arms embargo on Iran, which will expire in October under UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which endorses Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The administration of US President Donald Trump has threatened that it may seek to trigger a snapback of all sanctions on Iran if its attempts to extend the arms embargo fail.

The landmark nuclear deal was reached between Iran and the P5+1 group of countries — the US, Britain, France, Russia and China plus Germany — in 2015. However, in May 2018, US President Trump unilaterally pulled his country out of the JCPOA and re-imposed the sanctions that had been lifted against Tehran and began unleashing the “toughest ever” fresh sanctions.

While the US is no longer a party to the JCPOA, it has launched a campaign to renew the Iran arms ban — in place since 2006/2007 — through a resolution at the Security Council, but Russia and China are most likely to veto it.

Addressing a cabinet session on Sunday, Rouhani said, “The termination of the arms ban [on Iran] … is one of the important achievements of the JCPOA and if Americans want to question this achievement, other big countries know what our reaction will be.”

The Iranian president also expressed hope that “all countries who are members of the United Nations Security Council and the Board of Governors” of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), would be aware of “the US planning with regard to these plots.”

“We, for our part, will be successful in this regard and will weather these plans that the United States has made for Iran,” he noted.

Posting a tweet in early June, Iran’s UN ambassador said the US’ call for an extension of the UN Security Council’s arms embargo on Tehran lacked legal standing in international law.

Majid Takht-e Ravanchi said the US ambassador to the UN “wrongly” believes the US retains the right to initiate snapback of sanctions under the UN Security Council Resolution 2231.

“WRONG: US cannot be a JCPOA ‘Participant’, since Donald Trump ceased US participation,” the Iranian ambassador noted, referring to Trump’s 2018 decision to withdraw his country from the Iran nuclear deal in violation of the Resolution 2231.

In the middle of May, China and Russia also rejected US plans to extend a UN arms embargo on Iran along with a probable push to trigger a return of all sanctions on Tehran at the UN Security Council.

The “US has no right to extend an arms embargo on Iran, let alone to trigger snapback,” China’s UN mission wrote in a tweet.

“Maintaining the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is the only right way moving forward,” he added.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov vehemently rejected the plan as a “cynical” measure plunging the UN Security Council into crisis.

“The conclusion is that the next crisis in the UN Security Council and the UN as a whole is imminent, taking into account this US stubbornness,” he said, adding, “Washington will not have an easy road here in any case.”

European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said on Tuesday that the US has already pulled out of the international nuclear agreement and cannot currently use its former membership of the deal to seek a permanent arms embargo on Tehran.

“The United States has withdrawn from the JCPOA, and now they cannot claim that they are still part of the JCPOA in order to deal with this issue from the JCPOA agreement. They withdraw. It’s clear. They withdraw,” Borrell said.

The EU believes that the JCPOA plays a key role in maintaining regional and international security and has made efforts to keep the pact alive despite US pressure.

Borrell is tasked with supervising the circumstances surrounding the implementation of the nuclear deal so he can help resolve disputes between its signatories.

June 14, 2020 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , | 1 Comment

Denmark summons Saudi envoy over Riyadh’s support for anti-Iran terror group

Press TV – June 11, 2020

Denmark has called in the Saudi ambassador to Copenhagen to protest the kingdom’s support for a notorious terrorist group behind a 2018 deadly attack in Iran’s southwestern city of Ahvaz, among its other terrorist crimes against Iranians.

Riyadh’s envoy was summoned to the Danish Foreign Ministry on Wednesday after terrorism charges were leveled against three leaders of the anti-Iran al-Ahvaziya terror group based in Denmark.

Danish police said they were prosecuting “three people for financing and promoting terrorism in Iran, including in collaboration with a Saudi intelligence service.”

The suspects are believed to have received funds from Riyadh, which has been pursuing a highly hostile Iran policy under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Meanwhile, Danish Security and Intelligence Service (PET) stressed that the trio worked for the Saudi regime between 2012 and 2018.

PET chief Finn Borch Andersen said it is “completely unacceptable” that Denmark is used “as a starting point to finance and support terrorism.”

“We will not accept such activities under any circumstances and our ambassador in Riyadh has repeated the same message directly to the Saudi authorities,” Danish Foreign Minister Jeppe Kofod said in a statement.

In February, Denmark said its intelligence service had arrested and charged three members of the Saudi-backed terror group for spying on behalf of the kingdom in the Scandinavian country.

Al-Ahvaziya has committed numerous crimes against Iranian targets over the past decades, among them bomb attacks in public places, abductions, assassinations, kidnapping for ransom, shooting at tourists and blowing up oil pipelines.

Formed a few years after the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, the terror group was inspired back then by the Baath regime of Iraq’s ex-dictator Saddam Hussein.

Al-Ahvaziya has been after separating the southwestern province of Khuzestan — home to the country’s Arab population — from the rest of Iran through engaging in armed conflict against the Iranian government.

In September 2018, the Saudi-backed terror outfit claimed responsibility for a deadly attack on military parade in Ahvaz, Khuzestan’s provincial capital. The assault killed 25 people, including members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and civilian bystanders, and injured 70 others.

Shortly after the attack, the London-based “Iran International” television channel funded by Saudi Arabia allowed the al-Ahvaziya spokesman to go live on air to defend the bloodshed.

In parallel, the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group also claimed responsibility for the Ahvaz attack.

In response, Iran launched missiles on gatherings of the ringleaders of the terror attack Ahvaz based in an area east of the Euphrates in Syria, killing and injuring a number of them and inflicting heavy losses on their stronghold.

Riyadh is widely viewed as a key sponsor of Takfiri terrorists, who are inspired by Wahhabism, an extremist ideology preached by Saudi clerics.

June 11, 2020 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, War Crimes | , , | 2 Comments

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »