Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Zenith of Western asymmetric warfare in Iran and Ukraine

By Drago Bosnic | June 16, 2025

Achieving strategic advantage over your opponents has been at the center of every conflict in human history. In modern times, this is accomplished with long-range strike systems and weapons of mass destruction. However, countries that are at a disadvantage in that regard can opt for asymmetric methods to achieve similar or sometimes even more efficient results. Ever since the advent of nuclear weapons, direct conflicts between global powers have been avoided, as all sides understand there would be no winners in such a war (or at least they did until recently).

Thus, the importance of intelligence services and other forms of non-kinetic warfare grew exponentially. The ability to infiltrate your opponent’s state apparatus is of the utmost importance, while maintaining plausible deniability adds to the strategic depth of defense, as the attacker can simply deny the involvement of its special services.

The political West has been at the forefront of such operations for years, targeting all of its opponents through asymmetric means, particularly through proxies. This is especially true for Russia, which still has major issues with the Kiev regime agents infiltrating the country and conducting operations of strategic importance. The latest attacks on Russian strategic aviation are a testament to that. It should be noted that Moscow’s services have been quite successful in detecting Western agents as they have decades of experience in doing so.

However, Ukrainian operatives are a different story. Namely, the vast majority of Ukrainians speak fluent Russian and can easily blend in virtually anywhere in the country. They can also obtain Russian citizenship, meaning they could be largely under the radar for years. It’s exceedingly difficult to uncover such plots, particularly if they’re being conducted over the course of several years.

This also holds true for other countries of the multipolar world, including Iran, which has been heavily infiltrated by foreign agents, as evidenced by the sheer number of assassinations and so-called decapitation strikes on top Iranian commanders. It’s still unclear how exactly Israel managed to create such a large network of its agents within Iran, but their operations have had a strategic impact on the ongoing conflict.

The Mossad had very close ties with the SAVAK, former Iranian secret police and intelligence service during the Shah era, so it’s quite possible that the Israelis maintained contacts with their Iranian associates even after 1979. They could’ve easily played the role of sleeper agents who were activated by Israel at the moment of the strike. In addition, new operatives could’ve infiltrated Iran from neighboring countries, particularly Azerbaijan which maintains a close partnership with Israel.

Apart from being a major client for the Israeli Military Industrial Complex (MIC), which was instrumental in Baku’s takeover of native Armenian lands in Artsakh (better known as Nagorno-Karabakh), Azerbaijan also has irredentist ambitions toward northwestern Iran, where a homonymous area has more ethnic Azeris than the South Caucasus country itself. The regime in Baku certainly sees the ongoing events as a perfect opportunity to achieve its goals, which could be a major factor in Israeli operations.

Numerous observers have also pointed out the many similarities between the actions of the Kiev regime and Israel, as both have been conducting these asymmetric hybrid attacks deep within Russia and Iran, respectively. The drones that were used in attacks on Moscow’s long-range aviation and Iranian air defenses operate in a virtually identical manner, targeting strategic assets from within.

There are two possibilities in this case. Either the Mossad is involved in training the SBU and/or GUR, or they’re all connected into a much larger network run from Washington DC and London. The latter is much likelier, as both SBU and GUR have strong ties with the CIA and MI6, respectively. In other words, the US-led political West is conducting these operations in an attempt to secure a strategic advantage over its rivals.

This is also done through so-called “international” organizations such as the UN, OSCE, IAEA, etc. For instance, after the start of the special military operation (SMO), Russian military intelligence uncovered that OSCE, which is supposed to be a neutral organization monitoring the ceasefire, was actually helping the Kiev regime target Russian forces by giving the former access to its cameras along the frontline. Moscow promptly ordered OSCE personnel to leave after this.

Some sources are reporting that the IAEA also did something similar in Iran, by giving Israel information on the identity of Iranian nuclear scientists. If true, this could explain how the Mossad was so effective in eliminating them virtually on the first day of the attack. In addition to scientists, a large number of high-ranking Iranian military officers were eliminated within the country. This is perfectly in line with the political West’s doctrine of so-called “decapitation” attacks that aim to paralyze the chain of command in a targeted country.

Many of the most prominent warmongers in Washington DC have been calling for such strikes, even against opponents like Russia. And indeed, in the last several years, there have been a number of assassination attempts against top-ranking Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin himself. Once again, this was done through proxies such as the Neo-Nazi junta.

In some cases, this could’ve also worked, as evidenced by disturbing revelations regarding the mysterious death of the late Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi and his Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian. The aftermath of Raisi’s death has been disastrous for Iran and its Axis of Resistance. By the end of last year, Syria fell to NATO’s terrorist proxies, while Hezbollah’s long-time leader Hassan Nasrallah was assassinated, followed by a number of high-ranking Iranian and pro-Iranian figures at around a similar time.

The strategic consequences of these events cannot be overstated, meaning that the idea they were purely accidental is extremely unlikely, to put it mildly. By the time Israel attacked Iran, the geopolitical situation in the Middle East shifted dramatically in Israel’s favor. This made launching strategic attacks much easier, as it didn’t have to worry about Syrian air defenses.

Mossad operatives on the ground used not only drones, but also missiles (such as the “Spike NLOS”). Worse yet, it seems they didn’t even have to stay in the country to launch these strikes, as both drones and missiles were controlled remotely, which is yet another indicator of the same modus operandi used by the Kiev regime. Military sources indicate that Israel also used portable electronic warfare (EW) systems to disrupt Iranian air defenses, making it far easier for its missiles to reach targets within Iran.

As previously mentioned, this sort of deep infiltration also enabled Israel to assassinate top-ranking personnel. Reportedly, this includes General Mohammad Bagheri, the Chief of the Iranian General Staff; Hossein Salami, Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and David Sheikhian, commanding officer of the IRGC’s air defenses. Many other senior military leaders were also killed.

Although Israeli strikes were far more efficient than those launched by the Kiev regime, it’s impossible not to draw parallels with high-profile assassinations of numerous Russian public and military figures, including Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, the late commander of Russian NBC Protection Troops, who was killed in a terrorist attack back in mid-December. It should be noted that he was investigating US involvement in biological warfare in NATO-occupied Ukraine and was in no way connected to military operations against the Neo-Nazi junta forces.

Thus, the only logical conclusion is that his assassination was certainly not conducted by the SBU of their own volition. Namely, such operations require significant resources that would be reserved for important operations to undermine the Russian military. The only thing that was undermined is the investigation into the Pentagon’s massive biowarfare program.

The Kiev regime conducted many similar attacks on Russian scientists, including Daniil Mikheev, a coordinator of new unmanned systems for the Ministry of Defense; Konstantin Ogarkov, an employee of a defense research institute in Voronezh; Igor Kolesnikov, an engineer at a design bureau in the Tula oblast (region); Sergei Potapov, a cybersecurity defense specialist from Nizhny Novgorod; Valery Smirnov, one of the leading experts in programs for radio-electronic protection of strategic facilities.

In January 2024, a car with officers from the electronic intelligence headquarters in the Bryansk oblast was blown up, while on the night of April 17-18, Evgeny Rytnikov, the head of the design bureau of the Bryansk Electromechanical Plant, the developer of the now legendary “Krasukha” EW systems, was also killed. Such assassinations are a testament to the terrorist nature of the Neo-Nazi junta, as all these people were non-combatants.

Among the prominent Iranian scientists killed by Mossad were Dr. Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, Dr. Ahmad Reza Zolfaghari, Dr. Abdolhamid Minuchehr, Dr. Amir Hosein Fekhi and Dr. Fereydoun Abbasi. Once again, it’s impossible not to draw parallels, despite the fact that Israeli strikes were far more strategically consequential.

Still, the main conclusion is that the political West continues to use its proxies to wage war on several countries simultaneously, while also maintaining plausible deniability.

The only way to counter such attacks is for the targeted countries to enforce tighter control over communications, as well as enlarge their intelligence apparatus. While these measures could be seen as “totalitarian” (and will no doubt be presented as such by the mainstream propaganda machine), there’s simply no other way to blunt the blade of the political West’s modern asymmetric hybrid warfare.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

June 16, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Deterrence or death: Israel is making the case for a nuclear-armed Iran

By Dr. Mathew Maavak | RT | June 16, 2025

Just hours after Israel launched its strikes on Iran in the early hours of Friday, June 13, US President Donald J. Trump declared that it was “not too late” for Tehran to return to the negotiating table over its nuclear program. The level of delusion displayed by the joint aggressors here is simply staggering. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu justified the bombs being rained on Iranian cities as a means to bring “freedom.”

The US-Israeli axis sees no contradiction in reducing a sovereign nation to rubble while draping its aggression in humanitarian rhetoric. The strike came even as Washington and Tehran were engaged in protracted negotiations over the thorny nuclear issue. This is not diplomacy; this is coercion cloaked in diplomatic theater. Worse, it will go down as a day of infamy in international relations: a moment when negotiation was used not to resolve conflict, but to disguise premeditated violence.

Regime change blowback

What did Israel and the United States hope to achieve through this betrayal? Regime change? The total submission of a sovereign nation to a militarized settler state forged in 1948? Are we now expected to believe that post-regime change, Tehran will suddenly embrace Tel Aviv – as some delusional pro-Israel ideologues like to fantasize?

Incredibly, Israel now casts itself as the victim. Russia’s deputy UN envoy Dmitry Polyansky brusquely described Israel’s claims that it was only acting in “self-defense” as “very perverted logic.” But such perversion runs deep in the policies and pathologies of the Israeli state.

As key Iranian infrastructure is bombed to ruins, and as Netanyahu urges Iranians to overthrow what he calls “an evil and oppressive regime,” many Iranians are calling, ironically and defiantly, for their government to acquire nuclear weapons as the only credible deterrent against the endless cycle of sanctions, sabotage, targeted killings, and military strikes unleashed by the US-Israeli axis. Under such circumstances, can Tehran be blamed for cultivating and arming proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas in an effort to contain Israel? Just look at what Israel did to its neighbours before these groups existed.

What makes Netanyahu believe that any post-Ayatollah government would be more pliant? If anything, it might be more resolute in seeking the ultimate deterrence. After all, Iran has been the target of unrelenting foreign aggression since the 1953 CIA-MI6 coup against nationalist Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh.

And let us not forget that during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War, the Islamic Republic was bombarded with chemical weapons, supplied or sanctioned by Western powers. Washington had no qualms back then, when Saddam was “our man.” That was, until Israel orchestrated a back-channel arms pipeline that would become the infamous Iran-Contra affair.

A matter of honor

Can any self-respecting nation endure the constant humiliation meted out by its adversaries? That model of submission may succeed in parts of the Arab world, or in post-colonial client states across the Global South, but the Persians are apparently made of sterner stuff. Only time will tell. A civilization that traces its lineage to Cyrus and Avicenna has a moral and historical obligation to protect itself from existential threats. And if doing so requires the ultimate form of deterrence, then so be it – even if that means defying a so-called “international community” that has allowed Israel to quietly amass nuclear weapons and lay waste to its neighbors with impunity for nearly 80 years.

Israel, for its part, has warned the world time and again of the consequences of ignoring its self-declared prerogatives. As Netanyahu declared last year: “If Israel falls, the whole world falls.”

What exactly did he mean by that? Perhaps he was alluding to the Samson Option – a Sword of Damocles that Israel has long wielded over the world’s head. It has been described as a nuclear-armed ultimatum: protect Israel at all costs, or face global ruin.

The ‘Samson Option’

The Samson Option refers to Israel’s alleged military doctrine of massive nuclear retaliation in the face of an existential threat. Named after the biblical figure who brought down a Philistine temple, killing himself along with his enemies, the doctrine reflects a last-resort strategy. If Israel faces annihilation, it will reportedly unleash its full nuclear arsenal, possibly as many as 400 warheads, against its adversaries, regardless of collateral damage or global fallout.

But is the Samson Option truly limited to nuclear counterstrikes?

Former Israeli Defense Minister Naftali Bennett once warned that if Israel were ever pushed to the brink, critical global systems, including life-sustaining medical devices like pacemakers, could cease to function. That may sound far-fetched, until you consider that Israel’s cybersecurity and cyber-strategic sectors have become a strategic pillar of its economy. Navigation apps like Waze, maritime tracking systems, and aerospace logistics pipelines are embedded with “secure” Israeli codes.

Now imagine a hidden fail-safe buried in legacy software across the globe, programmed to unleash cascading failures across nuclear plants, air traffic control systems, financial markets, and emergency infrastructure when the Samson Option is unleashed? Think of the recent Stuxnet and Lebanese pager affairs as harbingers. One keystroke, one kill-switch, and the lights go out everywhere!

As a researcher in systemic global risks, I find it increasingly naive to assume that the Samson Option is limited to a conventional nuclear doctrine.

The real Samson Option may be about collapsing the global system itself – a scorched-earth deterrent against isolation or defeat.

A case for a nuclear Iran

Kenneth Waltz, one of the most influential realist thinkers in international relations, argued in a controversial 2012 Foreign Affairs article titled “Why Iran Should Get the Bomb” that a nuclear-armed Iran might actually stabilize the Middle East, rather than destabilize it.

Waltz’s theory is rooted in neorealism (or structural realism), which sees the international system as anarchic, and posits that states act primarily to ensure their own survival. From this perspective, nuclear weapons are the ultimate deterrent, and their spread, under specific conditions, can actually lead to greater stability. Consider North Korea: since developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems, its behavior has arguably become more calculated and status-quo-oriented. It also encouraged Trump to extend an olive branch to Kim Jong-un.

Israel remains the sole nuclear power in the Middle East, a monopoly fostering strategic imbalance and absolute impunity. The emergence of a rival nuclear-armed state, even with minimal second-strike capability, would force belligerent sides to act with greater caution. Conflicts would likely be reduced to face-saving precision strikes, as seen with nuclear-armed India and Pakistan. Despite hosting radical militant groups, Pakistan has behaved as a rational actor within the nuclear matrix.

Similarly, a nuclear Iran could reduce its reliance on asymmetric proxy strategies – such as its support for Hamas or Hezbollah – because its security would primarily rest on deterrence.

Some critics however warn that if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia may rapidly follow suit. A moot point, except that Riyadh bankrolled Islamabad’s nuclear weapons program under America’s watch during the 1980s Soviet-Afghan War which featured beloved “anti-Soviet warriors” like Osama bin Laden!

There are also persistent reports which suggest that some Pakistani nuclear assets may already be stationed in Saudi Arabia, under the command of senior Pakistani officers. In the event of a regional nuclear escalation, Riyadh can simply request transfer at will.

Historical precedents also do not support alarmist non-proliferation fears. When North Korea acquired nuclear weapons, neither South Korea nor Japan followed suit. Deterrence, once established, tends to cool ambitions, especially when the cost of escalation becomes too high.

What if Iran is destroyed?

So, what happens if Israel prevails in the current high-stakes military standoff, and a “friendly” government is installed in Tehran? This could come about in any number of ways, as Israel alone will not be able to bomb Iran into submission. From a game theory perspective, a series of false flag events can be pinned on “Iranian sleeper cells.” Furthermore, Netanyahu keeps insisting that Iran is plotting to assassinate Trump – a charge unsubstantiated by any US intelligence findings. If a “presidential transition” occurs overnight, Vice President J.D. Vance may commit US forces directly to Israel’s ongoing bombardment of Iran.

But let’s game out another scenario: If the current conflict escalates and the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is destroyed – whether by design or by accident – Iran will almost certainly be blamed for the loss of Islam’s third holiest site. Such an event would enrage the Sunni Muslim world, redirecting its fury toward Shia Iran, and potentially paving the way for Israel to construct its long-anticipated Third Temple. Notably, in the early 1980s, Israeli extremists plotted to blow up the Dome of the Rock and the adjacent Al-Aqsa Mosque to effect this very outcome.

Should such scenarios unfold, it could mark the disintegration of the Middle East as we know it. Netanyahu has previously hinted that after Iran, nuclear-armed “militant Islamic regimes” like Pakistan could be next in Israel’s crosshairs. This warning is not without its irony. For decades, Pakistan’s deep state has maintained covert ties with Israel – dating back to Mossad-ISI collaboration in arming the Mujahideen during the 1980s Soviet-Afghan war. Israel has long been aware of Pakistan’s “pan-Islamic” nuclear ambitions but likely opted for strategic silence until all the Middle Eastern chips were in place.

What the wider Muslim world fails to grasp is this: alliances with unprincipled powers are always transactional. When the geopolitical bill comes due, it may cost far more than anyone is willing to pay.

The Zionist dream

Since its founding in 1948, several Israeli leaders have consistently expressed a vision of “Greater Israel” stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates – encompassing parts of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and the Gulf. Iran however remained the perennial spoiler to this geopolitical dream.

In fact, it was none other than Supreme Allied Commander Europe (NATO), General Wesley Clark, who famously revealed that Iran was the last in a list of seven Middle Eastern countries slated for regime change after 9/11. The current conflict is not about Iranian nukes per se; it is about Israel’s territorial ambitions and the fulfilment of ancient apocalyptic messianic fantasies.

Zionist ideologues like Avi Lipkin had even floated the idea of “purifying Mecca, Medina, and Mt. Sinai” – rhetoric that signals theological as much as territorial ambitions. Once Israel secures strategic depth in the Middle East, it may soon challenge major powers beyond the region. But first, Iran must be subdued!

Dr. Mathew Maavak researches systems science, global risks, geopolitics, strategic foresight, governance and Artificial Intelligence.

June 16, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

What if Iran Closes the Hormuz Strait?

Sputnik – 16.06.2025

With the Israel-Iranian conflict in full swing, oil producers and oil consumers alike are wondering: could Iran resort to shutting down maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, and if so, how it might affect oil prices?

Oil could hit $130 per barrel, or even $300, if Iran does close the strait, warns Dr. Tilak Doshi from the King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center.

It is very likely that such high prices would not be “favored by the US administration, and they will try to arrive at a resolution of the war as soon as possible,” he notes.

“Historically, in 2008, oil prices briefly reached $147 per barrel without any major geopolitical conflict, driven solely by financial speculation and tight supply-demand dynamics,” muses energy economist Dr. Kazi Sohag.

“During the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo, triggered by the Yom Kippur War, oil prices increased by 300%, demonstrating how quickly markets can react to political shocks,” he adds.

Even without the strait’s closure, targeting Iran’s oil export and refining facilities could push prices to $80 or even $90, predicts Marc Ayoub, energy policy researcher.

“If things continue like they are currently, we would stay on the same norm, and we might reach a level or a ceiling of $80 per barrel maximum,” he elaborates.

“And also, if Israeli Kareesh or Leviathan are targeted as well, we might see increases for up to $5, between $5 and $10. That means we might reach… $90 or something.”

June 16, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , | Leave a comment

Italy and Germany on the War Front

By Manlio Dinucci | Global Research | June 16, 2025

Italy and Germany are at war not only against Russia in support of Ukraine, but also against Iran in support of Israel. This is demonstrated by documented facts. These facts are ignored by the political-media mainstream.

The Italian B350ER aircraft – a new-generation aircraft for espionage, target recognition and communication operations – operates in the Black Sea together with similar US aircraft to spy on Russian territory and assist Ukrainian forces to strike Russian targets with unmanned drones and explosive vessels. Italy is thus not only supplying weapons to Kiyv but is actively participating in this and other ways in the NATO war against Russia. Even more direct is Germany’s participation in the war: it has permanently stationed a 5,000-strong Bundeswehr brigade in Lithuania, equipped with 2,000 tanks and other military vehicles.

“With this combat-ready brigade,” states German Defence Minister Pistorius, “we are taking on a leadership responsibility within the Alliance here on NATO’s Eastern Flank”.

Thus, NATO has deployed its forces on the borders with Russia’s Kaliningrad Oblast and Russia’s ally Belarus. At the same time, two other NATO countries — the United Kingdom and Canada — are deploying their ++forces in Estonia and Latvia, which also border Russia. These forces are like a candle lit in a powder keg. According to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, if NATO forces suffer losses in a clash with Russian forces on the border, all other NATO countries would have to intervene on their side against Russia. The Trump Administration’s role is becoming increasingly equivocal, as it states that it wants to agree with Russia on a diplomatic solution to end the war. Yet, it is helping Ukraine to continue the war against Russia, either directly through military operations such as those in the Black Sea, or indirectly through NATO, which, under US command, is bringing its military forces ever closer to Russia.

As part of the same strategy, Germany and Italy play a significant role in supporting Israel in the Middle East. After the USA, Germany is the second-largest supplier of weapons to Israel. So far, Israel has received six Dolphin-class submarines from Germany, manufactured by ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems. These submarines have been modified to launch nuclear attack missiles. According to an agreement in 2022, Germany will supply Israel with three more Drakon-class submarines, which are larger than the previous models and can launch even more powerful nuclear missiles. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that possesses nuclear weapons, and, as it has not joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, it is not subject to any control. Iran, having joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, has civil nuclear facilities that are subject to UN Atomic Energy Agency controls.

June 16, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US aerial tankers headed to Middle East – media

RT | June 16, 2025

The US has reportedly deployed more than 30 aerial refueling tankers across the Atlantic toward the Middle East, Military Watch Magazine reported on Monday. The outlet has described the buildup as “unprecedented,” claiming it could suggest broader US involvement in the ongoing Israeli-Iranian war.

West Jerusalem and Tehran have entered the fourth day of open hostilities. Last Thursday, Israeli forces launched airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets, killing senior military officials and scientists and prompting retaliatory missile barrages on Israeli cities such as Tel Aviv and Haifa.

The US has expressed support for the Israeli strikes, with President Donald Trump calling them “excellent.” He has also warned that Washington could become directly involved in the conflict if American interests are threatened but has yet to announce any plans to involve US forces.

However, according to flight tracking data, the US has already started deploying KC-135 and KC-46 aerial refueling tankers to the Middle East. Military Watch Magazine has suggested that the aircraft may be intended to support Israeli Air Force operations or refuel US fighters and bombers if Washington expands its role in the conflict.

The report also claims that tankers from other Western countries have participated in Israeli aerial refueling efforts, while the US is believed to have provided intelligence, satellite targeting data, and missile defense support.

On Sunday, Axios reported that Israeli officials had asked the US to directly take part in the military operation, specifically requesting assistance in striking Iran’s Fordow enrichment facility. However, US officials cited by the outlet said the request was declined, with one stating that the Trump administration is not considering any such involvement.

Nevertheless, Tehran has claimed that Washington’s support for West Jerusalem has made the US complicit in Israel’s aggression against Iran. Sources within the Iranian military have also reportedly indicated that Tehran’s response to Israeli strikes would “spread to all areas occupied by this [Israeli] regime and related US bases in the region in the coming days.”

In response, Trump has warned that any Iranian attack on US forces would trigger a military response, writing on his Truth Social platform that “if we are attacked in any way, shape, or form by Iran, the full strength and might of the US Armed Forces will come down on you at levels never seen before.” He also insisted that the US “had nothing to do with the attack on Iran” and called on Tehran to return to negotiations.

June 16, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Middle East in Crisis – 2

Netanyahu’s war on Iran has no future

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | June 16, 2025 

An unnoticed undercurrent of the Israel-Iran war is that three Christian nations in Europe — UK, France and Germany — have joined the fray with alacrity on the side of Israel.  

Strange, isn’t it, that these European countries comprising the so-called E-3 have a well-established exclusive path of dialogue with Iran but are joining Israel’s warpath? It’s a Crusade, stupid! 

The three ‘Crusader nations’ share Israel’s obsession to check the rise of a Muslim nation as an emerging power in the Middle East that could radically transform its geopolitical alignments. Simply put, destroying the Islamic regime in Iran is the real objective of Israel’s war — and of the three Christian nations from Europe. 

Reportedly, Israeli fighter jets which attacked Iran used the British air base in Cyprus; British refuelling planes are on deployment in Syrian-Iraqi airspace for use of Israeli fighter jets; French president Emmanuel Macron, as defender of Roman Catholicism openly vows that he will act to prevent Israel’s defeat; Germany, the fountainhead of Protestantism, has also similarly positioned itself behind Israel. 

However, on the other hand, what emerges from the hour-long phone conversation between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday is that they will work together to advance the path of dialogue with Iran, the current conflict situation notwithstanding. The Kremlin readout stresses that Putin forcefully denounced the Israeli aggression. 

Such a line-up of the principal actors signals that Israel’s best bet lies in killing the war itself as a strategic error and create a ‘new normal’? But will Tehran allow Netanyahu to get away with murder? That’s the million dollar question. Putin will have to use all his persuasive power during the planned visit to Iran — ie., if it still goes ahead. 

The Israeli thinking behind its assassination of the IRGC leadership and military commanders stemmed out of the foolish miscalculation that Tehran lacks a political will to resist aggression. The Israeli objective is on the one hand to create conditions for a regime change in Iran and on the other hand to derail any form of US-Iran constructive engagement.

All through, terror has been the chosen weapon for Israel and the western powers to undermine and weaken Iran. But a point has been reached where a containment of Iran is no longer feasible. Logically, Iran’s neighbours in the Muslim world should have rallied in support of Iran but that’s too much to expect, given their limited sovereignty to act independently. 

Nonetheless, Iran will not capitulate. Iran’s sense of national pride and honour as a civilisation state will prompt it to circle the wagons and wage a protracted war until victory. From the early days of the revolution, the Islamic republic which was founded on the principles of justice and resistance on the bedrock of nationalism and independence, got attracted to Mao’s concept of ‘protracted people’s war’ to keep predator nations at bay. That strategy paid off during the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988). 

Saddam Hussein too, like Netanyahu, miscalculated that Iran was a hopelessly weakened nation in the civil war conditions with its economy in virtual collapse, army in disarray, state formation yet to crystallise, and with no allies in the region to lend a helping hand. But as it turned out, Iran fought an 8-year war defiantly to a stalemate, undeterred by the lavish support extended to Saddam by the Western powers and their regional allies. 

The US even equipped Saddam’s army with chemical weapons to stop the human-wave–attack tactics of Iranian fighters, but of no avail — although, an estimated quarter million Iranians sacrificed their lives.  

At some point, in a very near future, Israel will also meet the fate of Saddam, having miscalculated Iran’s grit to resist. Netanyahu also estimated that Iran is a much weakened country compared to last year due to the setbacks taken by the Axis of Resistance. Such naïveté underestimates the potency of resistance at the very core of Shi’ism. 

Last week, the resistance forces that were supposedly vanquished from the face of the earth regrouped and began firing missiles at Israel — from Syria, of all places! On May 4, Houthis fired a ballistic missile at Tel Aviv hitting the perimeter of the main terminal of Ben Gurion Airport! Reports suggest that Hezbollah has restored its supply routes from Iran.  

What Israel fails to grasp is that resistance movements do not die if their raison d’être remains. Israel is, in reality, in very deep crisis fighting on multiple fronts amidst a cascading domestic political crisis and an economy that requires drip feeding by Washington. 

As the US’s capacity to influence events in the Middle East keeps diminishing, Israel’s unviability as a nation propped by the Jewish Lobby in the Beltway appears sharper in focus. Already, there is resentment within the US about bankrolling Israel and fighting its wars.

On the contrary, the rise of Iran is inevitable — with a population base 10 times bigger than Israel’s, vast mineral resources, a self-sufficient agricultural sector and broad-based industry, innovative progress in technology, big domestic market, highly strategic location and trained manpower. 

Iran’s stamina is of a long distance runner, as Iran-Iraq war showed, whereas, Israel’s forte is as sprinter on a 100 metre track. Make no mistake, Israel, a small country with a population of 8 million people will get hollowed out in a protracted war. 

In the current scenario, what goes against Israel critically is that while President Donald Trump tried and failed to stop Netanyahu on the warpath, he is not going to deploy American forces to fight Israel’s war. 

Trump has an evangelical base in US politics and is on friendly terms with wealthy Jewish donors, but has nothing in common with the Crusader nations of the Old World — be it on Ukraine or Iran. In both cases, actually, he tends to view the paradigm through the America First prism where he sees immense potential to generate wealth through business links with Russia or Iran. 

Besides, Trump is far too smart a politician to risk the future of his MAGA movement whose core tenet is the total rejection of all interventionist ‘forever wars’. Trump knows only too well that American public opinion is staunchly opposed to Middle Eastern wars.

The replacement of Mike Waltz as NSA on May 1 (a known Israeli proxy who found himself in the top echelons of Trump administration) and the subsequent purge of the entire pack of ‘Iran hawks’ in the National Security staff under him, signalled that Trump is wary of Netanyahu’s diabolical plots to derail his negotiations with Iran through back channels. (here and here)   

During their phone conversation on Saturday, according to the Kremlin readout, Trump and Putin agreed to prioritise the “negotiating track in Iran’s nuclear programme… Trump noted, the team of US negotiators is ready for resuming work with Iranian representatives.” Clearly, a military confrontation with Iran does not figure in Trump’s calculus. 

That being the case, Netanyahu’s bombastic rhetoric apart, Israel’s best interests lie in ending this futile war in the quickest way possible. Conceivably, that is also the preference of the IDF. A protracted war on its own steam with a clutch of crusader nations in tow as cheer leaders is not something that can save Israel from destruction.

Curiously, Trump in his latest Truth Social post on Sunday after the conversation with Putin advised Israel “to make a deal” with Iran! Does that fit into Netanyahu’s war mongering? And Trump went on to burnish his own credentials as a peacemaker president! 

Trump concluded predicting that “we will have PEACE, soon, between Israel and Iran!” Succinctly put, Trump has no intentions whatsoever to risk American lives by fighting Netanyahu’s wars.  

Obviously, “PEACE, soon” will be Russia and Iran’s preference too, as serious negotiations can be resumed and agreement reached that would herald a US-Iran normalisation and the lifting of American  sanctions. But does that suit Netanyahu? 

The paradox is, Israel has no future in a protracted war with Iran, but an inconclusive end to this war will pose the high risk for Netanyahu of a cascading demand for a regime change in Israel. Loss of power means loss of parliamentary immunity from prosecution that Netanyahu hitherto enjoyed from corruption charges against him and his family members, and a possible imprisonment.

Read more: Iran Attack: Netanyahu Gambles Big, Rediff.com, June 14, 2025

June 16, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Putin holds phone conversations with Israeli PM and Iranian president

RT | June 13, 2025

Russian President Vladimir Putin has held phone conversations with his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss the escalation in the Middle East following the Israeli strike against Iran.

Israel launched a major attack on Iran overnight targeting nuclear facilities and various military installations. The strikes continued into the day, inflicting considerable material damage and casualties on Iran’s top military leadership and, reportedly, high-profile nuclear scientists.

“The Russian president expressed his condolences to the leadership and people of the Islamic Republic of Iran in connection with the numerous human casualties, including civilians, resulting from the Israeli strikes,” the Kremlin press service said in a statement on Friday.

Russia “condemns Israel’s actions, which violate the UN Charter and international law,” Putin stressed, according to the statement. At the same time, the Russian leader expressed a readiness to mediate and to “continue to contribute to the de-escalation of the conflict between Iran and Israel.”

Putin also underscored the importance of “returning to the negotiation process and resolving all issues related to the Iranian nuclear program exclusively through political and diplomatic means.” The ongoing escalation “is fraught with the most disastrous consequences for the entire region,” he warned.

The Israeli attack comes after five rounds of US-Iranian talks about Tehran’s nuclear program that effectively stalled and failed to produce any tangible result. The sixth round of negotiations was expected to take place in Oman on Sunday.

Iran has vowed to retaliate for the attack, insisting that it “cannot have been carried out without the coordination and authorization of the United States.” US President Donald Trump claimed he knew about the impending strikes beforehand, describing them as “very successful.” Trump also suggested Tehran brought the attack upon itself through its alleged reluctance to strike a nuclear deal.

“We gave them a chance and they didn’t take it. They got hit hard, very hard. They got hit about as hard as you’re going to get hit. And there’s more to come. A lot more,” he said, commenting on the attack.

June 13, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes | , , , , | 1 Comment

Western hypocrisy: ‘Israel’ bombs Iran, Tehran told not to retaliate

Al Mayadeen | June 13, 2025

Top Western leaders have called for restraint in the wake of the ongoing Israeli aggression on Iranian territory. Brutal strikes targeted military, nuclear, and civilian infrastructure and led to multiple casualties. Yet, while urging de-escalation, these leaders have largely avoided condemning “Israel’s” violation of international law, choosing instead to direct their diplomatic pressure on Tehran not to retaliate.

The double standard is stark: while Iran has consistently operated within the framework of international law and the UN Charter, the Israeli entity has carried out cross-border aggression with impunity. Under Article 51 of the UN Charter, Iran has a recognized legal right to self-defense, a point conspicuously absent from most Western statements.

Europe avoids accountability for ‘Israel’

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas called the situation, not Israeli attacks, “dangerous” and appealed for restraint from “all sides”, despite Iran being the target of the aggression. Kallas, who reportedly spoke with Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar shortly after the attack, did not denounce the strikes or the violations of Iranian sovereignty.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed the vague language, urging parties to “exercise maximum restraint, de-escalate immediately, and refrain from retaliation.” The call placed the burden on Iran to avoid a response, while the Israeli entity’s unlawful actions were met with silence.

On his part, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot and Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani both stressed the need for “diplomacy”, but neither condemned the unilateral Israeli aggression. Tajani stated, “There is no solution but a diplomatic one. Actions and reactions are dangerous,” drawing false parity between attacker and victim.

Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron convened a special defense meeting but offered no criticism of “Israel’s” blatant breach of international norms.

Australia and NATO echo the US line

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, speaking from Fiji, framed the issue around Iran’s nuclear program rather than the illegal nature of the Israeli strike. “We are very conscious of the threat that Iran becoming a nuclear state would represent,” he said, further aligning with Washington’s narrative. Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs updated travel advisories, urging Australians to leave “Israel” and the occupied Palestinian territories.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, while warning of escalation, also avoided assigning blame, waving the “de-escalation” card for vague purposes.

“De-escalation is now the first order of the day,” he said, reflecting a Western consensus that implicitly tolerates Israeli militarism while expecting Iranian restraint.

Walking a delicate line

Former US President Donald Trump confirmed that he had been briefed ahead of the strikes and stated, “Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb. We are hoping to get back to the negotiating table,” again shifting the narrative away from Israeli accountability.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed that the United States had no involvement in the strikes but issued a warning to Tehran, “Israel took unilateral action against Iran,” and any retaliation must not target US interests.

“We are not involved in strikes against Iran, and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region,” Rubio said in an official statement. “Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense, Rubio added, although it was “Israel” that always initiated attacks against the Islamic Republic.

“Let me be clear: Iran should not target US interests or personnel,” Rubio said, without addressing whether Washington would defend “Israel” in the event of Iranian retaliation, departing from traditional US messaging that often emphasizes unwavering support for the Israeli regime. This support came directly from the US president himself, who rushed to “Israel’s” rescue.

‘Both sides’ should avoid further destabilization

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer labeled the attacks “concerning” but urged all sides to reduce tensions, stopping short of condemning the aggression.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who received a direct call from Netanyahu, affirmed “Israel’s” so-called right to “self-defense” and echoed longstanding Western concerns over Iran’s nuclear program. He, too, urged both sides to avoid further destabilization, without acknowledging who initiated the escalation.

Tehran maintains right to self-defense

Iranian officials have underscored that the Islamic Republic has not initiated the war and that its actions have consistently adhered to international law. Tehran has emphasized that its right to respond is enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, asserting that “Israel’s” continued violations of international law, coupled with Western silence, further undermine the credibility of global institutions.

The widespread Western calls for restraint, directed almost exclusively at Iran, highlight a longstanding hypocrisy: that Israeli violations of international law are tolerated, while Iranian sovereignty and legal rights are dismissed or ignored.

It is worth noting that this is happening as Oman was planning to host the sixth round of US‑Iran nuclear talks this Sunday in Muscat.

Tehran and Washington have held five rounds of talks since April to carve a new nuclear deal to replace the 2015 accord that Trump unilaterally withdrew from during his first term in 2018.

Iran has always reiterated its commitment to diplomacy while upholding its commitments under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, while the West has manipulated the agency to serve geopolitical goals.

It is worth noting that Iranian media outlets on Thursday published a series of documents that reveal covert coordination between IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi and “Israel”, a collaboration Iranian officials say was designed to politicize the agency’s oversight of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.

June 13, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Israel’ crossed the line, aggression is war declaration: Araghchi

Al Mayadeen | June 13, 2025

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that “Israel has crossed every red line” in its hostilities against Iran, calling the Israeli attacks on Iran this Friday “a declaration of war.”

In a letter to the UN Security Council and the UN Secretary-General, Araghchi urged an emergency meeting to address “Israel’s” military actions against Iran, insisting that “the matter must be dealt with immediately.” Araghchi urged the UN Security Council to fulfill its obligations under the UN Charter, demanding that it condemn the attack and take swift, decisive action to hold “Israel” accountable.

The Iranian Foreign Minister also reaffirmed his country’s determination to defend itself in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter, stating that “Israel’s attacks on Iran constitute a blatant violation of Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity as an independent UN member state.”

Earlier on Friday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stated in a televised address, “The Iranian people and the nation’s officials will never remain silent in the face of this brazen aggression,” emphasizing that “the enemy will receive a legitimate, forceful, and decisive response that will make it regret its foolish act.”

Pezeshkian vows devastating response to ‘Israel’s’ aggression

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian vowed on Friday that the Islamic Republic of Iran would deliver a powerful and legitimate response to “Israel’s” act of aggression, warning that the enemy will deeply regret its actions.

“Israel” launched a major attack on Iran in the early hours of Friday, targeting residential buildings, nuclear facilities, and military infrastructure across Iran.

June 13, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Israel’s Attack on Iran: The Latest Developments

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 13.06.2025

Israel has carried out an unprecedented, multi-wave surprise attack against Iran involving 200 jets, plus drones operating inside the Islamic Republic. Here’s a recap of the key details, plus new information that’s come to light in the past hours.

The attack, codenamed ‘Operation Rising Lion’, targeted:

  • The Natanz uranium enrichment facility and the Tabriz research site.
  • Cities, with damage reported in Tehran and at least 9 other urban areas. 320+ civilians injured, nearly 80 killed.
  • Air defense and missile launchers.
  • Top IRGC and Armed Forces leaders, nuclear scientists, a senior aide to the Supreme Leader.

Iran’s Response

  • Ali Khomeini vowed “severe punishment,” while President Pezeshkian promised to make Israel “regret” its “reckless” actions.
  • Iran cancelled a new round of nuclear talks with the US, owing to US “complicity” in the attacks.
  • Assassinated military leaders are being replaced, with Mohammad Pakpour taking Hossein Salami’s place as IRGC chief, and Abdolrahim Mousavi replacing Mohammad Bagheri as Chief of General Staff.

Has Iranian Counterstrike Taken Place?

  • Initial reports suggested Iran launched 100-200 drones toward Israel.
  • Other reports said up to 800 projectiles, including cruise and ballistic missiles, were launched.
  • But Fars News says Iran hasn’t carried out ANY substantive retaliatory attacks yet.

Trump’s Ultimatum

The US president wrote a mob boss-style Truth Social post boasting about the murder of “certain Iranian hardliners,” and warning that the next attacks will be “even more brutal” unless Iran makes a deal. Later, he issued a post about his “60-day ultimatum,” signaling direct knowledge of Israel’s plans.

  • Israeli officials told Axios the US gave Israel a “green light” for the strikes.
  • JPost reported Israel is trying to convince the US to join in on the attacks directly.

Key Reactions

Traditional regional US allies including Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar sharply condemned Israel, with Qatar saying Tel Aviv’s “reckless actions continue to destroy prospects for peace” & put global security “in imminent danger.”

Russia condemned the sharp escalation of tensions and Israel’s blatant “violation of the UN Charter and international law.”

The UN’s response? “Concern” about the targeting of nuclear sites.

June 13, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

A narrative shatters: Syrian refugees refuse to return despite Assad’s ouster

By Mohamad Hasan Sweidan | The Cradle | June 11, 2025

The fall of former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad in December 2024 was expected to trigger a mass return of Syrian refugees. It did not. Six months on, UN figures show fewer than eight percent of Syrians abroad have made the journey home. The promise of a new era in Damascus has collided with the harsh realities of insecurity, poverty, and heightened foreign interference.

The Syrian refugee crisis – now in its 14th year – was born of war, western-imposed economic blockade, and the disintegration of state institutions that started in March 2011. What began as internal displacement soon morphed into a mass exodus across West Asia and into Europe, producing one of the most severe refugee crises of the 21st century.

Life after Assad: The enduring refugee crisis

Despite the fall of the Assad government, the Syrian refugee crisis remains unresolved. As of early 2025, the UN reports that approximately 6.2 million Syrians remain registered as refugees abroad – primarily in Turkiye, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt – with millions more residing in Europe and North America. Only a fraction have returned since the Syrian opposition assumed power.

The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) estimates that about 400,000 refugees returned between December 2024 and April 2025. This number rose slightly to 481,730 by May, still below eight percent of the total refugees abroad. This disparity underlines a stark reality: The fall of Assad did not translate into mass return as the west suggested for years, which reveals that there are deeper, unresolved issues that keep Syrians away from Syria.

In West Asia’s key host countries, Turkiye hosts between 2.7 and three million Syrian refugees under a temporary protection regime, in addition to roughly one million unregistered Syrians. Lebanon hosts around 750,000 registered refugees, though Beirut places the actual figure closer to 1.5 million. Jordan houses approximately 650,000 Syrian refugees.

While many refugees may dream of returning, reality intervenes. A mid-2024 survey found 57 percent hoped to return one day, yet fewer than two percent believed this was feasible within the following year. UNHCR identifies safety concerns and the lack of stable livelihoods as the most significant obstacles. These core issues shape the calculus of return – a calculus that has not shifted meaningfully since Assad was in power.

Why Syrians aren’t going back

A May poll cited critical return deterrents: housing and property conditions (69 percent), service availability (40 percent), safety (45 percent), and economic hardship (54 percent). Fourteen years of war have left Syria fractured, devastated, and distrustful. There is no unified, trustworthy security or governance structure. The post-Assad era remains deeply uncertain to Syrian refugees.

The current political set-up in Damascus is a patchwork of domestic and foreign-influenced actors. Despite Assad’s ousting, returnees consistently cite improved security and essential services as prerequisites. A recent survey indicated that 58 percent of Syrians abroad would return only under “safe and dignified conditions,” while 31 percent remain undecided.

Governance challenges are equally daunting. The new leadership, installed on 8 December 2024 and headed by Al Qaeda-linked Ahmad al-Sharaa (also known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani), has pledged reform. But memories of infighting among rebel groups linger. Many Syrian refugees are alarmed by the ascension of militant factions, including former Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) affiliates, fueling fears of sectarian reprisals and authoritarianism.

Beyond Syria’s borders, refugee networks now serve as lifelines. After more than a decade abroad, Syrian refugees have established enduring community ties. In Turkiye, 60 percent of working-age Syrians are employed, mostly in informal sectors. These jobs, although low-paid, offer stability compared to war-torn Syria.

Yet, most Syrians in Turkiye remain socially unanchored: Over half report feeling disconnected from Turkish society, where racism has become rife, while 84 percent still feel moderately connected to Syria. This duality reflects a long-term migration trend where refugees retain ties to their homeland while integrating abroad.

A recent survey shows that just seven percent of Syrians in Turkiye have concrete plans to leave. Others express the desire to relocate, but without actionable steps. Citizenship also affects permanence: Around 238,000 Syrians had been naturalized in Turkiye by mid-2024, granting them full legal protections, including immunity from deportation. Turkish opposition sources, however, estimate this figure could be as high as 2.5 million.

The return paradox: Poor conditions in host nations, yet no return?

Even deteriorating conditions in host countries have not significantly altered return patterns. Economic collapse in Lebanon, rising costs in Turkiye, and recent conflict along the Lebanese border have not pushed Syrians homeward. Studies consistently show return decisions hinge more on improvements in Syria – security, jobs, services – than on hardships abroad.

Divisions among external powers inside Syria further complicate matters. Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and western states continue to prioritize their respective geopolitical gains over stability. The result is a fragmented political order dominated by armed factions and foreign patrons, with little accountability to actual Syrians.

This instability has real consequences. The massacres along Syria’s coast last March, reportedly instigated by UAE-backed elements, required intervention by the new Damascus authority. Such events erode trust and deter return.

Economically, Syria remains in free fall. According to the UN Development Programme (UNDP), 90 percent of Syrians live below the poverty line. The World Bank projects an additional one percent GDP contraction in 2025. The World Food Programme (WFP) says 9.1 million are food insecure, with 3.6 million reliant on aid.

Electricity is available just two to three hours a day, crippling industry and inflating living costs. Despite promises by the transitional government to reform banking and attract Persian Gulf investment, remaining sanctions and market isolation are still serious hurdles, even after Washington lifted most restrictions in May 2025.

Unemployment is rampant, fuel and transport costs are surging, and social safety nets are vanishing. Monthly incomes in many regions fall below $40, while basic food baskets cost twice that amount. The exodus of Syrian professionals continues to deplete the labor market, deepening reliance on remittances in the absence of a coherent reconstruction plan.

Syria remains a high-risk return

The reluctance of millions of Syrians to repatriate was never actually about leadership change – credible data simply does not exist on this. It is about the cumulative consequences of war: insecurity, economic collapse, political fragmentation, and the absence of justice or reconciliation.

Unless those in power focus on rebuilding credible institutions and securing livelihoods – not just reshuffling elites – the prospect of return will remain a perilous gamble.

June 11, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics | , , , | Leave a comment

Iran’s intel breach involves Israeli nuke plans, surveillance, organ trafficking: Report

The Cradle | June 11, 2025

An Iranian journalist with links to the country’s security establishment has released what he says are the first details from the thousands of sensitive documents on Israel, which Tehran announced it obtained days ago.

The documents include “Tel Aviv’s dangerous four-year roadmap in the nuclear field” and information on Israel’s “nuclear military industry facilities, bases, infrastructure and processes,” journalist Mohammad Ghaderi reported on 10 June.

The documents, which, according to Tehran, revolve mainly around Israel’s nuclear secrets, contain other information, such as documentation of bribes to well-known Arab figures aimed at advancing the Abraham Accords, as well as the “complete profiles” of 23 senior Israeli spies.

They also include “Information on about six million Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Telegram users,” Ghaderi says.

Additionally, there is personal information on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife, including medical documents.

The journalist notes that Iran’s “treasure trove” includes “Information on corruption networks, including organ trafficking networks, drug distribution, sexual exploitation of women and children, information finance, money, banking, and insurance.”

There are also hard drives and nearly 2,000 documents from the Israeli premier’s office, as well as information from “Mossad’s secret archive,” Ghaderi added.

Ghaderi claims Iran has also obtained access to private information on Israeli officials and leaders opposing Netanyahu, “including from hidden cameras in their bathrooms, bedrooms and inside their homes, and information obtained from hacking their mobile phones and personal computers, which were used in Bibi’s office to blackmail his opponents.”

The documents also contain thousands of high-quality aerial images of Israeli cities, ports, and important infrastructure, as well as “40,000 hours of CCTV footage.”

A banned recording of a heated Knesset debate involving Netanyahu, reportedly erased from official Israeli archives, is part of the cache of documents allegedly seized by Iranian intelligence.

According to DropSite News, Ghaderi is “a known media proxy” who “is often used by Iranian authorities to release sensitive information before official acknowledgment.”

DropSite News reporter Ryan Grim said, “either Iran is bluffing for leverage ahead of the next round of nuclear talks, or they pulled off an espionage coup of historic proportions.”

Iran’s Intelligence Minister Esmail Khatib announced on 8 June that Tehran has obtained thousands of sensitive documents on Israel’s nuclear program.

“The transfer of this treasure trove was time-consuming and required security measures. Naturally, the transfer methods will remain confidential, but the documents should be unveiled soon,” Intelligence Minister Esmail Khatib told Iranian television on Sunday.

“Talking of thousands of documents would be an understatement,” Khatib went on to say. The “vast collection of strategic and sensitive [Israeli] documents” includes “plans and data on [Israel’s] nuclear facilities,” according to the intelligence minister.

“They also include other documents about the relationship with the US, Europe, and other countries, as well as intelligence documents that would boost Iran’s offense power,” Khatib said.

On 10 June, the Intelligence Ministry confirmed the operation in an official statement, saying the documents were seized by operatives who managed to break through multiple layers of Israeli security and avoid detection.

A significant portion will be used by Iran’s military, some will be shared with allied countries and anti-Zionist groups, and selected parts will be made public, the ministry added.

The chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Hossein Salami, said the intel will provide Iran with an advantage if it is forced to respond to an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities.

June 11, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »