Iranian Terrorism is Here to Stay 

https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Hezbollah.jpg

Military Intelligence head: Terrorism is here to stay

Arutz Sheva Staff, 22/06/17 19:11

The head of the IDF’s Intelligence Directorate, Major General Hertzi Halevi, spoke at the Herzliya Conference and addressed the security threats to Israel.

“Terror is here to stay,” Halevy said. “ISIS has lost territory and shrunk, but instead of an Islamic Caliphate, we see a virtual Caliphate. There is a clear connection between the pressure on Mosul and al-Raka and the wave of terrorism in Europe.”

According to him, the likelihood of an initiated war against Israel is low. “Power-building processes, especially in Gaza and Lebanon, transfer military power into irresponsible hands.Our enemies, who seek to deter Israel, are liable to bring upon themselves the next war.”

Today, Halevi said, wars begin and end differently. “These are wars with organizations. They do not start with a decision, but rather with a deterioration between the organizations. They do not end with a unilateral decision by paratroopers at the Western Wall.”

The head of Military Intelligence said that Iran, the Assad regime and Hezbollah constitute the main threat to the region, “with global funding and a major danger to the State of Israel. Iran is problematic not only because of the nuclear issue. It is in Iraq, Syria and Yemen.”

We see clearly that Hezbollah is building a military industry with Iranian knowledge, producing weapons and transferring them to southern Lebanon.

He said the terrorist attacks in Europe would continue for the foreseeable future.

Maj. Gen. Halevi said that Iran has been working in the past year to establish an infrastructure for the production of precise weapons in Yemen and in Iraq. “The nuclear agreement prohibits Iran from creating a certain weapon, but it produces other weapons. 20 countries are threatened by the deployment of Iranian Zelzal missiles.”

Addressing the recent Iranian missile strikes on ISIS targets, he said: “We saw it from medium range missiles. I think ISIS was hit hard. I ask myself: if Iran is so involved in Syria – why did not they strike from there? If it’s a show, it’s not clear it was so successful and it’s still disturbing.”

He also said that Israel has allowed more than seven million tons of construction material into Gaza in the three years since Operation Protective Edge. “How much of this has gone to the benefit of the civilians in Gaza? Do the children in Gaza receive a better education system? The answer is usually no. This is really a dilemma, since Israel has an interest in not having a crisis in Gaza.”

“The electricity dilemma reflects this well. On the one hand, the oxygen masks in the hospitals are connected to electricity, but the digging machines in the Hamas tunnels are connected to the same electricity. We have to let Hamas choose. We cannot let Hamas build an army so easily.”

Khamenei Encourages the Shia Horn

Khamenei Warns Iraq Against Relying On U.S., Weakening Shi’ite Militia

June 21, 2017 01:43 GMT

RFE/RL

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has warned Iraq’s leader against weakening Shi’ite paramilitary groups and relying on the United States in the battle against the Islamic State (IS) extremist group..

At a meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar al-Abadi in Tehran, Khamenei said the Shi’ite militias were the main forces pushing back against the Sunni extremist group in Iraq, and Baghdad should not trust the United States, Iranian state media reported.

The Shi’ite militias, known as the Popular Mobilization Forces, helped Baghdad defend the country against IS when Iraqi military and police divisions deserted en masse in 2014.

Since then, the Iran-backed militias, estimated to comprise more than 60,000 fighters, have been engaged in the battle to recapture swathes of northern and western Iraq from IS.

But Sunnis in areas freed from IS control have accused the Shi’ite militias of looting, abductions, and murder.

Some Arab leaders in northern Iraq have asked Baghdad to dissolve the Shi’ite militias or expel them from their Sunni-majority provinces — moves that drew objections from Iran’s leader.

“Daesh is retreating from Iraq and that is thanks to the government’s trust in these young devoted forces,” Khamenei said, using an Arabic acronym for IS.

“The Americans are against Popular Forces because they want Iraq to lose its main source of strength,” he said.

Khamenei accused the United States and its ally Saudi Arabia of creating IS and said he opposed the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq.

“We should remain vigilant of the Americans and not trust them. The Americans and their followers are against Iraq’s independence, unity, and identity,” Khamenei said.

Iranian President Hassan Rohani, who also met with Abadi on June 20, joined Khamenei in claiming credit for recent gains by U.S.-backed Iraqi forces in recapturing IS’s northern stronghold of Mosul.

“The liberation of Mosul is the symbol of the end of terrorism and a victory for Iran, Iraq, Syria, and all the countries of the region that are fighting against terrorism,” Rohani said.

The Iranian leaders’ comments highlight the balancing act faced by Abadi as he strives to hold together a coalition of forces fighting IS in Iraq, including the Iraqi government’s own soldiers, the Shi’ite militias as well as Sunni tribal forces and Kurdish Peshmerga forces, all backed by U.S. trainers and special forces.

While Iran said its forces deserved credit for gains made against IS, the United States and its anti-IS coalition of Western forces have also claimed credit for helping Iraqi ground forces recapture Ramadi and other cities liberated from IS in the past two years, as well as for the recent gains in Mosul.

Abadi faces a balancing act not only at home but in the broader Persian Gulf region. His meeting with Iran’s leaders came one day after a visit to Saudi Arabia, Iran’s regional rival, in what he said was a tour aimed at promoting reconciliation between the region’s Sunnis and Shi’a.

Iraq lies on the fault-line between Shi’ite Iran and the mostly Sunni Arab world.

Abadi belongs to the Dawa party, a Shi’ite group with close ties to Iran. But analysts say he has managed relations with Iraq’s Sunni minority better than his predecessor, Nuri al-Maliki, and also improved Baghdad’s ties with Saudi Arabia.

Khamenei told Abadi that Iran was opposed to the referendum on independence scheduled by leaders of Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region for September, saying such a separatist move threatens Baghdad’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Iran has its own Kurdish minority in the west of the country.

With reporting by AP, AFP, and Reuters

Iran Terrorizes America (Daniel 8:4)

Fighters of the Shiite Hezbollah movement

Fighters of the Shiite Hezbollah movement / Getty Images

BY:

The Iranian-backed terror organization Hezbollah is vowing to launch strikes on U.S. forces operating in war-torn Syria in yet another sign that Iran and its terror proxies are beginning to take unprecedented direct action against American military coalition forces, according to U.S. officials and regional experts tracking the situation.

Just days before Iranian-affiliated militants launched a series of strikes on U.S. forces in Syria, Hezbollah released an official statement vowing to boost its terror operations against America, according to a translation of the five-point document provided to the Washington Free Beacon.

Officials and experts are viewing Hezbollah’s declaration as further proof that Iran is willing to attack American-backed forces as part of its efforts to bolster embattled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

U.S. military officials acknowledged that Iran was likely behind a drone strike on American forces last week, a move that has escalated a growing proxy war in the region between Iran and the United States.

U.S. military officials told the Free Beacon that while they are not seeking a fight with Syrian-regime backers such as Iran and Russia, they will take forceful action to prevent attacks on assets in the area.

“The Coalition presence in Syria addresses the imminent threat ISIS in Syria poses globally,” one U.S. military official with Central Command, or CENTCOM, told the Free Beacon. “The Coalition does not seek to fight Syrian regime, Russian, or pro-regime forces partnered with them, but is well prepared to defend itself from hostile threats if necessary.”

U.S. military officials recognize the threat posed by Iran and its terror proxies, but are working to focus on the fight against ISIS, which is the primary reason American forces are working in Syria, sources said.

“The Coalition calls on all parties to focus their efforts on the defeat of ISIS, which is our common enemy and the greatest threat to regional and worldwide peace and security,” according to the military official.

Hezbollah’s latest warning to U.S. forces is certain to escalate tensions in a region that has experienced unprecedented violence in the past years.

“America knows well … that the capacity to strike their [American-backed] gathering points in Syria and its neighbors are available any time the circumstances call for it, based on the availability of various rocket and military systems, in light of the deployment of American forces in the region,” Hezbollah warned in its statement, which was independently translated from Arabic for the Free Beacon.

Hezbollah claims that there have not yet been strikes due to “self-restraint” from terror entities operating in the area.

Iranian officials made a similar declaration in the past week. Video footage released by the Islamic Republic last week shows Iranian drones shadowing U.S. forces in the region while Farsi-language narrators laugh and threaten attacks.

“The silence of Syria’s allies is not a sign of weakness, but self-restraint, out of the allies’ wish to open the door for other solutions,” Hezbollah said in its statement. “But this will not last if America goes far and crosses red lines.”

One veteran Middle East policy adviser who is in routine contact with the Trump White House told the Free Beacon that Iran’s increased willingness to strike U.S. forces is based on fears about the Trump administration’s willingness to target Iranian terror operations.

The Obama administration took a mostly hands off approach to Iran’s aggressive behavior in the Middle East due to its efforts to ink the nuclear deal and ensure it sticks.

“The Iran nuclear deal required ignoring the atrocities being committed across the Middle East by Iran and Hezbollah, including the systematic ethnic cleansing of Sunnis in Syria,” the source said. “If the Obama administration had ever pushed back, it would have triggered a confrontation with Iran, and the nuclear deal would have collapsed.”

“But the Trump administration is putting a stop to that blackmail and taking a holistic approach to the behavior of Iran and its proxies,” the source explained. “They’re not going to let Iran hold our entire foreign policy hostage to the nuclear deal, no matter what that says about Obama’s legacy.”

Tony Badran, a Syria expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the Pentagon is aware that Iran is orchestrating attacks on behalf of Assad in Syria.

“That the DoD is negating any distinction between Assad regime forces and Iranian militias is both accurate and significant,” Badran said. “It is accurate in that regime forces—themselves an assortment of militias and remnants of the army—are integrated with the IRGC-led militias. And it’s significant insofar as it eliminates the option for the Russians to play up the charade of that distinction.”

Iran’s goal is to expand its operations in Syria and intimidate U.S. forces, Badran said.

“Hezbollah media is accompanying these forces and shooting footage and posting pictures and declarations of intent to connect their forces on both sides of the Syrian and Iraqi borders,” he said. “There is no question who is the lead force here: it’s an Iranian force.”

US Deploys Itself Against Russia

Show of force: The B-1 Lancer (left), B-2 Spirit (centre) and B-52 Stratofortress (pictured right) together at RAF Fairford US deploys all its nuclear-capable bombers to Britain

Daily Mail

The US has deployed several nuclear-capable strategic bombers to Britain for the first time as tensions with Russia continue to grow.

Two B-2 stealth bombers, which cost more than half a billion each three B-52H Stratofortress aircraft and three B-1B Lancers are currently stationed at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire.

A spokesman for the base said the aircraft are being used ‘in support of exercises BALTOPS (Baltic operations), Saber Strike and Arctic Challenge taking place in the U.S. European Command area of responsibility.’

Show of force: The B-1 Lancer (left), B-2 Spirit (centre) and B-52 Stratofortress (pictured right) together at RAF Fairford

He told the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard: ‘The deployment of strategic bombers strengthens the effectiveness of RAF Fairford as the U.S. Air Forces in Europe and Air Forces Africa’s forward operating bomber location’ and the deployment of the bombers provide: ‘important integration and interaction with our joint partners, UK and NATO allies.’

Despite their use solely being for exercise purposes currently, the aircraft are capable of delivering a nuclear strike and have been used in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past.

The decision to deploy the bombers on UK soil comes as tensions are mounting with Russia as it adopts more a aggressive military front.

Russian Tupolev Tu-95 ‘Bear’ strategic bombers have repeatedly been intercepted in recent months by NATO aircraft, including RAF Typhoons.

American power: The B-2 Spirit stealth bomber is the world’s most advanced strategic bomber

Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit

  • Cruising Speed: Classified – believed to be high subsonic
  • Range: 6,000 miles, 10,000 miles with one aerial refueling
  • Payload: Capable of carrying 16 B61 Nuclear free fall bombs or 80 conventional 500lbs bombs 
  • Crew: Two

One of the most advanced aircraft ever built, the B-2 Spirit America’s premier strategic bomber. It’s ‘flying wing’ design allows it to penetrate enemy radar systems to deliver either nuclear or conventional weapons.

The project was originally conceived during the Carter administration in 1976 as a way to counter the Soviet threat. It was shrouded in secrecy and cost nearly $45billion to develop until it’s first flight in 1989.

With just one air-to-air refueling the B-2 is capable of flying an astonishing 10,000 miles. This means that there is rarely a need to deploy it outside the U.S., except in cases where the American government wants to project a show of force.

The long-range, multi-mission B1-B Lancer has been part of the US Air Force since 1985

Rockwell B1-B Lancer

  • Top Speed: 900-plus mph
  • Range: Intercontinental 
  • Payload: Capable of carrying nuclear weapons and up to 75,000lbs of ordnance internally -the equivalent of 24 misiles
  • Crew: Four

Nicknamed ‘The Bone’ for its sleek look, the swing-wing B-1B Lancer was originally designed as an incredibly fast strategic bomber that could penetrate the Soviet Union’s airspace.

However, the collapse of the USSR meant that there was a reduced need for the United States’ nuclear bombers, so the B-1 was assigned a conventional role in the mid-1990s. In the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia six B-1Bs flew two per cent of strike missions but dropped 20 per cent of the total ordnance.

It has been nearly continuously deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2001. It has also recently seen action in Libya and Syria. Upgrades will ensure the plane is in service up until at least 2040.

A flying antique: The B-52 has been a part of the United States Air Force for more than 60 years. (File picture)

Boeing B-52 Stratofortress

  • Top speed: 650mph 
  • Range: 8,800 miles 
  • Payload:  Capable of carrying nuclear weapons or 70,000lbs worth of conventional weapons 
  • Crew: Five

The B-52 was initially designed as a high-altitude nuclear bomber. But when it was first introduced in 1955, few could have imagined it would still be flying more than six decades later.

It has seen action in Vietnam – where it flew more than 120,000 missions – as well as in Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan. It was also the main strategic nuclear deterrent during much of the early Cold War.

Pilots joke that the plane’s air-frame is older then them or their father’s – which is testament to the original engineers. The B-52 is nicknamed the BUFF (Big Ugly Fat Fellow) for its appearance and difficulty to fly.

There are plans to keep the B-52 in service beyond 2040, which could mean it could have been flying for a full century.

Surviving the Inevitable Nuclear War (Rev 15)

nuclear bomb explosion blast city shutterstock_639638614

An illustration of a nuclear bomb exploding in a city. Shutterstock

  • A small nuclear bomb set off by a terrorist is one of 15 disaster scenarios the US government plans for.
  • Such a blast would create radioactive fallout, which can kill or hurt people many miles away.
  • If you survive a nuclear attack, take shelter indoors, stay put, and listen to a radio for instructions.
  • Sheltering from fallout could save hundreds of thousands of lives in a city.

The Cold War may have ended in 1991, but the looming threat of nuclear attack lives on with more than 14,900 nuclear weapons wielded by nine nations.

A terrorist-caused nuclear detonation is one of 15 disasters scenarios that the federal government continues to plan for with state and city governments — just in case.

“National planning scenario number-one is a 10-kiloton nuclear detonation in a modern US city,” Brooke Buddemeier, a health physicist and radiation expert at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), told Business Insider. “A 10-kiloton nuclear detonation is equivalent to 5,000 Oklahoma City bombings. Though we call it ‘low-yield,’ it’s a pretty darn big explosion.”

nuclear bomb explosion blast city shutterstock_528910063

An artist’s depiction of a nuclear explosion. Shutterstock

Buddemeier could not estimate the likelihood of such a terrorist attack, stating “it’s one of these things that changes with time.”

However, it’s not an unfounded concern with the proliferation of fissile nuclear material and kiloton-class weapons in stockpiles.

If a nuclear detonation were to occur, and you somehow avoided the searing-bright flash, crushing blast wave, and incendiary fireball, Buddemeier says there is one simple thing that could increase your odds of survival.

“Shelter, shelter, shelter,” he says. “The same place you would go to protect yourself from a tornado is a great place to go.”

What you’d be hiding from is sandy, deadly, and arrives just minutes.

The threat of radioactive fallout

A fearsome after-effect of nuclear blasts is called fallout, which is a complex mixture of fission products (or radioisotopes) created by splitting atoms.

Many of these fission products decay rapidly and emit gamma radiation — an invisible yet highly energetic form of light. Exposure to too much of this radiation in a short time can damage the body’s cells and its ability to fix itself, which is a condition called acute radiation sickness.

“It also affects the immune system and your ability to fight infections,” Buddemeier says.

Only very dense and thick materials, like many feet of dirt or inches of lead, can reliably stop the gamma radiation emitted by fallout.

“The fireball from a 10-kiloton explosion is so hot, it actually shoots up into the atmosphere at over 100 miles per hour,” Buddemeier says. “These fission products mix in with the dirt and debris that’s drawn up into the atmosphere from the fireball. … What we’re talking about is 8,000 tons of dirt and debris being drawn up into this cloud.”

The gamma-shooting fallout can loft more than five miles into the air. Larger chunks and pieces quickly rain back down, but the lighter particles can be sprinkled over distant areas.

“Close into the [blast] site, they may be a bit larger than golf-ball-size, but really what we’re talking about are things like salt- or sand-size particles,” Buddemeier says, adding that fallout doesn’t really resemble “snow” or dust, as movies often depict. “It’s the penetrating gamma radiation coming off of those particles that’s the hazard.”

A car is the least-ideal place to shelter for a variety of reasons, says Buddemeier. For one, “your ability to know where the fallout’s gonna go, and outrun it, are — well, it’s very unlikely,” he says. Fallout is carried by high-altitude winds that are “often booking along at 100 miles per hour,” he adds, so you’d be very unlikely to out-run or out-drive the fallout.
Plus, streets would probably be full of erratic drivers, accidents, and debris. Some vehicles may also not work due a strange effect called electromagnetic pulse, or EMP.

But most importantly, you shouldn’t “assume that the glass and metal of a vehicle can protect you” from fallout, says Buddemeier. “Modern vehicles are made of glass and very light metals, and they offer almost no protection. You’re just going to sit on a road someplace” and be exposed.

A much better shelter is likely within a quick walk or run of wherever you may be, Buddemeier says, and “the timing is important.”

Where you should shelter from fallout

Your best shot at survival after a nuclear disaster is to immediately get into a “robust structure” and stay there. Buddemeier is a fan of the mantra “go in, stay in, tune in.”

“Get inside … and get to the center of that building. If you happen to have access to below-ground areas, getting below ground is great,” he says.

Besides cars, the poorest shelters are made of wood, plaster, and other materials that don’t shield much radiation (about 20% of houses fall into this category). Better shelters, such as schools and offices, are made of bricks or concrete and have few or no windows.

Soil is a great shield from radiation, says Buddemeier, so ducking into a home with a half basement is better than going into a place with no basement at all.

apartment building house radioactive fallout shelter protection quality level llnl bruce buddemeier

The protection factor that various buildings, and locations within them, offer from the radioactive fallout of a nuclear blast. The higher the number, the greater the protection. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Next, “stay in 12 to 24 hours,” he says.

The reason to wait is that levels of gamma and other radiation fall off exponentially after a nuclear blast as “hot” radioisotopes decay into more stable atoms. This slowly shrinks the dangerous fallout zone — the area where high-altitude winds have dropped the most radioactive fission products.

nuclear explosion fallout radiation danger zones decay bruce buddemeier llnl

The dangerous fallout zone (dark purple) shrinks quickly, while the much less dangerous hot zone (faint purple) grows for about 24 hours before shrinking back. Bruce Buddemeier/Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

A recent study by Michael B. Dillon, a colleague of Buddemeier’s at LLNL, suggests that moving to a stronger shelter or basement may not be a bad idea if you initially ducked into a flimsy one. But whatever structure you’re moving to should be less than five minutes away. (Though if you’re very close to the blast site, stay put in whatever you can find.)

Finally, tune in.

“Try to use whatever communication tools you have,” Buddemeier says, adding that a hand-cranked radio is a good object to keep at work and home, since emergency providers would be broadcasting instructions, tracking the fallout cloud, and identifying where any safe corridors for escape could be.

Despite the fearsome power of a nuclear EMP, which has the potential to damage electronics, Buddemeier says “there is a good chance that there will be plenty of functioning radios even within a few miles of the event” that can provide “information on the safest strategy to keep you and your family safe.”

Buddemeier says he hopes no one will ever have to act on his advice. But if people can find good shelters, he says the blow of an unthinkable catastrophe could be softened.

“We may not be able to do much about the blast casualties, because where you were were is where you were, and you can’t really change that. But fallout casualties are entirely preventable,” he says. “In a large city … knowing what to do after an event like this can literally save hundreds of thousands of people from radiation illness or fatalities.”

Terrorism From The Iranian Horn

Terrorists in Tehran

BY MICHAEL LEDEEN JUNE 10, 2017

Yes, I know: Tehran is full of terrorists, but mostly they’ve been the regime’s terrorists, and mostly they kill, beat, and torture Iranians who don’t much care for Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei or President Hasan Rouhani. Wednesday was different. Or maybe not.

ISIS has claimed its killers staged the two attacks in Tehran on symbolically powerful targets: the tomb of the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini, and the “parliament” building.

There are many Iranians who don’t believe it was ISIS; they think it was the terrorists they know, the ones who kill innocent Iranians all the time. Iran being what it is—a Mediterranean country where the simple, straightforward story is invariably rejected in favor of a more complicated conspiracy theory—they purport to have “evidence.”

The evidence is all circumstantial, including the claim that ISIS has not attacked Iranian forces in Iraq and Syria, and that no Iranian official was killed or wounded. Only civilians were targeted. So why in Tehran? They say it’s obvious: it’s a hoax, staged by the regime, justifying further repression. Notice that the same sort of claim was made by Turks opposed to Erdogan. They say that the dictator staged the false coup that justified his massive crackdown against his internal opposition.

Whatever the truth may be—and it will be a while before it gets sorted out—the events in Tehran bespeak considerable opposition to the regime. If the terrorists were enemies of Khamenei et al., then the regime is faced with armed opponents. If the regime staged it, well then it shows the regime is sufficiently concerned about the internal opposition to have run a substantial risk: the most important symbols of the regime have been attacked, and Iranian security didn’t stop it and in fact staged it.

Hatred Between Persia and the Saudis (Daniel 7/8)

People attend the funeral of the victims who were killed on the June 7 attack at the Iranian parliament and Ayatollah Khomeini's mausoleum, in Tehran, Iran June 9, 2017. TIMA via REUTERS ATTENTION EDITORS - THIS IMAGE WAS PROVIDED BY A THIRD PARTY. FOR EDITORIAL USE ONLY

People attend the funeral of the victims who were killed on the June 7 attack at the Iranian parliament and Ayatollah Khomeini’s mausoleum, in Tehran, Iran June 9, 2017. TIMA via REUTERS ATTENTION EDITORS – THIS IMAGE WAS PROVIDED BY A THIRD PARTY. FOR EDITORIAL USE ONLY

Thousands mourn Tehran attack victims, chant ‘Death to Saudi’ | Reuters

By Parisa Hafezi | ANKARA
ANKARA Thousands packed Tehran’s streets on Friday to mourn the victims of two suicide bomb and gun attacks, and joined their supreme leader in accusing regional rival Saudi Arabia of involvement in the assaults.

People in the crowds, some crying, chanted “Death to Saudi Arabia” alongside the more customary “Death to America” and slogans against Israel, as they reached out to touch coffins wrapped in flags and covered in flowers.

Bombers and gunmen killed 17 people in Iran’s parliament and near the mausoleum of the Islamic Republic’s founder, Ayatollah Khomeini, on Wednesday, in rare strikes on the capital that exacerbated regional tensions.

The Sunni Muslim militants of Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attacks on the Shi’ite Muslim state.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in a message read at the funeral, said the raids would increase hatred for Saudi Arabia, the region’s main Sunni power, and America.

“It (the attacks) will not damage our nation’s determination to fight terrorism … but will only increase hatred for the governments of the United States and their stooges in the region like the Saudis,” Khamenei said. Saudi Arabia has said it was not involved.

MORE ARRESTS

Mourners chanted “God is greatest” and some carried pictures of Khamenei, captioned: “We are ready to sacrifice our blood for you.”

President Hassan Rouhani, a pragmatist more open to contacts with the West, attended the funeral alongside other clerics and officials. He said the attacks had targeted peace and democracy, but stopped short of blaming foreign powers.

The attacks came at a particularly charged time in the region, days after Riyadh and other Sunni Muslim powers cut ties with Qatar, accusing it of backing Tehran and militant groups.

The raids were the first claimed by Islamic State inside tightly controlled Iran, one of the powers leading the fight against the militants in Iraq and Syria.

Iran’s Intelligence Ministry said on Thursday five of the attackers were Iranian nationals recruited by Islamic State who had fought in the militants’ main strongholds in Syria and Iraq.

On Friday, the ministry said 41 suspects had been arrested around the country in connection with the attacks.

“With the help of security forces and families of the suspects, 41 people linked to the attacks and to Daesh (Islamic State) have been arrested in different provinces,” state TV quoted the interior ministry as saying.

“Lots of documents and weaponry have been seized as well.”

Two Sunni militant groups, Jaish al-Adl and Jundallah, have been waging an insurgency in Iran, mostly in remote areas, for almost a decade.

(Writing by Parisa Hafezi; Editing by Andrew Heavens)

The Saudi And American Allies (Daniel 7)

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivers a speech during a ceremony marking the death of the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, in Tehran, Iran, June 4, 2017. (photo by TIMA via REUTERS)

Author: Arash Karami

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivered one of his harshest criticisms of the new US shift in adopting Saudi Arabia’s anti-Iranian stance.

In a speech commemorating the death of the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Khamenei said that a number of enemy countries emerged immediately in the first decade following Iran’s Islamic Revolution in 1979 and have remained enemies until today. He urged Iranian officials to not ignore the principle of separating from the “coil of American power.” Khamenei added, “Our enemies are not idle. Until today, they have not been able to knock us back, but the enemy is lurking.”

On US President Donald Trump’s adoption of Saudi Arabia’s positions with respect to Iran and criticism by US officials of Iran’s presidential election during a recent Saudi trip, Khamenei said, “The president of America stands next to a tribal leader and does a sword dance and then criticizes the vote of 40 million people in our election.”

In an indirect attack on President Hassan Rouhani, who had advocated larger negotiations to remove all sanctions on Iran, which would likely require direct US-Iran talks on non-nuclear issues, Khamenei said, “Some know it to be reasonable — and they make a mistake — and say that challenging [the United States] has a price.” He added, “However, compromise also has a price. Consider that the Saudi government — to compromise with the new American president — is required to give more than half of its budget at the service of Americans.” During Trump’s trip to Saudi Arabia, the two sides agreed to a $110 billion arms deal.

Khamenei continued, “If challenging [the United States] is reasonable and in accordance with logic, its cost is lower than compromise.” Despite the moderate candidate’s re-election, Khamenei remained steadfast in his opposition to broader talks with the United States. “When you retreat, then they present new demands until you give in to their demands and the cycle continues,” he said. “Being a revolutionary means to not make your goal to please the enemy. Their goal should be to rely on the people and domestic forces and not submit to any power.”

Khamenei also acknowledged the issue of election violations, which conservative candidate Ebrahim Raisi complained about directly to the Guardian Council. Khamenei noted that while the violations did not change the outcome of the election, this should be prevented from happening again during the next election. He asked the candidates to put the partisan hostility and accusations behind themselves now that the election is over.

Khamenei also asked the electorate — whether their candidate won or lost — to compose themselves. Recalling the 2009 election in which the Green Movement leaders called the election fraudulent and brought out street protests, Khamenei said, “We saw what problems 2009 brought for the country.”

In a speech June 3, Rouhani made the case that his administration had been given a mandate with the re-election. “All the votes are to be respected,” Rouhani said. “The minority vote is to be respected, they too have rights. But the method of administration must be in accordance with the majority.”

Read More: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/06/iran-khamenei-khomeini-anniversary-saudi-us-rouhani.html

Preparing For The Nuclear War (Revelation 6)

Image source: Bing / About Site R

Daniel Jennings

WASHINGTON — America’s leaders have made elaborate preparations to survive a nuclear war while everyone else apparently dies.

The plans go back decades and only cover top government officials, according to a new book.

“In the early 1950s, the government really hoped and believed it would be able to save most Americans,” writer Garrett M. Graff told The Washington Post. But “plans and ambitions gradually shrunk until, realistically, the best they could hope to do is save the senior leadership.”

Graff describes the elaborate plan in the book “Raven Rock: The Story of the U.S. Government’s Secret Plan to Save Itself – While the Rest of Us Die.”

Graff discovered that the federal government maintains several huge secret underground fortresses where officials, officers and politicians — but not average citizens — would survive nuclear war in relative luxury. One of them, Raven Rock near the Pennsylvania/Maryland state line, contains several freestanding multi-story buildings with 900,000 square feet of office space.

Raven Rock is where government leaders and top brass from the Pentagon would flee in the case of an attack on Washington D.C., Graff revealed. Former Vice President Dick Cheney hid there briefly after the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The Declaration of Independence Would Be Stored, Too

Another underground complex, Mount Weather in Virginia, once was where the Supreme Court, the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and paintings from the National Gallery of Art would be kept safe. That still might be the case, The Post reported.

The exact details of the bunkers and evacuation plans are unknown because they are classified. Graff was able to learn some details of the plans by sifting through declassified documents.

Graff became interested in the federal government’s survival plans when a coworker found a misplaced government ID and gave it to Graff.

“The back of the ID had these evacuation instructions on it,” Graff told The Post. “And so I got on Google Maps and followed the instructions and they led to a road that very clearly went into the side of a mountain, and you can see on the Google satellite view big concrete bunker doors.”

Some tidbits about those plans include:

Uncle Sam, it seems, is a prepper.

Australia Will Become A Nuclear Horn (Daniel 7:7)

8424941030_22c5ba1709_h
Australia and nuclear weapons

1 Dec 2015|In late October, Christine Leah and Crispin Rovere published a provocative piece on the War is Boring blog. Titled ‘Australia needs nukes’—and the Twitter accounts of the authors suggest it wasn’t their title—the piece argued not merely that Australia would benefit from having its own nuclear deterrent but, more audaciously, that Australia might properly be seen as a legitimate nuclear weapon state under the NPT. That second claim’s a bridge too far for me, and a rebuttal published on Arms Control Wonk suggests it was a bridge too far for others as well. Notwithstanding the rebuttal, the National Interest Buzz subsequently republished the original Leah-Rovere piece, from where it was picked up and republished by the Asia Times.

Since the piece refuses to die—despite Dr Leah’s acceptance of the criticisms on Arms Control Wonk—I want to offer a brief commentary here on the original argument. To get the specific out of the way of the general, let me say that I don’t believe the Australian government ever gave much consideration to the option of seeking nuclear-weapon-state status under the NPT. We know for a fact that some officials considered the option. But I’m not aware of ministerial weight ever being put behind the idea. And, as Hassan Elbahtimy and Matthew Harries argue in their rebuttal, it would involve some heavy-duty lifting to make the claim now, 45 years after Australia signed the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state.

Let’s start with some basic facts. First, Australia is a signatory of the NPT and it’s not a repentant state. It doesn’t regret the choice of nuclear identity it made by its signature. That choice wasn’t made on a sudden whim. Australian thinking about nuclear weapons, since at least 1957, has been dominated by a ‘Menzian’ vision—that such weapons could make a positive contribution to global security as long as they are held by responsible great powers sufficiently aware of the awful consequences of use as to be self-deterred. The two competing visions of nuclear weapons—Gortonians who wanted Australia to have its own arsenal, and disarmers who favoured universal disarmament—represented distinct minorities on the Australian strategic spectrum, albeit long-lived ones. True, the Gortonians enjoyed their best years in the late 1950s and through the 1960s. But it would be wrong to think that by 1970 Australia stood committed to a nuclear weapons program abruptly and reluctantly terminated by signature of the NPT.

Still, that doesn’t mean the Menzian vision is destined to rule forever. The vision turns upon two assumptions: that nuclear weapons remain confined to responsible great powers, and that the Asian strategic environment doesn’t slide towards a darker future. Both of those assumptions are eroding—although we might argue amongst ourselves about how much and how quickly. Nuclear weapons are gradually spreading to states that we wouldn’t usually think of as responsible great powers. And the pace of proliferation would quicken sharply if status quo powers—like Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey—were to withdraw from the NPT and begin manufacture and deployment of their own arsenals.

The darker future in the Asian strategic environment has two, possibly related, forms. The first form would involve loss of credibility in the US’s extended nuclear assurances to its regional allies. That might seem unlikely, but it certainly isn’t impossible. As the region becomes more multipolar, relative US strategic weight is going down—meaning the credibility of US assurances faces a more challenging structural environment. Moreover, if credibility breaks at one point a ripple effect could easily ensue.

The second form of the darker future would involve the return of revisionist powers in Asia. In a regional strategic environment where coercive powers enjoyed greater freedom to coerce, other states would start looking for game-changers of their own. Part of that search might well involve the re-consideration of serious options set aside in more benign times. The notion that deterrence should become a national enterprise rather than an international one—a core tenet of the Gortonian vision, but one disabled by signature of the NPT—might well grow a new set of legs in such circumstances.

Where does all that leave us? Australia isn’t a nuclear weapon state under the NPT. And its dominant view of nuclear weapons is one under which Australia doesn’t need an arsenal of its own. Australia’s strategic preference would be for that status, and the permissive conditions which enable it, to continue. We just can’t be sure they will.