Still reeling from the Saturday shooting attack on a military parade in Ahvaz, top Iranian officials are issuing a series of statements blaming the attack on the US, Israel, and Gulf Arab states, and pushing EU nations to stop hosting members of the separatist group involved after the deadly attack.
The attack killed 29 people and wounded 70. An Arab separatist group claimed credit for the attack, which immediately drew suspicion to Gulf Arab states, notably Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE.
President Hassan Rouhani was quick to note that not only are those nations liable to have supported the attacking group in some form, as they all consider Iran an enemy, but that all of them are also closely allied with the US.
US Ambassador Nikki Haley issued a statement denying any US involvement in the attack. Curiously, however, she said it was Rouhani’s fault for “oppressing his people for a long time,” and cited public protests in Tehran as connected to the violence.
Yet the US has been very public about funding the Tehran protests in the first place, as part of an attempt to portray Iran’s government as having lost all public support.
The UAE also denied involvement, saying everyone knows they oppose terrorism and accusing Iran of “incitement.”
Saudi Iran war is coming. The consequences of this would be a global economic collapse on a scale never seen before.
It will be a lot worse than just “economic collapse” if the U.S. goes hot against Iran.
Pretty good chance Iran is right since the CIA /State Dept and such fund all sorts of anti Iran groups. But if the spooks paid for this directly. then why? This attack just strengthens the Iranian regime. Of course it just be a effort to gin up the next conflict.
The part about strengthening the Iranian regime has seemingly never been a concern of ours. Either that or we are very dense.
Very dense dosen’t matter when the real goal is war without end.
Iran’s tiny arab minority wouldn’t possibly think secession was realistic if they didn’t know the Saudis are eager to throw money at anyone willing to make things as difficult as possible for Iran. And the Saudis know that if they can provoke aggressive behavior out of Iran, the US govt is quite likely to declare war and do much to purge the region of Shiites on behalf of the Sunni regimes as a side-effect of seeking more direct domination of strategic resources. [of course it will be in the name of countering aggression and terrorism…]
Sadly the vast majority of Americans don’t know or can’t grasp the Sunni vs Shiite you correctly stated here. “Da Muslims in da Middle East” is all they understand. Just clueless.
It’s basically not Sunni vs. Shia. The two have differences, like Baptists and Catholics do, but the two Muslim sects got along in Iraq until the US intervention They lived on the same streets, and intermarried. Then the US invasion exacerbated their differences, starting with the US-abetted Samarra mosque bombing on Feb 22, 2006. That changed everything.
And then we have the Saudi-Iran political difference promoted by the US, divide-and-conquer.
The purpose of some terrorism, is to move a regime into a more militant security state. This could be perpetrated by either an enemy ( to thwart sustainable government), leading to resistance, example, Central America, or by the regime itself, (to obtain support for internal security and militancy) example, Reichstag fire, 9/11. The secondary result of this event, will be US propaganda covering Iranian attempts to discover more 5th column cells. Prepare for stories of an “oppressive” Iranian regime thwarting “dissent”.
Totally agree.
The main clue is when the US says it is promoting “stability” when we know the opposite is true.
George Orwell would have understood.
MEK is making use of all that training and support that JSOC and Mossad have given them.
As shown in this article, one of America’s leading think-tanks is attempting to purge the internet of Iranian “propaganda” to protect Americans;
http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/09/atlantic-council-digital-forensics.html
We are now living in George Orwell’s dystopic future.
The usual suspects.
CIA, Mosaddegh, 1953. They’ve done it before, why not now? If they didn’t pull the triggers, they likely supplied the guns and the ammo.
I can find no direct quotes from Iran leaders naming “separatists.” Neither Supreme Leader Khamenei nor President Rouhani has mentioned separatists, although they have been reported by the western press to have said so. Only the IRGC spokesman has blamed Al-Ahwaziya separatists. The perps are correctly called “terrorists” by all at the top.
Even CNN has reported “Exactly which group carried out the attack was unclear ” here
So based on what we know now, the MSM (CNN excluded!) “separatist” line merely supports Haley’s blather.
Just showing the Iranians they can be hit anytime anywhere.
Imagine if we were having the Don’s military parade and had an attack similar to what happened in Iran. Would the word “separatist” ever be mentioned? Anywhere?
Considering the election November 6 with the usual shenanigans, and then the military parade on November 10 — it’s getting easier to imagine.
from irna:
…from fars:
President Trump delivers his speech to the United Nations General Assembly tomorrow, probably mentioning peace with North Korea and war with Iran, a mixed bag. Trump then chairs the UN Security Council Wednesday. He is expected to speak about Iran and charge that country with being the primary instigator of violence in the Middle East, hard for anyone to believe given the US record and the recent terrorist attack on Iran. President Rouhani will also speak to the UNGA Tuesday morning, probably mentioning US support of terrorism.