Iran’s firing missiles at Deash terrorists stationed in Syria drew many reactions, including from the US military which described the attack as ‘reckless and unsafe’. Why is it so? Because the missiles fell ‘within three miles’ of US troops!

Iran launched six ballistic missiles into the Albukamal district in Syria. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said the attack targeted terrorists involved in the September 22 attack on a military parade in the southwestern city of Ahvaz.

The missile attack killed a number of militant leaders and destroyed their supplies and infrastructure, with several sources reporting that a well-known Daesh commander called Abu Ali Al-Mashhadani being killed in the attack.

The Albukamal district, which lies east of the Euphrates River, is one of Daesh last remaining positions.

A US defense official told CNN Iranian missiles that targeted eastern Syria early Monday came within three miles of US troops in the country.

“Iranian forces did conduct no notice strikes last night and we see open source reports stating that they were targeting militants it blamed for the recent attack on an Iranian military parade in the Middle Euphrates River Valley,” said Ryan in a statement. “At this time, the Coalition is still assessing if any damage occurred and no Coalition forces were in danger.”

The CNN report, titled as Iran missiles in Syria land ‘within three miles’ of US troops, aims to portray the image that the attack could have endangered US troops in Syria and that such ‘no notice’ attacks are not common and potentially could be dangerous.

In a statement sent to VOA on Monday, Pentagon spokesman Cmdr. Sean Robertson said “given the complex nature of the battle space, such strikes potentially jeopardize the forces who are actively fighting ISIS in Syria.”

While that is another issue subjected to a well debate. The question now is “what is it that the US do exactly ‘within three miles’ away from Daesh in Syria?

They themselves claim that they are fighting terrorists in the area that Iran targeted with missiles. There has been, however, no report of US forces or US-backed Kurdish forces indicating to any attack against the terrorists in Albukamal in at least the last month.

The only big news reported on the media regarding Albukamal comes from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights which alleged that at least 400 Daesh members were transferred from Albukamal to the Idlib Province in northwest Syria last week.

If the US were indeed stationed in Albukamal to fight terrorists, couldn’t they attack such terrorists who were ‘within three miles’ of them?

Very strange… Iran fired missiles at ISIS in Syria. Killed several ISIS leaders – almost killed Al-Baghdadi. US complained (!!) saying Iran was reckless, cuz the strike was within 3 miles of US troops.

But why was ISIS leader Baghdadi feeling so safe so close to US troops????

— Trita Parsi (@tparsi) October 5, 2018

The suspicious pattern of US behavior, however, is not restricted to Syria.

Last year, Russian presidential special envoy for Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov said that during a meeting in New York with his US counterpart Alice Wells, he expressed his distrust regarding the issue of ‘unidentified helicopters’ in the north of Afghanistan that were transferring Daesh and their ammunition.

“Among the problems that we have, I identified the distrust that we have in connection with these mysterious helicopters transferring ISIL [Daesh] militants, their weapons, ammunition,” Kabulov said.

The post What does the US exactly do ‘within three miles’ of Daesh in Syria? first appeared on .

At least 65 ISIS terrorists, including several high-ranking intelligence commanders, were killed in Iran’s recent missile attack against the Takfiri group’s targets in eastern Syria, according to a statement by Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC).
Four ISIS positions were struck in the missile attack and Saudi, Kazakh and Afghan nationals among the terrorists killed in Iranian missile strike.
The IRGC fired six medium-range ground-to-ground ballistic missiles into ISIS bases in Syria’s Deir Ezzor on Sunday in retaliation for twin terrorist attacks in the Iranian capital Tehran, which killed 17 people and injured over 50 others.
A Daesh weapons and munitions cache in northern Deir Ezzor was “precisely struck and completely annihilated,” the statement said, adding that several tanks, military vehicles and suicide cars and a huge number of long-range missiles were destroyed. It added that six ISIS terrorists were killed and 10 injured in the attack.

 ‘The enemy cannot slap us, we’ll slap them!’ only a few hours after Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued the warning to Iran’s enemies during a meeting with families of Iranians martyred in Syria, Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) launched 6 missile strikes at ISIL command centers in Syria’s Deir Ezzor in retaliation for the June 7 twin terrorist attacks in Tehran on Sunday. 

Missiles fired by Iran to the ISIS reportedly were of Zulfiqar type with a range of 750 km (466-mile). While Israel remains outside this range, Iran’s Shahhab ballistic missiles can reach the regime occupying Palestine. (The missile is named for the sword which the Prophet Muhammad gave to the Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib ahead of the 625 AD Battle of Uhud).
This became Iran’s first operational use of its missile arsenal since Iran- Iraq war while the US has increased its pressure on Iran to limit the country’s missile program.

Deir Ezzor province is located in Syria’s border with Iraq on the shores of the Euphrates River. Subsequent to the defeat of the terrorists in Aleppo, leading to losing a key base in north-west of Syria, a huge number of terrorists relocated to Deir Ezzor in the west and the surrounding areas. Moreover, a great number of the terrorists having fled to Syria in the wake of the defeat in Mosul are operating in this region for the time being. 

The post Iran Missiles Strike Killed 65 ISIS Terrorists in Syria: IRGC first appeared on .

Tehran– ‘The enemy cannot slap us, we’ll slap them!’ only a few hours after Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued the warning to Iran’s enemies during a meeting with families of Iranians martyred in Syria, Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) launched 6 missile strikes at ISIL command centers in Syria’s Deir Ezzor in retaliation for the June 7 twin terrorist attacks in Tehran on Sunday. 

Early reports indicate full-fledged success as all Iranian missiles hit the predetermined targets; A large number of terrorists have been killed and their equipment and weapons destroyed.

Missiles fired by Iran to the ISIS reportedly were of Zulfiqar type with a range of 750 km (466-mile). While Israel remains outside this range, Iran’s Shahhab ballistic missiles can reach the regime occupying Palestine. (The missile is named for the sword which the Prophet Muhammad gave to the Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib ahead of the 625 AD Battle of Uhud).
This became Iran’s first operational use of its missile arsenal since Iran- Iraq war while the US has increased its pressure on Iran to limit the country’s missile program.

Hours before the missile strike, Iran Army’s Rapid Reaction Force were deployed to the western border areas of the country. Simultaneously, Iraqi People Mobilization Army, Hashd al-Shaabi, who fight ISIS are entering Deir Ezzor in Syria so they can help Syrian Army in liberating the important border area.

Deir Ezzor province is located in Syria’s border with Iraq on the shores of the Euphrates River. Subsequent to the defeat of the terrorists in Aleppo, leading to losing a key base in north-west of Syria, a huge number of terrorists relocated to Deir Ezzor in the west and the surrounding areas. Moreover, a great number of the terrorists having fled to Syria in the wake of the defeat in Mosul are operating in this region for the time being. 

Regarding the large number of terrorists in Deir Ezzor, their command centers as well as operations and logistical centers are located in this province in Syria.

The post Why Iran Targets ISIS Positions in Syria’s Deir Ezzor? first appeared on .

Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) launched multiple missile strikes at ISIL command centers in Syria’s Deir Ezzor in retaliation for the June 7 twin terrorist attacks in Tehran, the IRGC said in a statement issued on Sunday, adding that the mid-range missiles were fire from bases in Western Iran.

Early reports indicate full-fledged success as all Iranian missiles hit the predetermined targets; A large number of terrorists have been killed and their equipment and weapons destroyed following the missile attacks launched by the IRGC from bases in Iran’s western provinces of Kermanshah and Kurdestan.

“The Takfiri terrorists’ command center, concentration points and logistical centers used for assembling cars for suicide attacks in Deir Ezzor region in Eastern Syria came under attack by the IRGC moments ago in a move to punish the terrorists for the twin attacks on the Iranian parliament and the holy shrine of the late founder of the Islamic Republic, Imam Khomeini, on June 7,” the statement issued by the IRGC Public Relations Office said late this evening.

The IRGC said in the statement that the ‘crushing’ blow was in retaliation for the recent ISIS terrorist attacks on Tehran, which claimed the lives of at least 17 people and wounded over 45.

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps also warned all Takfiri terrorists as well as their regional and ultra-regional supporters that they would receive even more devastating responses if they repeat their ‘satanic’ moves against Iran.

The post Iran Launches Missile Strikes Targeting IS in Syria (Video) first appeared on .

By: Mahmoud Hedayatpanah*

The Turkish army, considering itself as the only founder of the Republic of Turkey and seeing itself as the guardian of Atatürk’s legacy, has always been trying to exert undue influence over and interfere in the politics of modern Turkey in order for them to be on right track for maintaining secularism.With the AKP (Justice and Development Party) rising to power and a process having kicked off in the 1980s, however, the influence lessened over time. The army leaders in Turkey are not that much pleased with it though. The fact that the army does not really have a great deal of room for maneuver in the political affairs originates from the growing political support for the parties.

Another reason given for the army’s reduction in power is the attempt made by Turkey so as to join the EU; as one of the key criteria for gaining admission to the EU is acceding to the parameters of Western liberal democracy, one of which is keeping the army under control by civil and political institutions, that’s to say only the political institutions have the authority, a situation which Turkey has stricken out;  Chief of the General Staff of Turkey, Doğan Güreş, had also claimed in 1992 that Turkey is a military state.

Such processes and the constitution change caused a reduction in power of the military interfering in the political affairs, but its natures did not change whatever. There is evidence showing that the government had nothing to do with the recent incident or at least did not, at all, intended to act as such, but in actual fact it was an attempt by the army to discredit the ruling Justice and Development government. Firstly, Turkey is a member of NATO, so it participates in the military exercises of NATO; it is common, however, for the Russians and NATO members, to intercept planes by jet fighters especially in the Baltic Sea, a trend having been continuing ever since the Cold War. Both the Russian and NATO aircraft have repeatedly approached and even violated one another’s airspace, but they had never clashed; that’s why NATO will not support Turkey regarding this incident as a probable reaction is expected to be done against NATO in the Baltic Sea by the Russians; Barack Obama, as well, in a phone call with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan suggested that they should think out well in order for similar incidents to be averted.

Secondly, a marked increase in trade between Turkey and Russia in 2014, which was $33 billion, was going to reach $100 billion up to 2010. So it is obvious that Russia is considered one of the most principal trading partners of Turkey, at the same time heavily dependent upon the Russian gas resources. Unprecedented, hostile act by the Turkish side may cause a breach between the two countries, and it seems very unlikely that Turkey would act with the aim of getting an important message across to Russia while Erdoğan was able to successfully tackle the economic problems and bring about a slight economic stability. That’s why he would not have intended anymore to get back to the past fragile economy.

A third point holding the attention is the Turkish statesmen backing down, such as Ahmet Davutoğlu stating that Russia is their friend and partner and they tend to keep the channels of communications open with Russia, or both Erdoğan and Davutoğlu pointing out that if they had been informed of the fact that the fighter belonged to Russian, they would not have acted as such, or the failed attempt Çavuşoğlu made in order for him to make contact with Russian Foreign Minister Segey Lavrov. If Turkey tried to get a message across to Russia, they would persist in the fact that the Russian fighter violated Turkish airspace and would be in a strong position against the Russians; but, they showed no insistence on their act in the aftermath of the incident, erroneously, for the sake of maintaining a good relationship between the two countries on Turkey’s part.

At last, it can be stated that with regards to a reduction in power of the army in having influence over internal affairs, the army tends to rely on the international scene so as to discredit the government, thereby reducing his power in Turkey and also causing the Justice and Development Party face domestic crises in order to ruin their reputation and efficiency; an opportunity of which the Turkish generals have taken definite advantage.

* Mahmoud Hedayatpanah, MA in Persian Gulf studies, is a military expert. His studies concentrate on Russian and American  military capabilities. He is fluent in English, Russian and Farsi.

The post Who in Turkery Shot the Russian Jet Down? first appeared on .

این مقاله را به فارسی بخوانید.

By: Sonia Mansour Robaey *

If I were a faithful and pious Muslim and if I were to take a look at the state of the religion of Islam and Muslims today, I would be extremely worried. And even though I am not a Muslim faithful but an Arab secular Christian woman, I can still worry for my Muslim sisters and brothers and the religion of Islam. This is not a selfless concern. The future of minorities in the Middle East depends largely on the state of the Muslim religion, which is the religion of the majority. Also, the Muslim religion and its people are part and parcel of my cultural background, of who I am as an Arab Christian, as much as Muslims of the Middle East are culturally shaped by their presence as pieces in a mosaic of religions and sects, which the region never ceased to be, until al Qaeda and its most notorious branch, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, ISIS, came to be.

Again, as an Arab Christian, I was educated not on the holy Qur’an, but on the religion of Islam and its History. I grew up seeing Islam as a religion of conquest and enlightenment in the Arts and Sciences. I grew up seeing Islam as a forward progressive religion. Of course, as in every religion, I could perceive some extremism here and there, some backwardness, but these seemed marginal, or so was my perception during the late seventies, early eighties, until al Qaeda and its most notorious branch, ISIS, came to be.

Since 911, I have been asking myself: what happened to Islam? More so since the emergence and mainstreaming of sectarian killings inside Iraq after the 2003 US invasion and the recent mass displacements of religious minorities by ISIS in the Middle East, the largest since the Ottoman Empire disintegrated.

To answer this question one must understand what happened between the late seventies and the early eighties and how the struggles born out of these years came to their conclusion as the iron curtain fell on the Soviet bloc ushering in a short era of revigorated and unchallenged American and western imperialism.

During these decisive years, we witnessed an Islamic revolution in Iran that rose against western imperialism while another Islamic movement in Afghanistan came to be subsumed, and consumed, by the goals of western imperialism. We also witnessed a war on Iran from the West, with Iraq as a proxy, meant to challenge to the nascent Islamic revolution of Iran. These events, which will lead to a profound misunderstanding inside Islam, took place after the strong anti-imperialist sentiment in the Middle East, in which Palestine was the main conduit, was sidelined through a partial peace between Israel and Egypt. The Palestine struggle was buried by partial peace and the Palestinian resistance lost the support of most Arab states. This was going to lead to the still-born Oslo peace process and the slow asphyxiation of the Palestinian struggle, while Israeli settlements flourished as they continue to do until today.

The eighties end with the triumph of western imperialism. But in the Middle East, the Islamic revolution of Iran stood in the way of this triumph, albeit weakened and its society profoundly wounded by the Iraq war. After the end of the Iraq-Iran war and Ayatollah’s Khomeini’s death, the Islamic revolution of Iran had survived but the country was going to spend the next decade rebuilding itself amid a climate of increasing hostility, unilateral and multilateral sanctions.

Iran’s Islamic revolution inspired many and in many ways in the region. Islamist groups and Islamist movements rose in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon. Only few survived and those who did, like Hezbollah, did so because they understood the spirit of the Islamic revolution of Iran, as it stood, as an Islamist insurgency, first and foremost, against western imperialism. Hezbollah resonated with the populations of the Arab world because it revived the Palestinian struggle and the struggle against western imperialism. At the same time, Hamas was born to challenge the occupation of Palestine, based on a non-compromising attitude toward the occupation, but with a different spirit marked by the context of inter Palestinian rivalry heavily weighed by outside and competing regional influences.

This is why Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups moved by the same goal for many years, find themselves today at odds because the forces that have been pulling Muslims apart since the event of the Islamic revolution of Iran, not only are still at work today, but they are now aided by scores of terrorist Takfiri groups claiming to be working for Muslims and Islam.

The Islamic revolution of Iran had clearly designated the anti-imperialist struggle as the defining project of modern Islam. But the Islamic revolution of Iran was not the only Islamic movement renewing the search to redefine Islam in modern times. However, the Islamist groups who came before it and most of those who were inspired by it sought a return to an era of Islam before western imperialism to find the tools to challenge western imperialism. Thus, the nostalgic return to Islam resulted in ambiguity toward the West. I am thinking here specifically of the Muslim Brotherhood. The ambiguity is in confronting modern western imperialism with conceptual tools that existed before this imperialism. This is at best a flight strategy, at worst, a legitimization of Wahhabism, the gangrene that’s been eating at the heart of Islam. Ambiguity exists also in the fact that running away from modernity prevents these movements from ever understanding imperialism, replacing understanding with mystification, leaving modernity to exert a fascination on their entire ideological conceptual apparatus without ever being able to understand it.

This is a tragic misunderstanding, by the insurgent Sunni branch of Islam, of how to conduct the struggle for relevance against western imperialism and renew the search to redefine Islam in modern times. Western imperialism, in its essence, is about the superiority of science and technology. By choosing nostalgia and pre-imperialist conceptual tools, insurgent Sunni Islam could then only fight western technical superiority and the way of life it implies with increased barbarism. Hence, al-Qaeda and ISIS.

The Islamic revolution of Iran, on the other side, has sought to fight western imperialism with the elements of its alleged superiority; technology. But contrary to other Muslim countries that had sought nuclear technology as a way to achieve military superiority, like the West, Iran sought nuclear technology only for civilian purposes and as a right to achieve equal status, to oppose to western imperialism the right to dignity. Because western imperialism sees itself as superior in status, it refuses dignity to others, to subdued countries, and it does so mainly through technology.

The post Iran N.Deal, Future of Islam and A.Khamenei’s Letter to Western Youth first appeared on .

According to the informed sources talked to Iran’sView, the new Iranian President, Hassan Rowhani, perceived to have won the June-14 elections by his moderation promises, is said to have requested the Leader to give him a modest free hand in the country’s foreign policy affairs, including the prolonged nuclear standoff, so that he will be able to tackle the Islamic Republic’s economic problems to some extent.

It is years now that Tehran is at odds with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany (P5+1) over its nuclear case due to irreconcilable views of the negotiating sides.

According to a Rouhani aide who has spoke to Iran’sView on condition of anonymity, he has promised the Supreme Leader he will be able to scrape a large part of the stifling sanctions imposed on Iran without damaging the nature of its nuclear program provided that the Leader permits the president to act more flexibly in the talks with the P5+1.

“I would agree with what I once called ‘heroic flexibility’, as it is a proper move at times,” said the Leader during his address to the Sepah commanders on Tuesday, seems to be an explicitly agreeing to the administration’s request. However, he cautioned the president to be wary of the “other side and the chief objective” in the talks while being more flexible.

Though this was not the first time the Supreme Leader spoke of “heroic flexibility”.

“Artistic and heroic flexibility, softness and maneuver are accepted and welcome in all political grounds,” said the Leader in another meeting a fortnight ago with members of the Assembly of Experts. “But maneuvers should not be interpreted as a leave to cross the red lines or step back of fundamental strategies or neglecting the ideals.”

The Leader of Iran is still suspicious about the flexibility in international dealings of the new administration as it might be induced to cross some red lines (like direct and comprehensive talks with the US) or retreat from fundamental strategies of the Islamic Republic (like supporting Palestinian cause and the Syrian government as part of the resistance front).

The Leader once again reminded the administration in his Tuesday speech that it is not allowed to neglect the “objectives and ideals” of the Islamic Revolution with excuses like “The world or the trends has changed.”

According to political observers in Tehran, the Supreme Leader has allowed the administration to expand ties with European countries, engage in direct talks with the US over the Syrian conflict, and show more flexibility in nuclear talks. The Leader has decided to let Rouhani have his try in various fields, even though he (the Leader) is not optimistic about the West’s reaction to Iran’s flexible tone; which is why the Leader stressed in his Tuesday speech that the US and the West are seeking much greatest goals in Iran’s nuclear case and that it should be taken in and well analyzed by “challenging the hegemonic system by the Islamic Revolution”.

“We do not approve of nuclear weapons not because of the US or others, but because of our beliefs; when we say no one can have nuclear weapons, we would never seek such weapons ourselves; the dissenters of Iran are after something else. These countries would never let their nuclear energy monopoly be broken,” Ayatollah Khamenei said on Tuesday.

“Diplomacy is the field of smile and calls for talks and negotiations; however, all these should be defined in the framework of our major challenge.”

Ayatollah Khamenei has repeatedly cautioned the new administration against the Islamic Republic’s red lines and fundamentals while exhibiting flexibility in its foreign dealings. In his earlier speech addressing members of the Assembly of Experts, the Leader certified that every “administration or person has their own methods and innovations, and are allowed to practice them in their work.”

As a key player in Iran’s power struggle during the past 34 years, the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution, or Sepah, has aligned itself well with the Supreme Leader’s directions, and stood up to administrations which fail to follow the Leader’s directions. Besides, the construction projects as well as economic activities run by the Sepah are a powerful lever that can help every administration to materialize their domestic policies; which may be why the President Rowhani addressed Sepah commanders a day before the Leader to ask them to support the administration economically.

With regard to Rowhani’s concerns about acceptance of his “flexible” policies by Sepah commanders, the Supreme Leader called on Sepah top brass to temporarily step out of politics and view the developments from outside.

“Sepah is not required to meddle in political grounds, but guardianship of the Revolution needs precise understanding of realities,” the Leader said on Tuesday.

“The organization that is deemed as the Revolution’s guardian arm cannot be expected to be alien to derivative political currents,” said the Leader, stressing that under the current circumstances Sepah must, of course, identify and counter all adversaries of the Islamic Republic.

The Leader is evidently giving the administration a free hand to remedy the country’s economic and political headache by putting into effect its innovations. Likewise the Leader would be happy see that his strategic decision has helped the administration manage to fulfill its promises and receive a palatable feedback from foreigners. However, if the government fails to get the desired response from the West by being more flexible, just like the Reformist administration of Mohammad Khatami, the Leader’s warnings and pessimism against the US and enemies will be well substantiated. 

“The revolution’s future is glorious for sure, but the time of its happening depends of the performance of the nation and officials. If we are united, integrated and decisive, such a future is soon realized, but if we are infested with indolence, arrogance and other such stuff, that future will be late to come.” Ayatollah Khamenei said to the top commanders of Sepah.

The post Why Iran’s Leader Gives Rowhani Nuclear Free Hand? first appeared on .

“Despite all the internal fractions and the continuation of the crisis in Syria, the Resistance is ready and prepared to defeat Israel at any time, marking a victory for Lebanon that would change the regional equations. The Syrian crisis would never stop us from our main priority that is [our] preparedness to confront any attack by the Zionists in the future,” Qavouq said.

On Tuesday a car bomb rocked a stronghold of Hezbollah in the south of the Lebanese capital, setting several cars on fire and wounding 37 people in a major security breach of a tightly-guarded area.

On the same day an attempted suicide attack in the Iranian southern city of Chabahar failed after the security guards of the governor’s office recognized the attacker.

Political observers describe these two attacks against Iran and its close ally Hezbollah on same day as a warning from Saudi Arabia and the US to Iran and Hezbollah about their role in Syria’s fighting against the rebels.

In recent months Syria’s President Bashar Al-Assad has been successful in defeating rebels in most of Syria.

To get more insight into the subject, Iran’s View interviewed Middle East Analyst Hossein Sheykholeslam. Mr. Sheykholeslam served as a political deputy of Iran’s Foreign Ministry for 16 years and also as Iran’s ambassador to Syria for three years. He is now The International Affairs Advisor to Ali Larijani, the speaker of Iran’s Parliament.

“The Muslim world and the influential countries in West Asia and North Africa are trapped in an American-Israeli plot, [due to which] their ability and power to fight against Washington and Tel Aviv is wasted in fighting each other,” said Sheykholeslam, adding “The White House and Tel Aviv officials know they are not able to fight Muslim countries in military ways, so they have tried to counteract the anti-Israeli anti-American potential of the nations in the region through engaging them in a conflict against each other.”

The Parliamentary Advisor in Foreign Affairs referred to Israel’s defeats in its military attacks against Hezbollah in the past. “In 2006 the Zionist Regime fought against Hezbollah for 33 days and was defeated. The next war took 22 days [ending in Israel’s defeat] and during the last one Israel could attack Gaza  for only 8 days and for the first time a small part of Palestine and the Palestinian nation was able to defeat the whole of Israel and impose its conditions for a ceasefire on Tel Aviv. Therefore Israel cannot start a new military attack due to Hezbollah’s deterrence.”

The post Hezbollah Warns Of Imminent Attack In Coming Days first appeared on .

“Egypt is the origin of the Islamic Awakening and the people tried in the last year to support real Islamists but the ruling system was so bad that another coup happened,” Ayatollah Khatami said.

Blaming the Muslim Brotherhood for recent events in Egypt he said: “After 80 years of organizational and political activities they were not useful to the people.”

“We expected the Egyptian people who are supporters of an Islamic awakening to not let their country become the backyard of the Zionist regime again,” said Khatami who is also a senior member of the Assembly of Experts.

Khatami then distinguished Takfiris and Wahabis from Islamist groups.

“[Wahhabism] is created by Britain and they are doing crimes against humanity in Syria as they did in many other places. We expect all of the Muslim leaders to publicly denounce the Wahhabis and say that Wahhabism is not an Islamic branch.”

The Takfiri extremists according to an article by PressTV hate everyone who doesn’t share their primitive misinterpretation. Their attitude toward Sufis, Shias, traditional Muslims, and of course non-Muslims is simple and brutal: “Off with their heads!”

The world was recently shocked by a video of US-backed Takfiri militants beheading two Christians, including a priest, in Homs. The disgusting video – filmed and posted by the Takfiris themselves, who seem proud of their actions – was just the latest in a series of atrocities perpetrated and filmed by Takfiris in Syria.

Another such video shows a Takfiri eating the heart and lungs of a slain Syrian soldier. Russian President Vladimir Putin says he hopes the US-backed Takfiri delegation to future peace talks will not include any cannibals, since that would make it hard for Russia to provide security for its diplomats.

The post Iran’s Voice Against The Takfiris, The Muslim Brotherhood And Explains Morsi’s Fall first appeared on .

“If we annually express our outrage over the US killing 290 of our dear countrymen including 60 children, we should not think America’s crime is only limited to this. America is not just responsible for the killing of 290 passengers of Airbus [flight 655]. The ruthless regime is responsible for killing over 220 thousands of our martyrs.”

Naghdi said the killings of tens of thousands of Iranians by Shah’s regime were ordered by the US. He blamed the US for ordering the crimes and terrors carried by anti-Iran terrorist groups like MEK who killed 17 thousands of the oppressed and defenseless people of Iran; including men, women, children, the youth, and the elderly.

He also referred to the assassination of top Iranian officials like Ayatollah Beheshti .America trained, prepared and organized these groups, putting them against their own nation.

“Everybody knows Saddam Hossein attacked Iran with the support order of the US,” the Commander added.

Even worse than the killing of 290 innocent passengers of Airbus is the atrocity of the American government than president who instead of apologizing and being ashamed gave medals of honor to the criminal who did it [Captain William Rogers], which shows it was an intentional, organized planned and ruthless crime and contrary to what the American officials say it was not a mistake so the US must expect a big and hard vengeance from the Muslim Nation.

The post US Policies Of Violence Are Feeding Muslim Vengeance: Iranian Top Commander first appeared on .