Fighting for Russia against the New World Order.

Showing posts sorted by relevance for query iran. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query iran. Sort by date Show all posts

Macron Does The Right Thing For Selfish Reasons

Macron Does The Right Thing For Selfish Reasons

By Adam Garrie 

French President Emmanuel Macron has offered a strong statement condemning American, Saudi and Zionist meddling in Iran’s internal affairs. In a statement which is surprisingly robust given Macron’s foreign policy record, the French President stated, 

“The official line pursued by the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia, who are our allies in many ways, is almost one that would lead us to war (with Iran)”.

Macron’s modus operandi is clear enough. French businesses, unlike their American counterparts, have taken advantage of the JCPOA (Iran nuclear deal), to conduct incredibly high stakes and potentially, massively profitable deals with Iran.

In July of last year, for example, the French energy corporation Total signed a $4.8 Billion deal with Iran relating to gas exploration and extraction along the vast South Pars gas field.

This is just one of many large deals inked between French companies and Iran. As Macron’s biggest support base remains France’s urbane financial and corporate elite, he is certainly not going to risk incurring their wrath. Because of this, he is standing up to the geo-political adventurism of the regimes in Riyadh, Tel Aviv and even Washington, whose goals of regional domination are not shared by France who in this instance, is collectively happy enough to make money from Iran without ruling Iran.

The scenario is not dissimilar to that which France faced in 2003 when President Jacques Chirac became an unlikely anti-war hero due to his vocal opposition to George W. Bush and Anthony Blair’s illegal war upon Iraq.
Unlike the US and UK who largely turned their back on Iraq beginning in 1990, French businesses continued to conduct high level deals  with Saddam Hussein’s country throughout the turbulent 1990s and early 2000s.

It is true that Chirac, like most of the world, realised the madness of a war on Iraq and likewise, he seemed to have a large degree of personal animosity towards Bush and Blair as they embodied the “ugly Anglo-Saxon” mentality that Chirac defined himself as the antithesis of. However, Chirac also knew that French businesses stood to lose billions of Euros from the destruction of Iraq.

Ultimately, he stood up for French business interests, which at that time, coincided with the interests of peace.

Today, Macron is doing largely the same, as the interests of the French corporate class which has ballooned since the more austere Chirac days, are temporarily aligned with the advocacy of peace in Iran. The fact that Washington and Tel Aviv are far more afraid of attacking Iran directly than they were in respect of Iraq in 2003, makes Macron’s intervention all the more important.

Of course there is another factor at play. In trying to diplomatically isolate Iran, Washington, Tel Aviv and Riyadh are attempting to coerce European parties to the JCPOA, including France, into adopting Washington’s position of opposition to the JCPOA.

Macron’s statement is a clear indication that this strategy has backfired, because for major European powers like France, the JCPOA remains popular.

The other US goal of trying to force Iran to cease its aid to the anti-terrorist struggle of Iraq and Syria also looks like a failure.

Iran’s role in Iraq is now that of a long-term political ally, as Iraq’s war has largely shifted from a military conflict to a security and political rehabilitation programme.  In this sense Iran’s role in Iraq is that of a long term partner which is something most Iranians and most Iraqis few favourably. Iranians who grew up hating Saddam’s Iraq, are now, not only at peace with, but are generally supportive of the Shi’a dominated Iraqi government’s pro-Iranian stance. In this sense, Iran’s position vis-à-vis Iraq is not likely to change.

In respect of Syria, Iran’s main role has evolved from a military advisor, to that of  being the torch bearer of Syrian interests at the Astana Peace Talks. While Russia’s role is that of a supreme balancer and Turkey’s role is one which seeks to legitimise extremist Sunni factions (however contradictory a task this is) while also restraining the influence of Kurdish extremists in Syria, Iran has aligned itself with the majority of anti-Takfiri Syrians. As a Shi’a power in the region, Iran’s pedigree offers a great deal of reassurance for the Syrians who have been most viciously targeted by Takfiri terrorists.

Fellow Astana members Russia and Turkey have offered robust statements in favour of Iran’s sovereignty with both Moscow and Ankara warning against any illegal foreign meddling in Iran’s internal affairs. Turkey has blamed “Israel” and the US for meddling in Iraq, while Russia has gone on the offensive against American hypocrisy.

In this sense, when a fellow Astana member came under attack from “Israel”, the US and Saudi Arabia, Russia and Turkey supported their besieged partner and in so doing, will have encouraged Iran’s further participation in Astana and by extrapolation in the Syria crisis.

Unless the US, “Israel” and Saudi Arabia are willing to flood Iran with terrorists and send new loads of arms to existing terrorist groups inside Iran (including Baloch aligned Takfiris, Kurdish terrorists, MEK sleeper cells and Royalist hooligans), their mission will likely fail.
Even if the aforementioned aggressive powers did send arms and/or cash to terrorists, Iran’s security services are very prepared for such an incident.

In this sense, the two immediate goals of the aggressive powers have failed—Europe has not rejected the JCPOA and Iran is not decreasing its legal influence in Syria and Iraq (nor Lebanon).

Because the aggressors will likely not give up this easily, Iran must remain on guard and ready to crush any hint of western/Zionist/Wahhabi backed sedition at any time.


Iran didn’t want to kill US troops with its strike, it wanted to make point to Trump about its missile tech & resolve. It did that

Scott Ritter 
Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer. He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. 
Iran didn’t want to kill US troops with its strike, it wanted to make point to Trump about its missile tech & resolve. It did that

Iran also fired five additional missiles at the US consulate in Erbil; US commanders on the ground said that it appeared Iran deliberately avoided striking the consulate, but in doing so sent a clear signal that had it wanted, the consulate would have been destroyed.
Trump had to back down

This was the reality that President Trump had to wrestle with when addressing the American people regarding the state of hostilities between the US and Iran.

Trump had previously promised a massive retaliation should Iran attack any US personnel or facilities. Surrounded by his national security team, Trump had to back down from that threat, knowing full well that if he were to attack Iran, the Iranian response would be devastating for both the US and its regional allies, including Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The US might be able to inflict unimaginable devastation on Iran, but the cost paid would be unacceptably high.

Trump’s rhetoric was aggressive, however, and his message made it clear that the US still considered Iran to be a rogue state whose pursuit of nuclear technology, ballistic missiles, and regional dominance would be opposed by the US, with force if necessary. But the Iranian missile attack drove home the new reality that, when it came to Iran’s actions in the Persian Gulf, American Presidential rhetoric no longer held sway as it once did.

Ali Khamenei, the Iranian Supreme Leader, drove this point home in a series of tweets claiming to have “slapped” the US in the face for its assassination of Soleimani, emphasizing that the policies pursued by Soleimani seeking the withdrawal of the US from the Persian Gulf region were becoming a reality, citing the recent vote by the Iraqi parliament to evict all foreign troops, including those of the US, from its soil.

President Trump, in his address to the American people, certainly talked the talk when it came to articulating a strong anti-Iranian policy. The real question is whether Trump and the American people are prepared to walk the walk, especially in a world where Iranian missiles are capable of dealing death and destruction on a scope and scale previously unimaginable.


Iran’s “Protests” Have Exposed Much of Alt-media As a Fraudulent Western Sham

Iran’s “Protests” Have Exposed Much of Alt-media As a Fraudulent Western Sham

A Russia Truth exclsuive article by Adam Garrie

The Iran “protests” have revealed the full extent of the myopic selfishness which is endemic in so-called “alt-media”. While predictably, western mainstream media have adopted the anti-Iranian rhetoric of the Zionist regime and of the Trump White House, what may come as a shock to some, is that so too have many in the so-called “alt-media”. 

 “Alt-media” has become a victim of its own success—a success built more on opportunism than on principle. For many, the western and Wahhabi terrorist proxy war on The Syrian Arab Republic was a watershed moment among those who were aghast at the fact that many of the so-called liberals of the west who protested the war in Iraq because George W. Bush couldn’t string a sentence together, ended up supporting (directly or tacitly) Barack Obama’s wars of aggression on Libya and Syria—simply because Obama was a smooth talker. 

Because of the protracted nature of the conflict in Syria, many naive western liberals and some erstwhile neo-cons, began to realise that in Syria, a secular, tolerant, multi-ethnic, multi-confessional, progressive and modern government was facing a visibly barbaric and an undeniably reprehensible onslaught at the hands of Takfiri terrorists who were armed, aided and funded by western governments and their allies in places like Saudi Arabia and “Israel”. 

Because of this and because of the naturally self-interested fear of the global threat from groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS, many westerners superficially rallied to the Syrian side without having the faintest idea of what they were supporting, nor a willingness to educate themselves about the history of the Syrian Arab Republic, Ba’athism or the legacy of President Hafez al-Assad, let alone his son, President Bashar al-Assad. 

Many in the west conspicuously failed to comprehend that Syria’s battle, while one which benefits global civilisation, is one being fought in the specific context of a long history of Arab nationalism. Syria does not exist for the benefit of foreigners, but for the benefit of her people and the wider Arab community. Syria is of course, a partner to all sincerely friendly nations ranging from Russia and China, to Iran and the DPRK. However, a great deal of non-Arabic analysis on Syria tends to view the conflict in selfish terms which represent an unconscious colonial mentality. A lot of this is a sad reflection on the background of those authoring such narrow minded “analysis”.  One cannot wish Syria well, without understanding the nature of her political system and consequently, why any external alteration to this system will have made Syria’s military victories, ultimately useless.

The future of the Syrian Arab Republic will not depend on the support of groups and individuals merely cheering on the Syrian Arab Army for selfish reasons, without care for the future of the Arab Republic. Syria’s future depends on those who see Arabism as an inseparable element vis-a-vis Syria’s society, laws and national character.

And now the penny has dropped even deeper.

 Unlike Syria, Iran has not faced an internal military onslaught from Takfiri terrorists, although last year, a large scale ISIS staged a brutal attack on important sites in Tehran. The result was 18 Iranians martyred at the hands of Takfiri terrorists in an assault which Iran’s security services said was orchestrated by Saudi Arabia—America’s primary Arab ally. 

However, because Iran’s struggle against Takfiri terrorism is one fought outside of Iran’s borders, the Takfiri atrocity of 2017 in Tehran did not register among many western observers. Indeed, because of decades of anti-Iranian propaganda, Iran’s steadfast and fully legal aid to Syria and Iraq in their fight against terrorism, has gone largely unnoticed. 

But now, the vile prejudices of many in the west are on full display. Iran’s government, like that of Syria’s Ba’athist government is a revolutionary government, it is a progressive government, it is a government which puts sovereignty above submission to western financial imperialism and one which puts the struggle of Palestine above capitulation to aggressive bullies. This is not to say that Syrians and Iranians don’t have complains against their governments. They do and voice them openly and peacefully in the normal way that is done in much of the world (outside of places like Saudi Arabia, occupied Palestine, Bahrain, the post-NATO Libya). This is not the issue, the issue is that of western/Zionist backed reactionaries and their thugs attempting to reinstall a puppet Shah in Tehran, all the while Al-Qaeda, ISIS,  Kurdish terrorists, Baloch terrorists and the terrorist group MEK salivate at their opportunity to destroy Iran. 

Unlike Syria’s secular revolutionary Ba’athist government, Iran’s Revolution is an Islamic Revolution. This of course has never prohibited Iran from having good ties to Christian Armenia, secular/Orthodox Russia, secular multi-confessional Syria or the secular Juche Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Likewise, recent efforts to improve relations between majority Sunni Pakistan and the Islamic Republic of Iran have been largely successful even in their initial stages. Turkey and Iran have also greatly expanded their relations in the last year, in spite of historic, political and spiritual differences. 

It is only in the west, where the ideology of liberalism sets itself in opposition to the Islamic Revolution. Other secular or non-Shi’a countries have no trouble forming partnerships and alliances with Iran.  In this sense, western liberalism and Wahhabism share a uniquely bigoted loathing of The Islamic Republic of Iran--one that other countries without Iranian style governments do not.  

So while many liberals and partially reconstructed neo-cons in the west temporarily aligned themselves with the Ba’athist Syrian Arab Republic due to a combination of opportunism and self-preservation, when Iran faces threats from the same sources (the US, “Israel”, Saudi Arabia), there is little genuine sympathy from many in western so-called “alt-media”. 

Instead they have reverted to form. Now, they either ignore calls for solidarity with the Islamic Republic, or they openly call for its demise because the Islamic Revolution is incompatible with their liberal/neo-con bigotry. 

It seems that Iran is a red line for many in “alt-media” which shows that the groundswell of support for alternative views on Syria was both formed by and is limited to acts of selfishness. 

Such individuals do not give a damn about Palestine, because they do not live in fear of an Israeli jet bombing their homes. Such individuals also do not give a damn about Iran, because they have been programmed by Zionist propaganda to hate The Islamic Revolution, in spite of its peaceful and progressive character. What they don’t realise is that Syria sees its war against groups like ISIS as part of the larger struggle to liberate the Arab world from Zionist/western imperialism. Furthermore, Iranians see their battle to preserve the Islamic Revolution as part of the wider battle against Wahhabi obscurantism. With friends as two-faced as this, Syria should be glad to be rid of them when they no longer find the Syrian cause “useful” to their own selfish agenda. 

If politically compromised individuals in the west actually cared about the principles of national sovereignty, opposition to western, Zionist and Wahhabi imperialism, an equality among nations and peace among peoples, they would all be rallying to support Iran. Instead they sardonically insult Iran’s Revolution, Iran’s culture, Iran’s government, Iran’s customs and Iran’s people. 

Of course, there are many in “alt-media” who are genuine and always were. These were the same people who were ignored before the horrors of ISIS woke many from their slumber. Now that they think ISIS has been destroyed, they are ready to go back to sleep. 

This is to the eternal shame of the “alt-media” frauds and will be to the eternal glory of those who support The Islamic Revolution, including those in Syria who stand shoulder to shoulder with their Iranian brothers and sisters, in spite of having different forms of revolutionary governments.

South Korea’s Genuine Protests Were Ignored by The West While Iran’s Fake “Protests” Are Praised

South Korea’s Genuine Protests Were Ignored by The West While Iran’s Fake “Protests” Are Praised 

 (A Russia Truth exclusive article by Adam Garrie)

Beginning in late 2016 and stretching well into 2017, millions of South Koreans engaged in seemingly unending protests against the Presidency of Park Geun-hye.

President Park who herself is the daughter of the infamous South Korean dictator Park Chung-hee, showed the world that when it came to a blind adherence to extremist US authored foreign policy, the apple did not fall far from the tree.

At a time when most South Koreans favour policies of peace, reconciliation and de-escalation with the DPRK, Park authorised the delivery of an unlimited amount of US weapons to Korean soil. She was later exposed to have worked with her intelligence service, the NIS, on plans to illegally assassinate the leader of North Korea, something which would have triggered a wider regional war that could have quickly gone nuclear.

It later emerged that Park conspired with elements of the NIS to rig the 2012 Presidential elections, which would have otherwise been won by the more peace-minded and moderate Moon Jae-in. This was just one of the multiple scandals that brought South Koreans onto the streets this year and the year before, calling for peaceful regime change against a corrupt extremist leader, who was later exposed as having no democratic legitimacy in the first place.

Eventually, Park was impeached and removed from office. She now languishes in prison and will be tried for her crimes against the country.

While the protests lasted for months, on a single day alone, in November of 2016, over 1 million Koreans filled the streets of Seoul demanding Park’s regime be removed from power.

In spite of the massive numbers of genuine protesters and the mounting evidence against Park which no one could responsibly dispute as authentic, there was little coverage of the protests in western media (both alt and mainstream). When western media did report on the events, they tended to portray the protests as a kind of K-pop style street party rather than months of rage and disgust aimed at a corrupt and militant leader who most Koreans could not wait to get rid of.

But there was no talk of “the world is watching” from Barack Obama nor Donald Trump when it came to South Korea. Likewise, there were no US State Department press releases connoting the phrase “regime change” as a desired outcome of the protests. Such words are uniquely reserved for countries like Iran.

Over the last two days, small but worrying “protests” have filled the streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities, coinciding simultaneously with Zionist media reporting that Washington and Tel Aviv have devised a new plan to “counter” and destabilise Iran.

There are some people naive enough not to see the connection between the publication of such reports and the seditious movements of small groups of agitators in Iran. The reality is that the staged “protests” are the first phase of the US and “Israel” implementing their illegal conspiracy against Iran.

As in the past, the events in Iran are being largely organised by the US, “Israel” and so-called NGOs and “non-profit organisations” whose goal is to promote and ultimately reinstall the reactionary, corrupt and gold drenched Pahlavi family, whose last period in power saw them spending Iran’s national wealth on palaces designed for hosting alcohol soaked parties—parties to which many foreigners and hardly any Iranians were invited.

The US and “Israel” are simply trying to provoke Iran with fake protests which are designed to stoke common concerns about price inflation( which is a concern not only in Iran but in the US, Japan, most of Europe and just about everywhere else in the world) in order to create a more wide reaching violent and seditious movement.

Make no mistake, these “protests” while small in number, are nothing more than a foreign backed operation designed to topple Iran and destroy the Islamic Revolution in the name of the Pahlavi family who seek to once again own Iran as if it was their private property and once again go back to the days of open theft coupled with an embarrassing pro-Zionist foreign policy.

Yet if one were to listen to the western media and politicians like Donald Trump, it is as if the “protests” are some sort of genuine movement in the name of….God knows what…they haven’t been specific in this regard.

When South Koreans had actual protests which numbered into the MILLIONS, the west said nothing. Yet when a few stooges of the Zionist regime and the CIA fill the streets of Iran, all of the sudden the fangs of the west become exposed. Likewise, far too many in alt-media seem all too happy to support a reactionary, US and Zionist backed attempt to replace an Iranian Revolution based on equality, social justice, dignity and scientific progress, with an old haggard royalist regime whose ethos is predicated on self-indulgence, corruption, blind adherence to the Zionist agenda and a total disregard for the needs of the people.

The schism between how the west viewed very real protests in South Korea versus how they excite themselves to the point of frenzy over small and inauthentic “protests” in Iran is shocking but not surprising.

South Korea is after all a historic partner of the US while Iran has helped to fight US and Zionist backed Takfiri terrorism throughout the Middle East. Iran has helped to virtually destroy groups like ISIS (Daesh) and how does the west reward them? The west rewards Iran with a small package of illegal regime change disguised as a popular movement—one that will ultimately fail and fail miserably.

This shows you what the west really wants, not just for Iran but for the wider world.

The Events In Iran Vindicate North Korea 100%

The Events In Iran Vindicate North Korea 100%

A Russia Truth exclusive article by Adam Garrie

The recent events in Iran, among other things, fully vindicate the security and defence policies of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in every sense. 

Already, recent history has vindicated North Korea’s policy. Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and to an extent Syria were destroyed by western militaries and their terrorist proxies because they did not have the full means to defend themselves, yet North Korea has not been destroyed because it does have the means to defend itself and deter attacks with its nuclear weapons. 

Far from an exotic theory, this is a very obvious matter of fact, one articulated by few world leaders, with the interesting exception of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. 

To further understand why North Korea has been vindicated, one must examine what happens when sovereign minded countries do deals with the west? 

In 2003, Libya agreed to disarm in return for extended business and security ties to the west. The result was the total destruction of Libya less than ten years later and the barbaric murder of its Revolutionary leader Brother Muammar Gaddafi. Gaddafi had often spoken with disappointment, regarding the fact that western business deals never came through in the way he had expected when he agreed to disarm. Still, he remained cooperative and as a reward the US sent savages in to murder him. 

Syria too had softened its traditional policies of scepticism regarding the west in the years immediately preceding the western led proxy war on Syria. The result has been a seven year on Syria by those same western powers and their Takfiri terrorist proxies, most notably ISIS.

In 2015, Iran agreed to the JCPOA, also known as the Iran nuclear deal, in which Iran forfeited its goal of developing a nuclear security deterrent in exchange for business deals with the west.

In 2018, western backed proxies and local traitors now set fire to the streets of Iran, all the while little significant progress has been made in terms Iranian business deals with the west. 

The US continues to sanction Iran, threaten Iran and lie about Iran’s compliance with the JCPOA, even though Russia, China, Germany, France, Britain, the EU as a whole and the United Nations, all agree that the JCPOA is being completely upheld by the Iranian government. 

Contrasting with Libya, Syria and Iran, North Korea has stated that no deals will be considered until its nuclear deterrent is fully functional in respect of being able to do to the US what the US can and often threatens to do to it.

 When Donald Trump stands before the UN threatening to “destroy” the DPRK, it is only natural that Pyongyang will want a stronger rather than a weaker means of defending itself. This is something a child in the schoolyard could understand with ease, yet many so-called intellectuals deceive themselves and in doing so, detach themselves from simple logic.

They are either stupid or cowards, not to publicly admit that the DPRK has been proved right and just about everyone else has been proved wrong.

Furthermore, North Korea has stated that even when it is willing to negotiate on other matters, that its nuclear deterrent is not up for negotiation. 

The precedent set by previous US “business” deals in exchange for disarmament totally vindicates the DPRK’s position. Far from good faith agreements, such deals are nothing more than a chance for the US to buy itself time while a stated enemy weakens itself and then, when sufficiently vulnerable, the US, its dependants and its proxies go to war and topple the state it had done a deal with.

The pattern has been repeated over and over again, but only North Korea seems to understand the nature of this clear pattern. 

Even in respect of a superpower like Russia, the US refuses to engage in arms reduction treaties—all the while amassing forces on Russia’s borders, before turning around and criticising Russia for maintaining the strength of its own armed forces. 

Sometimes one wonders if Washington really thinks the rest of the world is completely stupid? 

That being said, much of the world is matter-of-factly naive. The events in Iran speak for themselves. 

The following are the general developments that arise after a nation does a deal with the US and its partners:

--No tangible economic improvement 

--Continued sanctions and military threats 

--Some genuinely frustrated citizens who blame their own government for America’s broken promises 

--US armed forces and proxy militants/terrorist  trying to start a war in your borders 

North Korea is indeed a more closed society than Iran and this too has been vindicated by recent events. The US and its proxies do not reward countries for openness, but destroy them because of openness. The US sees an open door not as a sign of friendship but as a sign of vulnerability. 

If the US were to truly change (something that seems impossible until declining economic conditions wreak havoc upon the west in earnest), then perhaps North Korea would be more open to the rest of the world, but until then, it must protect itself as it continues to do.

North Korea, having suffered so greatly at the hands of the US and its partners in the 1950s, is more aware than most, of the full extent of barbarity that the US is happy to rain upon countries that it views unfavourably. 

But unlike others, the DPRK has never forgotten those important lessons of the relatively recent past, nor has the Supreme Leadership in Pyongyang neglected to study the pattern that begins with rapprochement with the US and is shortly followed by the total destruction of the smaller party to that initial rapprochement. 

One will never see proxy wars, “colour revolutions” and open sedition on the streets of the DPRK. This is because the DPRK knows how the US plays its game. If one thinks that North Korea is playing a hard game itself—one must remember that this game is only as hard as that which is necessary to hold off a US attack. 

North Korea stands vindicated—others are guilty of being naive and the US, as always, is guilty of being a dishonest broker and perennial aggressor.

Not finding itself on Iran exemption list, Europe vows to defy US sanctions

© Global Look Press / Christian Ohde

European countries have vowed to maintain “effective financial channels” and to keep trading with Tehran after the US announced that the EU is not among those spared from its sweeping sanctions against Iran.
European countries suddenly discovered that they were not on the list of the ‘lucky ones’ that their ally, the US, decided to exempt from the new wave of all-encompassing sanctions it plans to unleash on Iran. The sanctions, targeting Iran’s shipping, finance and energy sectors, which come into force on November 5, are also designed to punish those countries that dared to do business with the Islamic Republic in defiance of the US pressure.
Only eight nations were graciously granted exemptions by the US, according to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. However, Pompeo made it clear that the EU as a single entity is not on the list, sparking an angry reaction from the US’ western allies. Washington also specifically mentioned that it plans to target the special mechanism the EU has been creating to circumvent the restrictions, prompting its allies to fight back.
In response, the EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, together with the foreign and finance ministers of Germany, France and the UK, vowed to maintain “effective financial channels with Iran” and in particular to continue buying the Islamic Republic’s oil and gas.
They also said that despite Washington’s pressure the EU is still committed to establishing a “Special Purpose Vehicle” for Iran-EU trade. The European nations will seek to protect its companies engaged in “legitimate business with Iran,” the statement said, adding that the EU will cooperate with Russia and China in particular to achieve these goals.

Since its withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, the US has been pursuing a policy of “maximum pressure” on Tehran, vowing to bring its oil exports to ‘zero’, much to the dismay of the European countries, which praise the agreement as “a key element of the global nuclear non-proliferation architecture” and have re-affirmed their commitment to the deal.

Washington, meanwhile, seems to be ready to stop at nothing to force Tehran to bow to its wishes, with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin even threatening sanctions against the international service SWIFT, if it refuses to block Iran’s transactions.


There Are No “Overreactions” When Fighting Terror and Sedition

There Are No “Overreactions” When Fighting Terror and Sedition

A Russia Truth exclusive article by Adam Garrie

When it comes to securing one’s nation, protecting the people and fighting  terrorism organised by some of the most aggressive states in history—no “reaction” is too tough. There is in fact, no such thing as an overreaction in such situations. 

According to the latest reports from Sputnik, a reliable source which is in no way anti-Iranian, “protests” yesterday became even more charged, with some “protesters” shown attacking a facility belonging to Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. No one with a reasonable mind could believe that attacking the IRGC is an anyway related to any peaceful demonstration over domestic price increases. This was an act of terrorism, if not an act of war. 

If one thinks such words are “strong”, this if of course intentional. A nation can only quash sedition if it does so in such a way that it creates a lasting deterrent against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so that such fiends never attempt such foolish treachery ever again. 

One of the reasons that Chinese cities are among the safest in the world is because China takes all crimes deeply seriously. This is reflected in the sentences that Chinese courts enforce upon such ruthless criminals. Last year, a group of bandits from the United States who were jailed in China for theft, learnt rapidly, just how seriously China takes the criminal activities of lowlifes. 

The only reason they were released was due to the personal intervention of the US President who begged President Xi Jinping for clemency in order to save face. Even Trump later regretted his actions and publically expressed this on Twitter. 

Iran’s soft approach to sedition, as conveyed in President Rouhani’s speech yesterday, could be interpreted both as a sign of confidence in the unity and strength of the state, but it could equally be interpreted as a supremely naïve statement which overlooks the basic principles of how to stop sedition, not just in the immediate term but in the long term. 

In reality, if one’s security forces cracks down hard on a single seditious “protest”--enough for the nation not to be distracted by the event, but enough for would be traitors and foreign enemies to get the message—then such a state will increase the likelihood that such seditious acts or acts of war will never be attempted again in the long term future. This is the priceless value of a deterrent effect.
If one fights against thuggery, seditious mob tactics and against the presence of foreign agents seeking to ignite an insurgency on one’s soil, with the full force of military strength, the enemies will not attempt such methods again. Such an “overreaction” means that one will actually save national exhaustion, resources and ultimately lives in the medium and long term. 

When Brother Muammar Gaddafi learned that his nation was under attack from the terrorist proxies of foreign regimes, he spoke of the need to purify the nation, “street to street…house to house…”. 


Sadly, for Gaddafi, he had foolishly disarmed years before which subjected Libya to the onslaught of NATO weaponry that countries like the DPRK are protected from due to their nuclear deterrent.
Iran does not have the material problem of Libya, but it does have a problem of not speaking out forcefully against sedition before it has the chance to inspire the enemies of Iran to sink their teeth in. It is a problem that can and should be fixed.

Already, the US and “Israel” are salivating at the prospect of reinstalling the corrupt heir to the discredited Iranian throne—the Zionist fool Reza Pahlavi, who is cheering on the traitors from his mansion in Beverly Hills, USA.

Iran must put an end not just to the movements of the scoundrels in the street but to future generations of scoundrels, the ambitious of foreign agents and traitors and most importantly the wicked desires of the Zionist and American regimes. 

This is no time to be polite or passive, ultimately many innocent Iranians could become harmed if this blasé attitude continues for much longer.

The only way to do this is to crack down on sedition as China did in 1989.

As I previously wrote,
“During China in the 1980s, an increased number of so-called intellectuals went to academic institutions in the United States where they became seduced by and intentionally programmed by US government operatives keen to see a seditious revolt in the People’s Republic of China--one with the ultimate goal of bringing the regime in Chinese Taipei (aka Taiwan) back to power in Beijing.
Because a readymade regime in Chinese Taipei existed which salivated for power over all of China, the CIA and other aggressive actors did not need to go to the effort of forging a new regime or political model—they simply needed to create agitation among a class of elites in Beijing in order to try and bring down the People’s Republic of China.

Hu Yaobang became the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in 1982 and by the middle of the decade, he became increasingly seduced by the liberal fantasies peddled by western “educated” academics.

His open flirtations with liberal social ideology proved too much to Deng and other social traditionalists and he was removed from power in favour of Zhao Ziyang in 1987. 

When Hu died in 1989, subversive western orchestrated “protests” among “students” and their academic masters began to foment with Tiananmen Square being a focal point. Rather than put a quick end to the numerically small displays, Zhao Ziyang instead offered sympathy to many of the “protesters”.

Zhao was in many ways one part traitor and one part naive. A man of great experience and with a deeply important political position such as Zhao should have been aware, as others including Deng were, that the “protests” were neither genuine nor spontaneous. He should have realised that the “protests” were an attempt to overthrow the very institutions of the state, paving the way for a pro-western regime. To deny this, as he did, was a sign of both carelessness and a dereliction of duty.
Part of Zhao however did likely feel for the fact that young useful idiots of a western plot essentially volunteered themselves to be on the front line of a proxy war. However, his interventions proved totally insufficient and even had the effect of encouraging the conspirators.

The western orchestrators of the “protests” coordinated them to coincide with the official state visit of Mikhail Gorbachev. A visit which heralded the reconciliation between the two great Communist superpowers, instead became an attempt by the west to embarrass both China and the USSR in the same place and at the same time.

Zhao was finally removed from power in 1989 as China sent out the People’s Liberation Army to cleanse the streets of the western agents and restore order.

The vast majority of the Chinese population was unaffected by the events of 1989, but the ruling elite realised that they needed to take precautions to avoid such western meddling in the future. 

China rapidly recovered because of the ultimately decisive action the government took in putting an end to the “protests” and as a result, China is the unshakable powerhouse that it is today.

Although Iran is smaller than China, the west and “Israel” remain frightened of the prospect of direct military confrontation. They are equally afraid to take on Iran in Syria or Iraq by engaging with the limited number of Iranian anti-terrorist military advisors in the Arab nations.

Because of this, the US and “Israel” have devised a plan to “counter Iran” the sparse details of which have been published in Zionist media.

Like clockwork, “protests” in Tehran and several other Iranian cities broke out simultaneous to the publication of reports on an anti-Iranian agreement made between the US regime and the Zionist entity. Allegedly, the protesters are agitating for economic reform and price controls, but anyone who is not totally naive can see the direct correlation between the reports from Zionist media and the western orchestrated protests in Iran.

This is not the first time the west has attempted to use “protesters” to attempt and destroy the Islamic Revolution. So-called Iranian liberals were mobilised by western and “Israeli” actors in 2011.
In reality these “liberals” are a combination of reactionary monarchists, counter-revolutionary hooligans and useful idiots taking orders from Iranians going back and forth between California and Iran, acting under the same kinds of orders as the Chinese “academics” of the 1980s who conspired against the People’s Republic of China.

It is an open secret that “Israel” pours millions into Iranian groups based primarily in the US whose goal is to destroy the Islamic Revolution and restore the pro-western monarchy whose obscenely gluttonous leaders remain in exile, primarily in the US.

As I write this piece, it has been confirmed that an al-Qaeda linked group of terrorists from Iranian Balochistan have blown up a major oil pipeline in western Iran. This is what happens when traitors are not dealt with—the terrorists rush in.

Iran cannot take any further chances. As China learned, a short but hard crackdown on sedition is necessary in order to avoid the total destruction of the state, its people and society.
Many Iranians will not want to hear this. Many wish to pretend that the protests will simply fizzle out due to their small size and seemingly innocent origins. This attitude however is ultimately one derived from fiction, one which puts the lives of every Iranian man, woman and child in danger.
Western backed so-called “colour revolutions” generally begin with an irritating whimper and end with a blood-soaked bang.

Like China, Iran has it within its power to easily crush the seditious radicals. If Iran is to avoid the fate of Libya and others, it must act swiftly and decisively. The Zionist regime is using the events in Tehran and elsewhere as a test to see how far they can push Iran. The government must not allow the enemy to gain an inch.

It is time for a 1989 Chinese style law and order operation in Iran”.

Since I wrote this, two days ago, the pressing need for such a crackdown is all the more important. Iranian leaders must channel the patriotic rhetoric of Gaddafi and the laser like precision of Chinese officials in 1989, who were fully aware that the happiness of future generations of the people depended on a rapid extinguishing of sedition’s dirty flame. 

Now is not the time to wait, nor is it the time to care what the west thinks. Iran must double down on cultivating its new friendships and let the west rot like a rotten fruit on a wilting branch.
It is time to end all sedition and send a clear message to the aggressors in Tel Aviv and Washington that “None shall pass”!


Please help support us

More info

Big Tech Censorship

Popular searches

Russia Collusion