Since the dawn of the so-called “Islamic Revolution” of Iran, the Iranian government has had spiritual relevance to the Shia. Ayatollah Khomeini claimed, using the doctrine of Wilayat ul-Faqih, that he was the sole representative of the Imam Mehdi in his absence. Most Shia alive today revere Ayatollah Khomeini as well as his successors. The question must be asked: are these Iranian leaders such as Khomeini using the Imam Mehdi to help the Muslims as they claim or are they actually enemies of Islam who exploit the imaginary memory of Mehdi for their own political gain?
The truth is that the Iranian military is allied with Israel. Of course, the Shia lay-person will scoff at this statement and think it absurd. At first glance, we’d be tempted to agree. Admittedly, on the surface it does seem that Iran is a country full of anti-Israeli propaganda. The Iranian Ayatollahs speak out against the Zionist Jews frequently and with full vigor.
However, those in the intelligence community realize that this is a simple cover. The Ayatollahs are making use of the doctrine of Taqiyyah, which is a part of Shia faith. Taqiyyah is a Shia concept which allows the Shia believer to lie and use deciet in order to further his life or, in this case, his religion.
Despite what the Ayatollahs claim, the Iranian government is most definitely allied militarily with Israel, and we shall provide the irrefutable proof in this article. Both Israel and Iran are non-Arab states surrounded by “hordes” of Sunni Arabs; this is the uniting element between the two countries, both of which cannot see their neighbors, namely the Sunni Arabs, rise to power and question their hegemony. As such, both Israel and Iran act as satellite nations for the United States, which also fears the rise of an Islamist Sunni rise to power in Arabia. The two non-Arab countries, Iran and Israel, are thus used by the United States to prevent this from happening. To hide this nefarious Iran-Israel-US alliance, public officials on both sides (Iran and Israel/US) have engaged in public diatribes against the other. While their words may seem like their swords are drawn against each other, their actions show that they are indeed allied at the hip.
The London Observer estimated that Israel’s arms sales to Iran total $500 million annually. This is by far a conservative estimate, and this was in the 1980’s. Over time, with inflation, that number has increased. Current estimates range in the billions of dollars.
Let us now provide the irrefutable proof. Here is an article from the Global Security website, the respected think tank organization the United States government relies on:
After the Revolution, Iranians continued to buy arms from the United States using Israeli, European, and Latin American intermediaries to place orders, despite the official United States embargo. Israeli sales, for example, were recorded as early as 1979. On several occasions, attempted arms sales to Iran have been thwarted by law enforcement operations or broker-initiated leaks. One operation set up by the United States Department of Justice foiled the shipment of more than US$2 billion of United States weapons to Iran from Israel and other foreign countries. The material included 18 F-4 fighter-bombers, 46 skyhawk fighter-bombers, and nearly 4,000 missiles. But while the department of Justice was attempting to prevent arms sales to Iran, senior officials in the administration of President Ronald Reagan admitted that 2,008 TOW missiles and 235 parts kits for Hawk missiles had been sent to Iran via Israel.
Despite official denials, it is believed that Israel has been a supplier of weapons and spare parts for Iran’s American-made arsenal. Reports indicate that an initial order for 250 retread tires for F-4 Phantom jets was delivered in 1979 for about US$27 million. Since that time, unverified reports have alleged that Israel agreed to sell Iran Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, radar equipment, mortar and machinegun ammunition, field telephones, M-60 tank engines and artillery shells, and spare parts for C-130 transport planes
Source: Global Security Article(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/intro.htm)
We urge our readers to actually view the original articles themselves by clicking on the links above, since no doubt this is a hard idea to pallate. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a well-documented fact that is known in the intelligence community. The alliance between Iran and Israel is an undeniable fact.
Here is an article from TIME Magazine about the military alliance between Iran and Israel:
Or it could be said that the drama started in 1981, just after Reagan came into office, when U.S. officials learned that Israel was ignoring the 1979 American ban on the sale of arms to Iran. At the time Iran badly needed spare parts for the American-made weapons it had acquired during the Shah’s reign. In their hour of need the Iranians looked to Israel, which had also supplied weapons to the Shah.
The Israelis reportedly set up Swiss bank accounts to handle the financial end of the deals. Despite its embargo, the U.S. appeared to look the other way. Administration officials seemed interested in Israel’s notion that the arms sales would help foster ties with leaders in the Iranian military…
…In late August, Israel sent a planeload of arms to Iran. The cargo consisted mostly of Soviet-made weapons that the Israelis had captured in Lebanon…
In the fall of 1985 Iran was presumably making payments to Israel through the Swiss bank accounts set up to handle Israeli-Iranian arms sales in the early 1980s. At the same time, Israel was demanding that the U.S. replace the items that had been taken from Israeli stockpiles and sold to the Iranians. But Washington reportedly grew suspicious about the finances. In asking for fresh weapons, Israeli officials claimed that they could not pay full price, but Washington suspected that Iran was paying the Israeli dealers far more than the arms were actually worth. The U.S. urged Israeli officials to drop the arms merchants from the Iran deal and allow Jerusalem to take over the operation…
Israel sold Iran $12 million worth of weapons at a price that included a markup as high as 250%, or $42 million…
Source: TIME Magazine Article, (http://www.time.com/time/europe/timetrails/iran/ir861208.html)
The Russians sold the Lebanese weapons which were used against Israel. Israel seized these weapons and then gave them over to Iran. What an irony, considering that this was the same time that the Ayatollahs were making public statements lambasting the Israeli presence in Lebanon.
Here is an excerpt from MSNBC:
Reagan would wait and disclose his intentions in private. So it was with the disputed decision in August 1985 to condone arms sales by Israel to Iran. “He called and said, ‘I think we ought to get on with that. Let’s go ahead with that,” McFarlane told the commission.
Source: MSNBC Article,
This is all very strange, because at this exact same time, the Ayatollahs are publically condemning both Israel and America. And yet, they were actually having heavy arms dealing with their supposed enemies? In fact, we often see Israel publically decrying Iran and then Iranian leaders retorting back, but this is all one big facade to hide the truth: Israel and Iran are very much allied militarily, with the Zionist Jews providing advanced weaponry to the Shia in the hopes of empowering them against the Sunni Arabia.
Historically, the Kufaar (infidels) have always sought alliances with the Shia nations against the Sunni majority. During the Crusades, the Shia Fatimids were providing material aid to the Crusaders against the Sunni majority which held the Holy Land. The Shia Fatimids thus facilitated the take-over of the Holy Land (al-Aqsa) by the Crusaders. Then arose Salahuddin Ayyoubi (Saladin), the great leader of the Ahlus Sunnah, who first had to crush the Shia Fatimids before he could focus on the Crusaders and liberate the Holy Land.
The Shia also helped the Mongols, allowing the Mongol hordes to loot and pillage the Muslim lands. The Mongols were invited to attack the Sunnis by the Shia, and the sack of Baghdad consequently ended the Golden Age of the Muslims and heralded the rise of Europe. When the Ottoman Empire rose to power, again the Shia plotted and planned against the Muslims; the Safavid Empire was backed by the Western powers who sought to keep it as an ally against the more powerful Ottoman Empire. Once again, the Shia were allied with the West against the bulk of the orthodox Muslims.
This alliance between the Kufaar and the Shia continued with the Shah of Iran. He was no doubt an agent of America, and Iran became a key ally of Zionist Israel against the majority Sunni Arab countries. Many people thought that this status of Iran as Israel’s stooge ended with the Iranian Revolution and the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini. But the truth is, Iran’s alliance with Israel continued in full force.
- Irangate: The Israel Connection
The book “The Iran Contra Connection” discusses the relationship between Iran and Israel:
The Israeli Interest in Iran
… Though Israel, along with the United States, suffered a grievous loss with the fall of the Shah, its leaders concluded that lasting geo-political interests would eventually triumph over religious ideology and produce an accommodation between Tel Aviv and Tehran. The onset of the Iran-Iraq war in 1980 gave Israeli leaders a special incentive to keep their door open to the Islamic rulers in Iran: the two non-Arab countries now shared a common Arab enemy. As Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon told the Washington Post in May 1982, justifying Israeli arms sales to Tehran, “…we hope that diplomatic relations between us and Iran will be renewed as in the past.” Four months later he told a Paris press conference, “Israel has a vital interest in the continuing of the war in the Persian Gulf, and in Iran’s victory.” Such views were not Sharon’s alone; Prime Ministers Itzhak Shamir (Likud) and Shimon Peres (Labor) shared them too…
The Arms Channel Opens
Israel lost no time supplying the new Khomeini regime with small quantities of arms, even after the seizure of the U.S. embassy. The first sales included spare parts for U.S.-made F-4 Phantom jets; a later deal in October 1980 included parts for U.S.-made tanks…
Notes Ha’aretz correspondent Yo’av Karny “The cloak of secrecy that surrounds Israeli arms exports is so tight that one can compare it to the technique for smuggling hard drugs.” When caught in the act, Israeli officials maintained they were simply selling domestic arms, not embargoed U.S. weapons. “Whenever we would get word of shipments,” one American official explained, “the State Department would raise the issue with Israel, and we would get the standard lecture and promises that there were no U.S. weapons involved.”
…[The Israelis] signed a deal with Iran’s Ministry of National Defense to sell $135,842,000 worth of arms, including Lance missiles, Copperhead shells and Hawk missiles…
In November 1981, Israeli Defense Minister Sharon visited Washington, shopping for approval of similar arms sales [to Iran]. His U S. counterpart Caspar Weinberger, flatly turned him down. Sharon then went to Haig, hoping for acquiescence from the State Department. Again, McFarlane handled many of the discussions with Sharon and Kimche; this time Haig unequivocally opposed any violation of the embargo.
Yet as in 1979-80, Israel pursued its policy anyway, in flat violation of its arms re-export agreements with the Pentagon. In a May 1982 interview with the Washington Post, Sharon claimed that Israeli shipments had been cleared “with our American colleagues” months earlier and that details of all the shipments were supplied to the administration. Later that year, Israel’s ambassador Moshe Arens declared that Israel’s arms sales were cleared at “almost the highest levels” in Washington…
And those shipments would continue to be enormous in size, estimated by experts at the Jaffee Institute for Strategic Studies in Tel Aviv at $500 million in value from 1980-83. Other arms market experts have put the total value at more than $500 million a year, including aircraft parts, artillery and ammunition.
(Source: p.169, “Irangate: The Israel Connection” excerpted from the book The Iran Contra Connection by Johnathan Marshall and Peter Dale Scott, South End Press, 1987, paper)
Iran continues to recieve support from Israel. On the one hand, the Iranian Ayatollahs make vociferous condemnations of Israel, but on the other hand, they are secretly allied with the Israelis. This all in the name of religion, in the name of Taqiyyah, and in the name of some Hidden Imam who has made the Ayatollah his sole representative on earth, who has made him the Absolute Authority of Allah Himself.
Ayatollah Khomeini and his government were allied militarily with the likes of such Zionists as Ariel Sharon, the killer of Muslims in Palestine. The truth is that the Shia have always been allied with the enemies of Islam, which gives away their origins from Abdullah ibn Saba who supposedly converted to Islam from Judaism. Abdullah ibn Saba sought to create a group that would forever fight the Muslims from the inside, and we see this role being fulfilled by the Shia who claim to want unity with the Ahlus Sunnah but then they betray the Ahlus Sunnah whenever and wherever they can. The Shia fear that if the Ahlus Sunnah awakens to this threat, then they could easily crush the Shia everywhere due to the overwhelming numbers of the Ahlus Sunnah. So the Shia have adopted the policy of publically asking for unity and privately waging a war against the Ahlus Sunnah.
It is a huge fraud that the Iranian government claims to be enemies with Israel and yet is supplied arms from this same enemy. The Shia may claim to be allied with the Muslims, but they are secretly allied with the Zionist Jews and the Crusading Christians. The Quran says: “Of the people there are some who say: ‘We believe in Allah and the Last Day,’ notwithstanding their unbelief. Fain would they deceive Allah and the believers, but they only deceive themselves, and realize it not. In their hearts there is a disease, and Allah permitted this disease to increase. Grievous is the penalty they incur, because they are false.” (Quran, 2:8-10)
During the Iran-Iraq War, Iran aspired to annex the land of Iraq and thereby expand its borders to form a “Super Iran.” Publically, the United States declared that it wanted an Iraqi victory; however, the CIA secretly supported an Iranian victory. Thus began the ever famous Iran Contra debacle, in which the United States was caught red-handed supplying weapons and arms to Iran. It was indeed very embarassing to both the United States and Iran that they were publically declaring one thing and privately doing something completely opposite. During this entire time period, the two-faced Iranian government was publically condemning Israel but recieving billions of dollars worth of military armaments from America via Israel.
The United States had long ago recognized the importance of keeping Persian and Shia Iran as an ally against the Arab and Sunni Arabia. Both Israel and Iran felt surrounded by “seas of Arabs” and this was the unifying factor between Israel and Iran. During the Iran-Iraq War, Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon (future Prime Minister of Israel) told the Washington Post in May 1982, justifying Israeli arms sales to Tehran, “…we hope that diplomatic relations between us and Iran will be renewed as in the past.” Four months later he told a Paris press conference, “Israel has a vital interest in the continuing of the war in the Persian Gulf, and in Iran’s victory.”
However, Iran was unable to conquer Iraq and instead the war ended in a draw in 1988. But the United States quickly came to Iran’s aid and invaded Iraq in 1990. Once, Iraq had been the strongest force in the region next to Israel. Slowly, after years of war and sanctions enacted by the US government, Iraq was greatly weakened. Finally, the United States occupied Iraq, using September the 11th as a pretext. The US forces then turned a blind eye to the influx of Iranian influence in occupied Iraq. By allowing their cohort Iran to manage a puppet government in Iraq, the United States would give legitimacy to the new government since Iranian-backed Shia would seem more indigenous than foreign Westerners.
Iran began the process of demographic change and sent thousands of Iranians over the border and into Iraq. This included many Ayatollahs (who became the religious leaders in Iraq), as well as hundreds of thousands of fighters belonging to armed militias.
The Associated Press declared:
A resounding Shiite victory in next month’s elections will bring Iraq closer to Tehran, forming a “Super Iran” that could change the face of the Middle East, critics say…
Views vary dramatically over what shape Iraq’s political future will take following nationwide elections scheduled for Jan. 30, but few dispute that this Shiite-majority country’s relations with its eastern neighbor — which is ruled by Shiite ayatollahs — will grow closer…
This may embolden Shiites here and throughout the Middle East, some regional analysts say. But Iraq’s likely political shift is also stirring fears of the spread of an Iranian-brand of Shiite power throughout the Sunni Muslim-dominated region.
Jordan’s King Abdullah, a pro-U.S. Sunni Muslim, this month said Iraq’s elections could lead to the establishment of a hard-line Shiite regime based on the model in Iran…
Iraq’s interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, a secular Shiite running a separate ticket to the al-Sistani-backed one, accuses Iran of opposing Iraq’s postwar reconstruction. His defense minister labels Iran as his country’s “number one enemy” and calls the United Iraqi Alliance the “Iranian list” that would install a rule of “turbaned clerics” in Iran if it succeeds in the polls…
[Many of the Iraqi Shiites] also look to Iran’s Shiite establishment for religious guidance…
Such a scenario worries people like Iraqi-born Mustafa Alani, director of national security at the Dubai-based regional think-tank the Gulf Research Center.
“The nightmare scenario in the region is the election of an Iranian-influenced Shiite government in Iraq will lead to the creation of a ‘Super Iran’ emerging as a regional superpower” says Alani. “We are talking about a huge shift in the region’s power balance.”
(Source: The Associated Press,
Armed Iranian militias are crossing the border into Iraq. USA Today declared that there are concerns regarding a recent
…buildup of Iranian spies and militants in Iraq…Iran is trying to influence, and possibly disrupt, plans for a transition to Iraqi rule.
Iran is setting up civilian and armed cells in Iraq to intimidate Iraqis and covertly influence elections, says one of the four officials, a high-level officer with the U.S. military command in Baghdad.
Because the topic is so sensitive, U.S. officials won’t discuss it on the record. Iranian officials deny trying to manipulate the transition…
Since the fall of Baghdad in April, Iraq’s 900-mile border with Iran has not been patrolled as strictly as it was under Saddam Hussein. Thousands of Iranians have entered Iraq, apparently with their [Iranian] government’s blessing…
“The Iranians believe their ship is coming in and that Shiite Islamicists will achieve dominance,” Katzman [a Middle East expert at the Congressional Research Service] says…
“The Iranians are setting up an intelligence infrastructure in Iraq,” Tanter [another Middle East expert at the Washington Institute] says. “They can use it for political influence and/or military action…”
[The Iraqi group, the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq] has its own Iranian-trained militia…
(Source: USA Today, http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-02-12-iran-iraq-usat_x.htm)
The links between the United States and Iran become apparent when we see that the United States actually shut down anti-Iranian radio stations in Iraq. USA Today says:
Mindful of Iran’s leverage in Iraq…U.S. authorities in Iraq shut down a radio station operated by the Mujahedin el-Khalq (MEK), an Iranian dissident group that had been harbored by Saddam. U.S. authorities also took DNA samples from several thousand MEK members under U.S. guard in apparent preparation to charge some with terrorist crimes.
(Source: USA Today, http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-02-12-iran-iraq-usat_x.htm)
Moqtada al-Sadr, Ayatollah al-Hakim, Ayatollah Sistani, and so many more Shia leaders in Iraq are really supporters and citizens of Iran. BBC News said:
Moqtada Sadr’s popularity partly derives from his links to Iran…The more senior Ayatollah Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, a member of the US-appointed Iraqi Governing Council (IGC), is even more beholden to Iran. He is the leader of the Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution in Iraq (Sciri), which was established in 1982 in Tehran by the Iranian government. He returned to Iraq after spending 22 years in Iran.
Sciri’s 10,000-strong militia, called the Badr Brigades, has been trained and equipped by Iran.
Ayatollah Hakim underscored his continued closeness to Iran on 11 February, the 25th anniversary of Iran’s Islamic revolution. Opening a book fair in Baghdad, sponsored by the Iranian embassy, he praised the Vilayat-e Faqih (ie Rule of Religious Jurisprudent) doctrine on which the Iranian constitution is founded.
Then there is Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the most senior Shia cleric, who is now being routinely described by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) as a moderate, even pro-Western…Ayatollah Sistani was born and brought up in the Iranian city of Mashhad…Most of his nine charitable ventures, primarily providing housing for pilgrims and theology students, are in Iran. So too are the four religious foundations sponsored by him…
Outside official circles, there are signs of growing Iranian influence among Iraqi Shias…Also, Iranian Shias are pouring into Iraq, which has six holy Shia sites, across the unguarded border at the rate of 10,000 a day.
Then there are covert activities purportedly sponsored by Iran.
Soon after Saddam’s downfall, some 100 “security specialists” of the Lebanese Hezbollah arrived in Basra, at the behest of the Iranian intelligence agency…Since then two groups of Iraqi Shias calling themselves Hezbollah have emerged, one of them allegedly sponsored by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard, with its headquarters in Amara and branches in other cities. This is widely seen as a move to establish an Iranian intelligence infrastructure in Iraq…
(Source: BBC News, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3629765.stm)
The Washington Post said that there were
fears that Iran will move in as a major player after months of quietly building networks among Iraqi politicians and religious circles…Iran [has] built up its influence, deploying hundreds of personnel and channeling millions of dollars to secure ties that were impossible during Saddam Hussein’s rule…Iran is using all instruments available to interfere and be a very active player in Iraq…
Ironically, U.S. officials said the United States and Iran share the long-term goal…[to] give Shiite leaders a decisive edge. Iranian analysts agreed.
(Source: Washington Post,
- The International Herald Tribune
That the United States and Iran share the same objectives in Iraq. The Herald Tribune declared:
Paradoxically, it is in Iraq, where U.S. and Iranian interests coincide…The United States and Iran have many common interests in Iraq…Iran can help U.S. economic reconstruction efforts through its ties to the Iraqi merchant community and its own official aid to Baghdad. As for political stability, the United States may have the boots on the ground, but America’s coercive potential must be backed up by Iran’s soft power.
Iran’s seminaries, clerics, politicians and businessmen hold powerful sway over elites in Baghdad as well as local leaders.
(Source: International Herald Tribune,
Details on the increased Iranian influence in post-war Iraq are easily accessible to anyone who has the Internet (and Google) or even a cursory glance at recent newspaper clippings. In fact, there are too many sources to cite. The conclusion that is reached is that one of the countries that had the most to gain from the War on Iraq is none other than Iran. The United States and Iran conspired to take over Iraq; the United States would conquer the country, and Iran would manage it. In this manner, the new Iraqi regime would seem to be indigenous, as opposed to being run by a Western power.
Iran has been the historic arch-rival of Iraq and even fought a brutal war that lasted many years and resulted in many millions of Iraqi deaths. It is thus unprecedented that this same enemy (Iran) is now coming to power in Iraq.