SAEDNEWS: An informed source in Iran says that on that day in Mashhad, weapons were widely distributed among foreign elements and certain domestic mercenaries, and after an attack on Mashhad’s state broadcasting center, the planned goal was for the city—if only for a few hours—to appear like a fallen city.
According to SAEDNEWS, the question is: Was Trump’s tweet on the first day of the armed rioters’ assault in Iran—when he claimed “Mashhad has fallen”—simply a mistake or an emotional reaction, or was there a planned and coordinated background behind it?
An informed source in Iran says that on that day in Mashhad, with the large-scale distribution of weapons among foreign elements and some domestic mercenaries, and with the attack on Mashhad’s IRIB (state media) center, the arranged plan was for the city—even if only for a few hours—to look like a fallen city. Therefore, considering the volume of weapons and the confessions of those arrested, the U.S. scenario to bring down cities—starting with Mashhad—becomes clear.
Accordingly, Trump published his tweet with a specific timing. In the view of the plot designers in the U.S., the tweet was completely on time—or even if slightly earlier than the final outcome, it could have helped make that outcome happen.
The informed source also says that when advisers connected to the U.S.-designed plan on BBC Persian stated, “It is possible that even one million people will be killed, and this is a war—and in war, people get killed,” these claims were not meaningless and could not have simply been a personal opinion. Rather, when placed alongside many other remarks about “street war” and supporting it with U.S. military attacks, the nature of their terrorist activity—aimed at toppling and breaking up Iran—becomes evident.
Based on this, the U.S. plan, according to the source, was to prepare the groundwork for turning Iran into a Syria-like or Libya-like scenario—by having cities fall into the hands of armed terrorists, followed by the destruction of infrastructure and the transformation of Iran into ruins similar to Syria or Gaza. This would be carried out by their domestic elements and then by some rioters who would join them—rather than through a large-scale foreign invasion.
The advantage of such widespread destruction and the killing of millions of Iranians for the U.S., the source claims, was that in the future and in history, the devastation of the country would not be recorded as the result of U.S. military attack. Instead, it would appear as though it happened by the hands of the people themselves. This would also remove the unpredictable costs and unimaginable consequences of a direct and massive military strike from the shoulders of the United States.
The informed source described the extremely high number of seized and discovered military weapons in the days after the unrest, as well as orders for large-scale destruction in marketplaces and government centers, as efforts to create the image of a war-torn and fallen city. He said that even in Gilan—where there was an unsuccessful attack on the governorate—they managed to create such an image by setting fire to 500 shops in the market. However, their efforts ultimately ended in failure.
According to him, one of the main reasons for the failure of the U.S. terrorist plan was that protesters did not join the terrorists—something the plot planners had expected would happen.
Based on this, it appears that after the failure of the scenario of cities collapsing and widespread infrastructure destruction, the new instructions from the planners to the London-based networks—described as the main arm of this sedition and conspiracy—are to no longer speak about war or the need for one million people to be killed in Iran. Instead, by changing tactics, they are now supposed to report only that a democratic movement happened in Iran and that the Iranian system suppressed it.
The informed source also said that soon, through the confessions of those arrested—including killers of civilians and security forces—and through the creation of “personality files” for them, it will become clear that most of these individuals have records of criminality, drug-related offenses, fraud, and kidnapping, and that fewer ordinary citizens are seen among them.
Moreover, he added, logically speaking, an ordinary citizen cannot set a police officer on fire, behead them, or carry out mosque destruction and the burning of Qur’an shelves and prayer books in a similar and consistent style and method.
The source further said that if many members of parties critical of or opposed to the system described the events of January 8 and 9 as an evil enemy plan to break up Iran—whether in writing or on public platforms—it was because the scene was extremely clear and beyond interpretation or debate. Fair-minded political figures became convinced that these events were not simple incidents by protesting citizens, but rather a scenario of fragmentation and civilizational collapse by the historical enemy of the Iranian nation, namely the United States.
He added that this enemy had openly admitted that the number of deaths in Iran must reach the millions for collapse and downfall to become possible. After that, what Netanyahu recently demanded from Trump—namely the “Libya-ization of Iran”—could be carried out by some Iranians themselves.
