Intercepted Communications Reveal Iran May Have Awakened Terrorist Sleeper Cells

RedState 

Iran is the number one state sponsor of international terrorism, and even though the regime is currently getting shellacked daily by U.S.-Israeli forces in Operation Epic Fury, their terror network is still alive. It’s unknown how many potential killers are in our midst here in the United States.

New disturbing information reportedly emerged Monday in a federal law enforcement alert that indicates the Islamic Republic may have attempted to awaken “sleeper cells” and call them to action:

The U.S. has intercepted encrypted communications believed to have originated in Iran that may serve as "an operational trigger" for "sleeper assets" outside the country, according to a federal government alert sent to law enforcement agencies.

The alert, reviewed by ABC News, cites "preliminary signals analysis" of a transmission "likely of Iranian origin" that was relayed across multiple countries shortly after the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran, was killed in a U.S.-Israeli attack on Feb. 28.

Kurt Schlichter, senior columnist at our sister site Townhall, warned of the dangers of sleeper cells earlier in March:

The above tweet from RedState editor Jennifer Van Laar continues:

From a law enforcement source in CA:

"All SWAT qualified officers in Glendale in Burbank have been issued additional ammo+level 4 body armor for their patrol vehicles; for the near future, all units will be 2 officers so mandatory surge OT. LASD and LAPD following the same paradigm."

From a military intel source:

"In the Research Triangle area of NC, especially down toward Southern Pines and Ft Bragg, in the next 3 to 6 wks those cells will step in. Hezbollah is embedded completely there and they've been there for a generation; it's the same up and down the East Coast inside the Iranian expat community, and in LA and other places."

Be Armed and Ready – the Asymmetrical Battlefield Could Be Here at Home.

Sleeper cells and lone-wolf attackers are some of law enforcement’s most serious fears, because how can you fight something if you don’t even know it’s there?

The alert continued:

The intercepted transmission was encoded and appeared to be destined for "clandestine recipients" who possess the encryption key, the kind of message intended to impart instructions to "covert operatives or sleeper assets" without the use of the internet or cellular networks. 

It's possible the transmissions could "be intended to activate or provide instructions to prepositioned sleeper assets operating outside the originating country," the alert said.

Although the alert reportedly did not mention any specific known plots or terror cells, it warned that the danger is very much out there:

"While the exact contents of these transmissions cannot currently be determined, the sudden appearance of a new station with international rebroadcast characteristics warrants heightened situational awareness," the alert said.

Although the news is extremely unwelcome, it’s also not unexpected. Once we took out Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, we knew that there would be attempted retribution. 

Now, we just have to keep catching them before they hit us.

CNN Admits Veterans Overwhelmingly Support Operation Epic Fury

Townhall 

CNN analyst Harry Enten revealed that while some Americans are split over their support for Operation Epic Fury, veterans overwhelmingly support the Trump administration's actions in the Middle East.

"Take a look at this Fox News poll that came out during the past week. Net approval rating of the current U.S. military action against Iran. Look at that. Overall, Fox News shows a dead-even split," Enten said. "But look at those who served in the military. Significantly higher support for the U.S. military action currently going on in Iran. It plus 20 points. That should not be so much of a surprise because take a look at how they view Trump's foreign policy overall. Again, look at those who served in the U.S. military versus overall. If you look at Trump's foreign policy overall, the net approval rating on that, per Fox News, those who served in the military, they like what's going on on average. Look at that. The net approval rating plus eight points for Trump's foreign policy."

"But look at those overall. Way, way down there at minus 20 points," he said. "We're talking about a nearly 30-point gap between those who served in the military and overall."

Enten went on to explain that veterans have been a consistently supportive voting bloc for President Trump, dating back to 2016. He also argued that veterans played a critical role in helping elect the president in 2024.

"And this split, when it comes to those who served in the military and overall, dates back to Trump's elections, all the way back to 2016. But let's look at the 2024 numbers," Enten continued. "Look at this. 2024 results. Those who served in the military, Trump won them by, get this, 31 points. Kamala Harris actually won all other voters by two points. And that means, Johnny Berman, that means that Donald Trump only won in 2024 because of support from those who served in the military."

This comes as several political commentators, much of the mainstream media, and Democratic leaders attempt to frame Operation Epic Fury as another “forever war,” destined to cost American lives and billions of dollars with little benefit to the United States. However, with veterans overwhelmingly supporting the operation, that narrative faces increasing doubt.

What think Americans about the strike in Iran?

 1. A country risk-averse on new Middle East wars but not uniformly anti-action

Most public-facing analysis and polling show Americans do not want a broad, indefinite war with Iran, and only a small share support regime-change operations, but sizable numbers remain undecided or conditional in their views [1][2]. Think tanks and analysts stress that “the American people have clearly communicated that they do not want a war with Iran” and that few favor a regime-change war—numbers cited by experts put such support in the low single digits for Democrats and modest for Republicans [1]. The University of Maryland polling team similarly reports a large undecided cohort and variation by party, underscoring a national ambivalence rather than unified backing for military escalation [2].

2. Partisan and media fault lines shape who calls the strikes justified

Opinion pages and political leaders frame the strikes through partisan lenses: conservative commentators and President Trump’s allies argue the strike demonstrates decisive leadership and a unique opportunity to weaken Tehran, while other commentators and many lawmakers question prudence, legality and strategic coherence [3][7][8]. The New York Times opinion contributors present both hawkish and cautious takes—some veterans praise the move as necessary to deter Iranian proxies, while others warn about strategy and legality [7]. Congressional figures across parties have voiced alarm that the strikes risk widening conflict and were undertaken without clear authorization from Congress [5].

3. Economic anxiety is a central driver of public worry

Commentators and analysts warn that the strikes could trigger oil-market shocks that directly affect Americans’ cost of living, a concern highlighted by polling and experts who say cost-of-living is politically salient and could sway public reaction [4][1]. Coverage emphasizes that disruption in the Strait of Hormuz or attacks on shipping would have outsized impacts on global oil prices and domestic pump costs—an immediate, tangible channel by which distant military action influences American opinion [4].

4. Security expertise pushes back on simple victory narratives

Defense and policy experts quoted in mainstream outlets caution that air strikes alone are unlikely to topple Iran and that military operations would expose limits in U.S. missile defenses and stockpiles if the conflict escalates, reinforcing public doubts that the strikes will yield clean results [1][9]. Analysts at Chatham House and Stimson argue that aerial bombardment can be “battering” but not decisive absent political fractures inside Iran, a point that undercuts triumphant messaging and feeds public skepticism about a quick, favorable outcome [10][1].

5. Moral and humanitarian considerations complicate public sympathy

Opinion writers and reporting note that some Americans sympathize with Iranian protesters and hoped external pressure would help, yet others who remember past prolonged U.S. interventions fear the humanitarian and state-collapse risks of military solutions—nuanced positions that mix empathy with caution in public sentiment [6][7]. Coverage also points out inconsistencies in casualty reporting and the fog of war that make it harder for the public to form settled moral judgments [11][12].

6. Political accountability and legal questions sharpen partisan contestation

Lawmakers from both parties have demanded clarity and pushed back, with prominent senators calling the strikes “deeply consequential” and some members arguing the president acted without congressional authorization—developments that frame public debate as much about executive power as about foreign policy ends [5]. The public’s mixed response is therefore not only about ends but about who decides to take the country into conflict, a theme emphasized by analysts urging Congress to “stand and be counted” on any new war authorization [1].

Trump Sends Mixed Signals On When Iran War Might End

 Facing pressure after a surge in energy prices, President Trump said the war would be over “very soon.” He later said the fighting would go on for at least another week.

Here’s the latest.

Pakistani warships were escorting the country’s merchant vessels in the Middle East on Tuesday, as the conflict in Iran choked off oil tanker traffic and prompted President Trump to warn of even more aggressive U.S. action if Iranian leaders continue trying to cut off access to energy supplies.

Fighting has slowed ship traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, the conduit for about one-fifth of the world’s oil. Pakistan, which heavily relies on energy imports from the Gulf, said on Monday that it had sent warships to accompany merchant vessels to ensure its access to energy supplies.

Mr. Trump struck a belligerent tone toward Iran on Monday evening while speaking with reporters in Florida. “We will hit them so hard that it will not be possible for them or anybody else helping them to ever recover that section of the world,” he said. He also expressed displeasure at Iran’s appointment of Mojtaba Khamenei to succeed his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as supreme leader, saying that “it’s going to lead to more of the same problem for the country.”

Mr. Trump sent confusing signals about when the war might end.

In a phone interview with a CBS reporter, Weijia Jiang, he said the war “is very complete, pretty much,” adding: “We’re very far ahead of schedule.” Those comments appeared to ease market fears of a prolonged war. Oil prices dropped and stocks rose.

But after markets closed on Monday, Mr. Trump struck a different tone. “We have won in many ways, but not enough,” he told a gathering of Republican lawmakers in Florida. “We go forward more determined than ever to achieve ultimate victory that will end this long-running danger once and for all.” Asked at the news conference later if the war with Iran would be over this week, Mr. Trump said, “No.” He said only: “soon, very soon.”

In Turkey on Monday, the U.S. State Department ordered the mandatory departure of U.S. diplomats and family members from the consulate in Adana, a city near Incirlik Air Base, where the U.S. Air Force and other NATO forces operate. The Turkish defense ministry had earlier reported that NATO defenses in the country downed a ballistic missile launched from Iran, the second such incident announced in six days.

As the conflict raged into its 11th day on Tuesday, the United Arab Emirates said it was responding to Iranian strikes, while Saudi Arabia and Kuwait said they had intercepted drones, without specifying their origins. Bahrain’s Interior Ministry said that one person had been killed from an Iranian attack that hit a residential building in the capital, Manama.

Here’s what else we’re covering:

• Death toll: U.S. and Israeli strikes in Iran had killed about 1,300 people, according to Iranian officials, while Iranian attacks across the Middle East killed more than 30. The Israeli military said it had killed more than 1,900 Iranians. Israeli strikes have killed almost 500 people in Lebanon, state media reported, and more than 600,000 people have been displaced, according to President Joseph Aoun.

• Oil Prices: The international benchmark oil price, priced below $70 last month, briefly jumped to almost $120 late Sunday night, then fell after the Group of 7 wealthy nations said they were considering intervening to bring prices down. It then fell again after Mr. Trump’s remarks to CBS, ending the day below $90. Mr. Trump claimed to CBS that the Strait of Hormuz had reopened to shipping, though international monitors said otherwise, and said he was “thinking about taking it over,” though it was unclear what that would mean.

• School hit: A newly released video adds to the evidence that an American missile likely hit an Iranian elementary school where 175 people, many of them children, were reported killed. The evidence contradicts Mr. Trump’s claim that Iran was responsible for the strike.

• Soccer team: Australia granted humanitarian visas to five members of the Iranian national women’s soccer team after the players were labeled “traitors” by Iran’s state media for declining to sing the country’s national anthem during a tournament. The Australian authorities said on Tuesday that the same offer had been extended to the rest of the team.

• 
  
  https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/03/10/world/iran-war-trump-us-israel

Iran Boasts It Has Destroyed Hundreds Of US Missiles With Its Buildings

 

World·Mar 9, 2026 · BabylonBee.com

TEHRAN — As the conflict in the Middle East stretched into a second week, the Iranian government issued a public statement boasting that it had destroyed hundreds of U.S. missiles with its buildings.

Despite losing dozens of members of its leadership, the embattled Ayatollah's regime remained defiant while taunting the world that it had successfully wiped out hundreds — if not thousands — of U.S. missiles, drones, and bombs by blocking them with buildings and military bases throughout the country.

"The wreckage of their bombs can be seen strewn throughout the rubble of our cities," new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei said in a recorded address. "They thought that their missiles were formidable, but they completely disintegrate when they engulf our buildings in great explosions. When the smoke clears, you can see that the bombs are no more. When you look out across our leveled cities, unobstructed by any buildings, you can clearly see that there are no missiles in sight. Checkmate, America."

The regime also sang the praises of the former supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, along with the rest of its leadership council, for boldly destroying a barrage of U.S. missiles with their bodies when the conflict began. "The Great Satan claims superiority, but where are their missiles now?" asked a regime spokesman, Hossein Ahmadi, shortly before he triumphantly obliterated a U.S. bomb with his own body.

At publishing time, the Iranian government had also released a statement boasting that its navy had gone to the bottom of the sea to avoid detection.