Old explosion video falsely linked to Israeli strikes on Iran
"BREAKING: ANOTHER EXPLOSION AT AN OIL REFINERY IN IRAN," says a June 13, 2025 post sharing the visual on X.
The post comes from Sulaiman Ahmed, a self-described journalist who has repeatedly shared disinformation about the Middle East and the war between Israel and Hamas.
Similar posts spread across platforms and in other languages, including Spanish and Persian.
The image circulated after the Israeli military hit a range of Iranian nuclear sites, in an escalation of Israel's war with the militant group Hamas in Gaza.
Iran called the attack -- which killed several top military commanders and nuclear scientists -- a "declaration of war."
Oil prices soared in the aftermath of the airstrikes. But analysts told AFP price gains were capped in part by news that there has been no immediate reduction to crude production or supplies, as the strikes appeared to have avoided Iranian oil facilities.
The image shared by Ahmed and others on social media is also several years outdated.
Reverse image searches surfaced the photo in Iranian news reports detailing a November 4, 2020 incident at a petrochemical plant in Ilam, Iran (archived here and here). Rokna News Agency posted the photo to Telegram, saying it showed a "massive explosion" at the plant (archived here).
Further reports said the plume of smoke was in fact due to a fire in a waste pond that was quickly extinguished with no casualties (archived here, here and here).
AFP has debunked other misinformation about the Middle East, here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
US should stay out of war in Middle East: Retired colonel
Following Israeli strikes on Iran, one retired military officer told NewsNation, The Hill's sister network, that the U.S. should stay out of the fight. Iran has already vowed retaliation and the U.S. has shifted military assets into the region in case they are needed. Retired Lt. Col. Daniel Davis told NewsNation that the path forward depends on whether Iran chooses to prioritize revenge or regime survival, with revenge being the more dangerous option. 'Iran can bring substantial damage to Israel if they choose to go down the path of revenge, because then they're not going to be concerned about what happens next,' he said. 'They're going to be concerned about how much damage they can cause in the meantime.' Iran could consider the U.S. involved in the attack because it had forewarning and because the country supplies military aid to Israel. Secretary of State Marco Rubio denied any U.S. involvement in the initial attack and President Trump has urged Iran to reach a deal on dismantling its nuclear program. 'I will just categorically say that no matter what happens in terms of Israel and Iran, we should not get involved,' Davis said. 'It is not our war to fight.' 'It shouldn't have started at all, and we should not sacrifice American troops, which we surely would do if we get into a fight there,' he said.
Associated Press
21 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Why are some key Tehran allies staying out of the Israel-Iran conflict?
BEIRUT (AP) — Hezbollah has long been considered Iran's first line of defense in case of a war with Israel. But since Israel launched its massive barrage against Iran this week, the Lebanese militant group has stayed out of the fray. A network of powerful Iran-backed militias in Iraq has also remained mostly quiet — even though Israel allegedly used Iraq's airspace, in part, to carry out the attacks. Domestic political concerns, as well as tough losses suffered in nearly two years of regional conflicts and upheavals, appear to have led these Iran allies to take a back seat in the latest round convulsing the region. The 'Axis of Resistance' Hezbollah was formed with Iranian support in the early 1980s as a guerilla force fighting against Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon at the time. The militant group helped push Israel out of Lebanon and built its arsenal over the ensuing decades, becoming a powerful regional force and the centerpiece of a cluster of Iranian-backed factions and governments known as the ' Axis of Resistance.' The allies also include Iraqi Shiite militias and Yemen's Houthi rebels, as well as the Palestinian militant group Hamas. At one point, Hezbollah was believed to have some 150,000 rockets and missiles, and the group's former leader, Hassan Nasrallah once boasted of having 100,000 fighters. Seeking to aid its ally Hamas in the aftermath of the Palestinian militants' Oct. 7, 2023 attack on southern Israel and Israel's offensive in Gaza, Hezbollah began launching rockets across the border. That drew Israeli airstrikes and shelling, and the exchanges escalated into full-scale war last September. Israel inflicted heavy damage on Hezbollah, killing Nasrallah and other top leaders and destroying much of its arsenal, before a U.S.-negotiated ceasefire halted that conflict last November. Israel continues to occupy parts of southern Lebanon and to carry out near-daily airstrikes. For their part, the Iraqi militias occasionally struck bases housing U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria, while Yemen's Houthis fired at vessels in the Red Sea, a crucial global trade route, and began targeting Israel. Condolences to Iran, condemnations of Israel Hezbollah and its leader Naim Kassem have condemned Israel's attacks and offered condolences for the senior Iranian officers who were killed. But Kassem did not suggest Hezbollah would take part in any retaliation against Israel. Iraq's Kataib Hezbollah militia — a separate group from Lebanon's Hezbollah — released a statement saying it was 'deeply regrettable' that Israel allegedly fired at Iran from Iraqi airspace, something that Baghdad complained to the U.N. Security Council over. The Iraqi militia called on the Baghdad government to 'urgently expel hostile forces from the country,' a reference to U.S. troops in Iraq as part of the fight against the militant Islamic State group, but made no threat of force. Hezbollah was weakened by last year's fighting and after losing a major supply route for Iranian weapons with the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad, a key ally, in a lightning rebel offensive in December. 'Hezbollah has been degraded on the strategic level while cut off from supply chains in Syria,' said Andreas Krieg, a military analyst and associate professor at King's College London. A changing attitude to Iran Many Hezbollah members believe 'they were sacrificed for Iran's greater regional interests' since Hamas' attack on Israel triggered the latest Israel-Hamas war, and want to focus on 'Lebanon-centric' interests rather than defending Iran, Krieg said. Still, Qassem Qassir, a Lebanese analyst close to Hezbollah, said a role for the militant group in the Israel-Iran conflict should not be ruled out. 'This depends on political and field developments,' he said. 'Anything is possible.' Both the Houthis and the Iraqi militias 'lack the strategic deep strike capability against Israel that Hezbollah once had,' Krieg said. Renad Mansour, a senior research fellow at the Chatham House think tank in London, said Iraq's Iran-allied militias have all along tried to avoid pulling their country into a major conflict. Unlike Hezbollah, whose military wing has operated as a non-state actor in Lebanon - although its political wing is part of the government - the main Iraqi militias are members of a coalition of groups that are officially part of the state defense forces. 'Things in Iraq are good for them right now, they're connected to the state - they're benefitting politically, economically,' Mansour said. 'And also they've seen what's happened to Iran, to Hezbollah and they're concerned that Israel will turn on them as well.' That leaves the Houthis as the likely 'new hub in the Axis of Resistance,' Krieg said. But he said the group isn't strong enough — and too geographically removed — to strategically harm Israel beyond the rebels' sporadic missile attacks. Krieg said the perception that the 'axis' members were proxies fully controlled by Iran was always mistaken, but now the ties have loosened further. 'It is not really an axis anymore as (much as) a loose network where everyone largely is occupied with its own survival,' he said.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Weather, war and protests threaten to rain on Trump's military parade
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump's military parade here on Saturday — a celebration of the Army's 250th birthday that happens to coincide with the commander in chief's 79th birthday — comes at a time when American forces are supporting domestic deportation efforts and Israel's defense against Iranian missiles. The first such parade since Washington welcomed victorious U.S. troops home from the first Gulf War in 1991 — and an echo of similar extravaganzas following the Civil War and World Wars I and II — Saturday's affair will feature more than 6,000 troops, a procession of various types of armored vehicles alongside the National Mall on Constitution Avenue, and dozens of military aircraft cruising overhead. Trump, who relishes pomp, will have his own reviewing stand. But he runs the risk, literally and metaphorically, of watching rain drench his parade. Weather forecasts show a significant chance of precipitation and the possibility of evening thunderstorms. More substantively, the demonstrative show of American force will play out against the backdrop of Trump's inability to leverage U.S. power to fulfill campaign promises to end wars in Ukraine and Gaza. In a twist of timing, the long-planned exercises come the day after the U.S. began providing aid to Israel in shooting down Iranian missiles and days after Trump deployed National Guard and Marine troops to southern California to quell protests against immigration raids. Military parades have a long history in the United States, both at the national level and in local communities, said Barbara Perry, a presidential historian at the University of Virginia's Miller Center. "Humans are drawn to pageantry," Perry said, but she noted a difference between traditional military expositions and Trump's birthday version. "It's usually about the personnel," she said. "Now we know that this president has political issues all around the world, and wanting to show off the might. And if he views it, as in his first term, 'his generals,' and, if he views it as 'his military,' then you tie it to your personal special day of your birthday — that's what's different." Trump critics say he is exploiting the military to nurture his own ego — at a cost of as much as $45 million to taxpayers — and, as he claims sweeping executive powers, presenting himself in the manner of a dictator. For decades, Americans have associated heavily armed military parades with Cold War-era authoritarianism in the former Soviet Union and other countries. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., also made that comparison this week and said he didn't think the parade was the best idea. "I wouldn't have done it," Paul said Tuesday. "The images you saw in the Soviet Union and North Korea, we were proud not to be that." That may help explain why most American adults are sour on the idea. New NBC News Decision Desk polling, released Saturday morning, shows that 64% of adults surveyed say they disapprove of the parade. Protests are planned in Washington and across the country, organized under the slogan "No kings." Trump, who promised to meet protesters with "very big force," has sought to rebut the notion that he is celebrating himself. "It will be a parade like we haven't had in many, many decades here," he said this week. "And it's a celebration of our country. It's a celebration of the Army, actually." Democratic lawmakers pushed back on Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who was on Capitol Hill for a round of hearings this week, over their choices in how to use the military. "You are deploying the American military to police the American people. Sending the National Guard into California without the governor's request. Sending the Marines — not after foreign threats, but after American protesters," Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, told Hegseth. 'And now President Trump is promising heavy force against peaceful protesters at his D.C. military parade," she said. "Those sorts of actions, and that sort of rhetoric from the president, should stop every one of us cold. Threatening to use our own troops — on our own citizens — at such scale is unprecedented, it is unconstitutional, and it is downright un-American." Ken Carodine, a retired Navy rear admiral, said in a telephone interview with NBC News that the parade is not just "a terrible idea" but one that many of the servicemembers may not be excited about. "Most of the guys that are involved in either organizing or participating in this thing, it's the last thing they want to be doing. But they can't say anything," he said, explaining that they must follow the orders of their superiors, right up to the commander in chief. "It's a stupid order," Carodine said. "But it's a legal order." Some Republican lawmakers, including those who routinely back the president's actions, said this week that they are not enamored of the idea of the display. "The United States of America is the most powerful country in all of human history," Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said Tuesday. "We're a lion, and a lion doesn't have to tell you it's a lion. Everybody else in the jungle knows. And we're a lion.' Federal officials held discussions Friday afternoon about whether to move the start of the parade, scheduled for 6:30 p.m. after a day of festivities around the National Mall, to try to avoid the dangers and discomfort of possible thunderstorms. They ultimately decided to move ahead as planned. For Trump, it promises to be another moment of triumph, an exclamation point on the 2024 election victory that brought him back to the helm of the most powerful nation on the planet. But while the U.S. military has executed many successful missions in the years since Operation Desert Storm pushed Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait in 1991, the more memorable wars for most Americans are the drawn out engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq. The U.S. is not fighting any war abroad right now, and it is not coming off of any recent victory. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars, once supported by the American public, became unpopular over time as they cost the nation dearly in blood and treasure. The U.S. retreated from Afghanistan in 2021 — after 20 years — under an agreement negotiated by Trump and fulfilled by President Joe Biden. "Nobody had a parade for the kids coming back from Afghanistan," Carodine said. "That would have made a lot more sense than what we're doing tomorrow." This article was originally published on
