Iranian clerics call for assassination of Trump and Netanyahu

[Twiglets1]

Article in The Telegraph reports that Iran’s most senior clerics have called for the assassination of Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu.

In a 10-point statement, the Assembly of Experts said the killing of “the criminal American president” and “the wicked prime minister of the Zionist regime” was a religious duty.

Assassinating the two leaders – whom they described as mahdour al-dam, or deserving of death – “must not be neglected under any circumstances”.

In their call for Mr Trump and Mr Netanyahu to be assassinated, the clerics wrote that avenging the blood of Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader who was killed on the first day of the war, remained “paramount”.

“It is obligatory upon any duty-bound person who gains access to these criminals to send them to hell,” they added.

The language read like a religious edict but stopped short of a formal fatwa, which in Shia Islam is issued by an individual cleric in his own name rather than by a group.

The Assembly of Experts is an 88-member body of clerics constitutionally tasked with choosing and supervising the supreme leader.

The statement shows how fractured the establishment has become.

Only about 63 of the body’s members signed it, and the Assembly’s secretariat distanced itself hours later.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/06/30/iranian-clerics-call-for-trump-assassination/

Looks like it. Apparently its fine to assassinate the democratically elected leaders of states if you disagree with them. From the comfort of a democracy of course. Something that ordinary Iranians don't enjoy. How edgy!

Re religious leaders calling for the death sentence. If it was Pope Leo, or Starmer they wanted killed, then I get the outrage. Because they are against the death sentence.

I would be outraged too. I am totally against the death sentence too.

But what if the person they call to be executed is pro death sentence ? Well, I am against the death sentence as I said, but am I outraged ? Nah.

Trump is a Christian. He says the USA is a Christian nation. So he will know this verse below, as well as all the ones that forbid killing.

Mat 26:52 : Then Jesus says to him, "Turn back your sword to its place; for all who took the sword will perish by the sword;" (LSV)

Yet Trump is not only pro death sentence, but he also actively encourages it and pushes for it.

Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Directs the Enforcement of Death Penalty Laws in the District of Columbia – The White House

So I disagree with someone passing the death sentence. But outrage here, no.

I oppose capital punishment but in America it is carried out under democratic and legal processes. Completely irrelevant that Trump is a supporter to the issue of whether it is legitimate for the undemocratic theocratic leaders of a dictatorship to call for the assassination of democratically elected leaders.

Looks like both sides are at it anyway. From Reuters:

Araqchi's X post was attached to comments made by Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz stating that Iran's supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei was "marked for death."

I mean, marked for death has the same meaning doesn’t it?

I don't see it as irrelevant. As I said, I disagree with it. But outrage no.

Now if Trump had not started a war with them, bombed their leaders and so on, then yeah, I would feel outrage. If Putin for example called for the death of Trump then yeah, a bit of outrage. Because he has not really done anything against him

But would my outrage be as much as it would for an anti death sentence leader ? Likely not. That would be strong outrage.

It’s not rhetoric when you follow it up by <checks notes> bombing and killing most of the leadership of a country. I hope that helps you distinguish more easily in the future.

Me? I’m not dismissing what Trump has said.

Isn’t Israel Katz democratically elected then? Or is it ok for a democratically elected person to say some one is marked for death because that person is the head of an undemocratic theocracy? The waters get murkier and murkier.

Ok so just to clarify, if Trump or Netanyahu threaten to kill a world leader (or actually do kill them), that’s all fine and we shouldn’t take it too seriously. But if Iran threatens to kill Trump and Netanyahu that’s EVIL!!
Errmmm… am I missing something here?

I do remember senator Lindsay Graham saying (I paraphrase) the ICC was not set up to deal with democratically elected governments like the U.S. and Israel it’s for Africa and thugs like Putin.

I guess on that basis you can say and do what you like on the international stage so long as you have a western style democracy ( and aren’t black!)

I’m not a supporter of the Iranian regime, the complete opposite, but I agree with you it’s obvious that different standard are being unfairly applied.

I don't think you are missing something. I think that is the way it has been for decades.

But I am with you. It is wrong.

No Trump isn't morally superior and I never said he was.

Can agree that what they have both said is unacceptable but this thread is about the Iranian clerics. Plenty of other threads on MN about the outrageous things Trump has said and done.

Any reason the Iranian clerics shouldn't be criticised too for telling people to kill?

Only if we can criticise Israel Katz for basically saying the same thing.

I was responding specifically to a poster pointing out Trump's rhetoric that “a whole civilisation will die tonight.”

No we don't need to take that seriously because it didn't happen and Trump does make a huge amount of idle threats so we know.

Iran has threatened to destroy the US and Israel too. But this thread isn't about those generic threats, it's more about the call the Iranian clerics made for the assassination of Trump and Netanyahu as a religious duty.

What you appear to be missing is that it is pretty evil yes to use religion as an excuse to incite others to commit murder. In my opinion anyway.

Of course Katz can be strongly criticised too. He often is criticised on this board and holds extremist views that I doubt many on MN (including myself) would support.

It only fell short of being a fatwa because it was said by a group. The Telegraph explain that, The language read like a religious edict but stopped short of a formal fatwa, which in Shia Islam is issued by an individual cleric in his own name rather than by a group.

How do you know there is no way this is going to be carried out? Obviously both men have extremely tight security but nevertheless, it was a general call for anyone who supports the Iranian clerics to do their religious duty in trying to get close enough to them to kill them.

In their call for Mr Trump and Mr Netanyahu to be assassinated, the clerics wrote that avenging the blood of Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader who was killed on the first day of the war, remained “paramount”.

“It is obligatory upon any duty-bound person who gains access to these criminals to send them to hell,” they added.

What you appear to be missing is that it is pretty evil yes to use religion as an excuse to incite others to commit murder. In my opinion anyway.

Yes, and add ethnicity to religion, I would say.

Is this wrong when Israelis do it @Twiglets1

Who are the posters who have supposedly "cheered on assinations with scores of innocent lives being lost in the process"? I haven't seen any posts where people are celebrating civilian deaths.

No one has cheered them on. Using the phrase collateral damage in war does not mean that the deaths are cheered on.

There is collateral damage in any war including wars where the UK lost lots of lives (or caused the deaths of lots of lives). That doesn't mean the deaths were cheered on. It's more that civilian deaths are an inevitable part of wars, not that they are a part anyone wants to see.

It's wrong when anyone uses religion as an excuse to incite others to commit murder.

I don't know exactly who you are referring to when you say "Israelis". If you mean Netanyahu starting a war with Hamas in Gaza then that was not done for religious reasons but as a response to their violent attack on Israeli civilians on 7/10/23.

But religion has always caused wars. Throughout history. The crusaders weren’t sent off to make friends. They were sent to recapture the Holy Lands from those pesky Muslims. Religion causes wars. It was ever thus.

I was trying to think earlier of wars that did not include a religious element, and there are not that many.

In fact, I am reading a series of articles on Scottish history just now, and what a bloodthirsty lot. Pretty much religion in it all the way.

If you mean Netanyahu starting a war with Hamas in Gaza then that was not done for religious reasons but as a response to their violent attack on Israeli civilians on 7/10/23.

Well, honestly, if you are trying to suggest

1. that Netanyahu is the only Israeli inciting others to murder Palestinians

and

2. that Israel’s attacks on the Palestinians only began on/after/ in response to 7/10/23

there’s not really much point hoping for good faith discussion, is there?

Religion causes wars, yes. Just one reason I'm glad to be an atheist.

That's no reason not to criticise the Iranian clerics though for dressing up their desire for revenge on Trump and Netanyahu as a "religious duty".

Best to keep religion out of politics or if you're going to get involved - like the Pope - at least advocate for peace. Especially during a sensitive point in the potential peace process. Not exactly helpful to that is it?