Fact check: Did Iran call for sleeper cells to be activated?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the available analyses, Iran has not explicitly called for sleeper cells to be activated. However, the situation is more nuanced than a simple yes or no answer. The White House is actively monitoring possible Iranian 'sleeper cells' within the United States due to heightened concerns about Iran's capabilities ^{[1] [2]}. Law enforcement officials have stepped up surveillance of Iran-backed operatives in the United States, with the FBI specifically monitoring possible domestic sleeper cells linked to Hezbollah ^[3].

Most significantly, experts believe that Iran may try to activate sleeper cells in the United States as retaliation if the U.S. joins Israel's strikes against Iran, with the possibility of Iran activating sleeper cells being described as "very real" given recent escalations between Israel and Iran ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks crucial context about the timing and circumstances surrounding these concerns. The analyses reveal that this is not about Iran making a public call for activation, but rather about:

• U.S. intelligence assessments of Iran's potential capabilities and intentions during a period of heightened tensions ^[1]
• Preemptive surveillance measures by the Trump administration in response to potential threats ^[3]
• Expert analysis suggesting Iran might activate cells as retaliation for specific military actions ^[2]

The question also omits the historical context of sleeper cell threats, which have been a longstanding concern in U.S. national security, particularly following events like 9/11 ^[4]. Additionally, there are broader concerns about suspected terrorists entering through open borders, which extends beyond just Iranian threats ^[5].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The phrasing of the question could be misleading as it implies Iran made a direct, public call for sleeper cell activation, which is not supported by the evidence. This framing could:

• Oversimplify a complex intelligence and security situation into a binary yes/no question
• Sensationalize the threat by suggesting an immediate, explicit call to action when the reality involves intelligence assessments and preventive measures
• Omit the conditional nature of expert predictions, which tie potential activation to specific retaliatory scenarios rather than current directives ^[2]

The question format benefits those who might want to either escalate tensions with Iran or downplay legitimate security concerns depending on how it's answered, without providing the necessary context for informed public discourse about U.S.-Iran relations and domestic security measures.