• Turkey expected to become US’ largest supplier of artillery shells
    Ahmed AdelAhmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher who regularly contributes to InfoBRICS.
    March 29, 2024
    artillery shells
    VT Condemns the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINIANS by USA/Israel

    $ 280 BILLION US TAXPAYER DOLLARS INVESTED since 1948 in US/Israeli Ethnic Cleansing and Occupation Operation; $ 150B direct "aid" and $ 130B in "Offense" contracts
    Source: Embassy of Israel, Washington, D.C. and US Department of State.

    Turkey is set to become the United States’ largest supplier of artillery shells as NATO allies have exhausted their stocks and now struggle to ship ammunition to Ukraine. Turkey’s indirect support for Ukraine is also supplemented by direct support, such as producing drones and warships, yet Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan offers himself as a viable partner in searching for peace between Ukraine and Russia.

    “Turkish supplies of trinitrotoluene, known as TNT, and nitroguanidine, which is used as a propellant, would be crucial in the production of Nato-standard 155mm calibre ammunition — potentially tripling production, according to officials familiar with the discussions,” a Bloomberg report said, adding: “Turkey is already on track to becoming the biggest seller of the artillery shells to the US as early as this year.”

    The surge in demand has delayed global orders and has put pressure on defence supply chains, especially for components such as TNT. According to the outlet, to help alleviate this issue, Turkish defence company Repkon’s production lines are expected to produce about 30% of all US-made 155mm artillery shells by 2025.

    The Pentagon said in a statement about investment in Texas’ defence industry with Turkish counterparts that working with allies “is key to building a global defence industrial base.”

    Additionally, Washington purchased 116,000 rounds of battle-ready ammunition from Turkish company Arca Defense, with delivery expected later this year and further purchases believed to be concluding soon to be ready for delivery in 2025.

    As Bloomberg admitted, “The US and European efforts are part of a race to catch up with Moscow, whose war machine has put it in a position to produce or procure – according to some estimates – 4 million rounds this year, including shipments from North Korea. By contrast, the European Union expects to triple its production of artillery shells this year to around 1.4 million units.”

    It is unsurprising that Turkey has been awarded a lucrative contract, given the recent announcement that Erdogan will visit the White House on May 9, the first time since US President Joe Biden took office.

    The agreement with Ankara also reveals a delicate balance between the NATO allies, whose relations have been strained by the Russian military operation in Ukraine and Turkey’s months-long block on Sweden’s membership in the Atlantic Alliance. However, with Turkey greenlighting Sweden’s accession and plans to contribute to Ukraine’s military-industrial complex, the country is now being rewarded with export contracts and approval to upgrade its aging F-16 fighter jet fleet.

    The Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been used by the Ukrainian military against Russian forces. The drone maker, Baykar, has initiated the construction of a factory in Ukraine, and the company’s CEO said in February that they aim to complete the project within approximately 12 months and produce around 120 units a year.

    At the same time, it is recalled that in February, France, Greece, and Cyprus blocked financing for the supply of Bayraktar drones and artillery shells for Ukraine, which were to be purchased with European funds. Turkey was set to be financed from EU funds for some time, but once the order was confirmed, the three countries swiftly blocked the financing.

    Although the initiative failed, the US recognised Turkey’s rapprochement with the West and is now rewarding the country with imports and exports in the defence sector. This is despite the fact that the issue of the acquisition of the Russian-made S-400 is not resolved, which is the reason Turkey was booted from the F-35 fifth-generation fighter jet program to begin with.

    Erdogan announced his offer to host a peace summit between Ukraine and Russia earlier this month following a meeting with his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky.

    “Since the beginning, we have contributed as much as we could toward ending the war through negotiations,” Erdogan said. “We are also ready to host a peace summit in which Russia will also be included.”

    Although Erdogan claims to have contributed as much as possible to ending the war through negotiations, his country has also contributed to prolonging it. It is also recalled that during Zelensky’s visit to Turkey, he visited the shipyard where the two corvettes are being built for the Ukrainian Navy. At the same time, Turkey is providing drones to the Ukrainian military and is now replenishing the US’ artillery stocks. This is even though Ukraine has no chance of winning the war, meaning Turkey is not an honest broker for peace.


    ATTENTION READERS

    We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
    In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

    About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
    Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.

    https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/03/turkey-expected-to-become-us-largest-supplier-of-artillery-shells/
    Turkey expected to become US’ largest supplier of artillery shells Ahmed AdelAhmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher who regularly contributes to InfoBRICS. March 29, 2024 artillery shells VT Condemns the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINIANS by USA/Israel $ 280 BILLION US TAXPAYER DOLLARS INVESTED since 1948 in US/Israeli Ethnic Cleansing and Occupation Operation; $ 150B direct "aid" and $ 130B in "Offense" contracts Source: Embassy of Israel, Washington, D.C. and US Department of State. Turkey is set to become the United States’ largest supplier of artillery shells as NATO allies have exhausted their stocks and now struggle to ship ammunition to Ukraine. Turkey’s indirect support for Ukraine is also supplemented by direct support, such as producing drones and warships, yet Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan offers himself as a viable partner in searching for peace between Ukraine and Russia. “Turkish supplies of trinitrotoluene, known as TNT, and nitroguanidine, which is used as a propellant, would be crucial in the production of Nato-standard 155mm calibre ammunition — potentially tripling production, according to officials familiar with the discussions,” a Bloomberg report said, adding: “Turkey is already on track to becoming the biggest seller of the artillery shells to the US as early as this year.” The surge in demand has delayed global orders and has put pressure on defence supply chains, especially for components such as TNT. According to the outlet, to help alleviate this issue, Turkish defence company Repkon’s production lines are expected to produce about 30% of all US-made 155mm artillery shells by 2025. The Pentagon said in a statement about investment in Texas’ defence industry with Turkish counterparts that working with allies “is key to building a global defence industrial base.” Additionally, Washington purchased 116,000 rounds of battle-ready ammunition from Turkish company Arca Defense, with delivery expected later this year and further purchases believed to be concluding soon to be ready for delivery in 2025. As Bloomberg admitted, “The US and European efforts are part of a race to catch up with Moscow, whose war machine has put it in a position to produce or procure – according to some estimates – 4 million rounds this year, including shipments from North Korea. By contrast, the European Union expects to triple its production of artillery shells this year to around 1.4 million units.” It is unsurprising that Turkey has been awarded a lucrative contract, given the recent announcement that Erdogan will visit the White House on May 9, the first time since US President Joe Biden took office. The agreement with Ankara also reveals a delicate balance between the NATO allies, whose relations have been strained by the Russian military operation in Ukraine and Turkey’s months-long block on Sweden’s membership in the Atlantic Alliance. However, with Turkey greenlighting Sweden’s accession and plans to contribute to Ukraine’s military-industrial complex, the country is now being rewarded with export contracts and approval to upgrade its aging F-16 fighter jet fleet. The Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been used by the Ukrainian military against Russian forces. The drone maker, Baykar, has initiated the construction of a factory in Ukraine, and the company’s CEO said in February that they aim to complete the project within approximately 12 months and produce around 120 units a year. At the same time, it is recalled that in February, France, Greece, and Cyprus blocked financing for the supply of Bayraktar drones and artillery shells for Ukraine, which were to be purchased with European funds. Turkey was set to be financed from EU funds for some time, but once the order was confirmed, the three countries swiftly blocked the financing. Although the initiative failed, the US recognised Turkey’s rapprochement with the West and is now rewarding the country with imports and exports in the defence sector. This is despite the fact that the issue of the acquisition of the Russian-made S-400 is not resolved, which is the reason Turkey was booted from the F-35 fifth-generation fighter jet program to begin with. Erdogan announced his offer to host a peace summit between Ukraine and Russia earlier this month following a meeting with his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky. “Since the beginning, we have contributed as much as we could toward ending the war through negotiations,” Erdogan said. “We are also ready to host a peace summit in which Russia will also be included.” Although Erdogan claims to have contributed as much as possible to ending the war through negotiations, his country has also contributed to prolonging it. It is also recalled that during Zelensky’s visit to Turkey, he visited the shipyard where the two corvettes are being built for the Ukrainian Navy. At the same time, Turkey is providing drones to the Ukrainian military and is now replenishing the US’ artillery stocks. This is even though Ukraine has no chance of winning the war, meaning Turkey is not an honest broker for peace. ATTENTION READERS We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion. About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT. https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/03/turkey-expected-to-become-us-largest-supplier-of-artillery-shells/
    WWW.VTFOREIGNPOLICY.COM
    Turkey expected to become US’ largest supplier of artillery shells
    Turkey is set to become the United States’ largest supplier of artillery shells as NATO allies have exhausted their stocks and now struggle to ship ammunition to Ukraine. Turkey’s indirect support for Ukraine is also supplemented by direct support, such as producing drones and warships, yet Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan offers himself as a
    0 Comments 0 Shares 7679 Views
  • Study Claims COVID Caused More Heart Damage Than Vaccines — Here’s What the Authors Got Wrong

    Rainer Johannes Klement, Ph.D + Harald Walach reanalyzed data and found that while coronaviruses might cause myocarditis, the COVID-19 vaccines cause at least as much or more.

    Study Claims COVID Caused More Heart Damage Than Vaccines — Here’s What the Authors Got Wrong
    A 2023 study admitted that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines cause myocarditis, but claimed the COVID-19 virus was even more damaging than the vaccine. A recent, more detailed review of their data, however, showed the opposite is likely true.

    Angelo DePalma, Ph.D.
    human heart with covid vaccine
    Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free.

    Despite the known side effects of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, some studies (here, here and here) and health websites (here, here and here) argue that whatever vaccination’s adverse outcomes, being unvaccinated is worse.

    In one such study, Dr. Christian Mueller and his co-authors concluded the COVID-19 virus — not the vaccine — was responsible for more myocarditis, or heart muscle damage, than the vaccine.

    However, when Rainer Johannes Klement, Ph.D., a physicist at Leopoldina Hospital in Schweinfurt, Germany, and Harald Walach, a clinical psychologist and head of the Change Health Institute in Basel, Switzerland, reanalyzed Mueller’s data they found that while coronaviruses might cause myocarditis, the COVID-19 vaccines cause at least as much or more.

    The Klement paper appeared in the Feb. 1 edition of The Egyptian Health Journal.

    Mueller’s study

    Mueller set out to quantify and compare myocarditis in vaxed versus unvaxed subjects and to explain possible mechanisms.

    To explore these mechanisms, the researchers tested subjects for antibodies against interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA), the SARS-CoV-2-nucleoprotein, the viral spike protein and 14 inflammatory cytokines.

    Since none of these measures differed between study groups, the “mechanism” issue was unresolved.

    To assess myocarditis investigators tested 777 hospital workers (median age 37, 69.5% women) for cardiac troponin T one and three days after they received an mRNA-1273 booster. Cardiologists typically prescribe this test after a suspected heart attack to quantify the extent and duration of heart damage.

    Of the 40 subjects (5.1%) with elevated troponin on Day 3, 22 (2.8%) were diagnosed with myocarditis, with 20 cases occurring in women and two in men.

    The researchers reported that among these subjects troponin elevations were mild and temporary and did not involve abnormalities as determined by electrocardiogram. No patients experienced “major adverse cardiac events” within 30 days of receiving the shot.

    Mueller’s team concluded:

    COVID-19 associates with a substantially higher risk for myocarditis that [sic] mRNA vaccination …
    Myocarditis related to COVID-19 infection has shown a higher mortality than myocarditis related to mRNA vaccination.
    Before the COVID-19 vaccine were [sic] available, the incidence and extent of myocardial injury associated with COVID-19 infection was [sic] much higher than observed in this active surveillance study after booster vaccination.
    One of the Mueller co-authors had commercial ties to diagnostics companies. Another had previously been compensated by diagnostics and vaccine manufacturers. Mueller had relationships with diagnostics, pharmaceutical and vaccine companies at the time he wrote the paper.

    Where did Mueller go wrong?

    One way to measure treatment effects is to compare an outcome, for example, blood pressure, in the same subjects before and after the treatment and report before-and-after results.

    Although this option was known to medical researchers and available to him, Mueller did not take advantage of it — either because he did not think to measure pre-booster troponin levels or chose not to report them for some reason, perhaps because they did not align with his other results.

    Instead, his team took an approach that required two well-matched study groups. Although Mueller claimed placebos and controls met this requirement they differed on the feature that mattered most: heart health.

    Vaccinated subjects with current or recent heart issues were excluded from the study, while all control subjects had just entered the hospital with heart symptoms and were therefore already at greater risk for myocarditis.

    Klement and Walach found more anomalies in the Mueller paper.

    RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker Vax-Unvax
    RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker’s New Book: “Vax-Unvax”

    Order Now

    They began their critique by citing three 2021 studies on COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis (here, here and here). All three studies showed myocarditis became a concern shortly after the COVID-19 vaccine introductions.

    They discussed three papers in some detail:

    A 2023 German autopsy study on 25 unexpected deaths within 20 days of COVID-19 vaccination identified acute myocarditis as the most probable cause of death in four cases.
    A 2023 report on myocarditis in 303 non-vaccinated and 700 vaccinated asymptomatic subjects found significantly higher damage in the vaccinated persisting for up to 180 days post-vaccination.
    One of the first autopsy papers, an Indian-led study based on World Health Organization pharmacovigilance data reported 2.1 times the risk for cardiac arrest, 2.7 times the risk for acute heart attack, 2.6 times the risk for elevated troponin, and 7.3-fold higher levels of D-dimer for COVID-19 vaccinations compared with the use of other medications.
    These studies strongly suggest that myocarditis became an issue only after the mRNA vaccine rollouts. They contradict Mueller’s statement that the “extent of myocardial injury associated with COVID-19 infection was much higher than observed in this active surveillance study after booster vaccination.”

    According to Klement and Walach, this statement is wrong for two reasons.

    First, in addition to the non-equivalence of controls’ and subjects’ heart-health status, Mueller ignored the much larger number of COVID-19-infected, unhospitalized, unvaccinated individuals with (presumably) much lower troponin levels compared with patients entering the hospital with heart symptoms.

    Second, Klement and Walach argued that the public health impact of myocarditis depends not only on the incidence or rate among study groups but the size of those groups. The significance is that a lower incidence in a very large group (vaccinated) is more meaningful than a slightly higher rate in a very small group (individuals infected with COVID-19).

    scales of justice
    Your support helps fund this work, and CHD’s related advocacy, education and scientific research.

    Donate Now

    On that basis, Klement and Walach estimated the number of myocarditis cases among all German COVID-19 hospitalizations at 27,467, and among those who were vaccinated at 1.97 million.

    As a result, regardless of myocarditis severity, there were 71.7 times as many myocarditis cases among the vaccinated as among those hospitalized for COVID-19.

    A similar analysis for Switzerland estimated 169,960 cases of myocarditis among vaccinated compared with 8,179 among those hospitalized for COVID-19. Although not as dramatic as the German estimates this still shows a much higher occurrence of heart damage among vaccinated versus hospitalized.

    In a June 2021 paper, Walach, Klement and Dutch data analyst Wouter Aukema concluded that based on 700 adverse reactions, 16 serious side effects and 4.11 deaths for every 100,000 vaccinations, COVID-19 vaccines were released with insufficient safety data.

    The authors said the risk-benefit ratio for mRNA vaccines did not add up because “for three deaths prevented by vaccination we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination.”

    Mueller told The Defender via email:

    “Our study reveals an important lack of prospective safety data concerning COVID-19 vaccines. Given the magnitude of the vaccinated population compared to the much smaller proportion of the population that became infected and developed symptoms, including a small percentage with possible heart damage, our findings should remain qualitatively robust.”

    LEARN MORE
    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-study-myocarditis-vaccines/

    Join @ShankaraChetty
    🚨 Study Claims COVID Caused More Heart Damage Than Vaccines — Here’s What the Authors Got Wrong Rainer Johannes Klement, Ph.D + Harald Walach reanalyzed data and found that while coronaviruses might cause myocarditis, the COVID-19 vaccines cause at least as much or more. Study Claims COVID Caused More Heart Damage Than Vaccines — Here’s What the Authors Got Wrong A 2023 study admitted that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines cause myocarditis, but claimed the COVID-19 virus was even more damaging than the vaccine. A recent, more detailed review of their data, however, showed the opposite is likely true. Angelo DePalma, Ph.D. human heart with covid vaccine Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free. Despite the known side effects of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, some studies (here, here and here) and health websites (here, here and here) argue that whatever vaccination’s adverse outcomes, being unvaccinated is worse. In one such study, Dr. Christian Mueller and his co-authors concluded the COVID-19 virus — not the vaccine — was responsible for more myocarditis, or heart muscle damage, than the vaccine. However, when Rainer Johannes Klement, Ph.D., a physicist at Leopoldina Hospital in Schweinfurt, Germany, and Harald Walach, a clinical psychologist and head of the Change Health Institute in Basel, Switzerland, reanalyzed Mueller’s data they found that while coronaviruses might cause myocarditis, the COVID-19 vaccines cause at least as much or more. The Klement paper appeared in the Feb. 1 edition of The Egyptian Health Journal. Mueller’s study Mueller set out to quantify and compare myocarditis in vaxed versus unvaxed subjects and to explain possible mechanisms. To explore these mechanisms, the researchers tested subjects for antibodies against interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA), the SARS-CoV-2-nucleoprotein, the viral spike protein and 14 inflammatory cytokines. Since none of these measures differed between study groups, the “mechanism” issue was unresolved. To assess myocarditis investigators tested 777 hospital workers (median age 37, 69.5% women) for cardiac troponin T one and three days after they received an mRNA-1273 booster. Cardiologists typically prescribe this test after a suspected heart attack to quantify the extent and duration of heart damage. Of the 40 subjects (5.1%) with elevated troponin on Day 3, 22 (2.8%) were diagnosed with myocarditis, with 20 cases occurring in women and two in men. The researchers reported that among these subjects troponin elevations were mild and temporary and did not involve abnormalities as determined by electrocardiogram. No patients experienced “major adverse cardiac events” within 30 days of receiving the shot. Mueller’s team concluded: COVID-19 associates with a substantially higher risk for myocarditis that [sic] mRNA vaccination … Myocarditis related to COVID-19 infection has shown a higher mortality than myocarditis related to mRNA vaccination. Before the COVID-19 vaccine were [sic] available, the incidence and extent of myocardial injury associated with COVID-19 infection was [sic] much higher than observed in this active surveillance study after booster vaccination. One of the Mueller co-authors had commercial ties to diagnostics companies. Another had previously been compensated by diagnostics and vaccine manufacturers. Mueller had relationships with diagnostics, pharmaceutical and vaccine companies at the time he wrote the paper. Where did Mueller go wrong? One way to measure treatment effects is to compare an outcome, for example, blood pressure, in the same subjects before and after the treatment and report before-and-after results. Although this option was known to medical researchers and available to him, Mueller did not take advantage of it — either because he did not think to measure pre-booster troponin levels or chose not to report them for some reason, perhaps because they did not align with his other results. Instead, his team took an approach that required two well-matched study groups. Although Mueller claimed placebos and controls met this requirement they differed on the feature that mattered most: heart health. Vaccinated subjects with current or recent heart issues were excluded from the study, while all control subjects had just entered the hospital with heart symptoms and were therefore already at greater risk for myocarditis. Klement and Walach found more anomalies in the Mueller paper. RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker Vax-Unvax RFK Jr. and Brian Hooker’s New Book: “Vax-Unvax” Order Now They began their critique by citing three 2021 studies on COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis (here, here and here). All three studies showed myocarditis became a concern shortly after the COVID-19 vaccine introductions. They discussed three papers in some detail: A 2023 German autopsy study on 25 unexpected deaths within 20 days of COVID-19 vaccination identified acute myocarditis as the most probable cause of death in four cases. A 2023 report on myocarditis in 303 non-vaccinated and 700 vaccinated asymptomatic subjects found significantly higher damage in the vaccinated persisting for up to 180 days post-vaccination. One of the first autopsy papers, an Indian-led study based on World Health Organization pharmacovigilance data reported 2.1 times the risk for cardiac arrest, 2.7 times the risk for acute heart attack, 2.6 times the risk for elevated troponin, and 7.3-fold higher levels of D-dimer for COVID-19 vaccinations compared with the use of other medications. These studies strongly suggest that myocarditis became an issue only after the mRNA vaccine rollouts. They contradict Mueller’s statement that the “extent of myocardial injury associated with COVID-19 infection was much higher than observed in this active surveillance study after booster vaccination.” According to Klement and Walach, this statement is wrong for two reasons. First, in addition to the non-equivalence of controls’ and subjects’ heart-health status, Mueller ignored the much larger number of COVID-19-infected, unhospitalized, unvaccinated individuals with (presumably) much lower troponin levels compared with patients entering the hospital with heart symptoms. Second, Klement and Walach argued that the public health impact of myocarditis depends not only on the incidence or rate among study groups but the size of those groups. The significance is that a lower incidence in a very large group (vaccinated) is more meaningful than a slightly higher rate in a very small group (individuals infected with COVID-19). scales of justice Your support helps fund this work, and CHD’s related advocacy, education and scientific research. Donate Now On that basis, Klement and Walach estimated the number of myocarditis cases among all German COVID-19 hospitalizations at 27,467, and among those who were vaccinated at 1.97 million. As a result, regardless of myocarditis severity, there were 71.7 times as many myocarditis cases among the vaccinated as among those hospitalized for COVID-19. A similar analysis for Switzerland estimated 169,960 cases of myocarditis among vaccinated compared with 8,179 among those hospitalized for COVID-19. Although not as dramatic as the German estimates this still shows a much higher occurrence of heart damage among vaccinated versus hospitalized. In a June 2021 paper, Walach, Klement and Dutch data analyst Wouter Aukema concluded that based on 700 adverse reactions, 16 serious side effects and 4.11 deaths for every 100,000 vaccinations, COVID-19 vaccines were released with insufficient safety data. The authors said the risk-benefit ratio for mRNA vaccines did not add up because “for three deaths prevented by vaccination we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination.” Mueller told The Defender via email: “Our study reveals an important lack of prospective safety data concerning COVID-19 vaccines. Given the magnitude of the vaccinated population compared to the much smaller proportion of the population that became infected and developed symptoms, including a small percentage with possible heart damage, our findings should remain qualitatively robust.” LEARN MORE ⬇️ https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-study-myocarditis-vaccines/ Join ➡️ @ShankaraChetty
    CHILDRENSHEALTHDEFENSE.ORG
    Study Claims COVID Caused More Heart Damage Than Vaccines — Here’s What the Authors Got Wrong
    A 2023 study admitted that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines cause myocarditis, but claimed the COVID-19 virus was even more damaging than the vaccine. A recent, more detailed review of their data, however, showed the opposite is likely true.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 9528 Views
  • Synopsis of ICJ’s decision on Israeli genocide, reactions, and take-aways
    [email protected] January 27, 2024 genocide, icj, international court of justice
    Synopsis of ICJ’s decision on Israeli genocide, reactions, and take-aways
    World Court rules on Gaza emergency measures in Israel genocide case, in The Hague (photo)
    Get a handle on the ICJ ruling, the dissenting judges, the binding nature of the decision, take-aways from several important voices, and reactions from stakeholding parties.

    Summary of ICJ’s ruling

    reposted from Al Jazeera

    The World Court ordered Israel to take action to prevent acts of genocide as it wages war against the Hamas group in the Gaza Strip. (15-2)

    (vote 15-2) The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular:

    (a) killing members of the group
    (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
    (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
    (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group

    (vote 15-2) The State of Israel shall ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in point 1 above

    (vote 16-1) The State of Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip

    (vote 16-1) The State of Israel shall take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip

    (vote 15-2) The State of Israel shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II and Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip

    (vote 15-2) The State of Israel shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this order within one month as from the date of this Order.

    The court stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire.



    Who are the ICJ judges that voted against motions?

    Julia Sebutinde – voted against all motions

    In 1996, Sebutinde was appointed as one of the judges of the High Court of Uganda. In 2012, she became the first African woman to be appointed to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the world court. She has broken barriers and paved the way for countless other African women in the field of law.

    Sebutinde got her undergraduate degree in Uganda, and Master’s and Doctorate of Law at the University of Edinburgh. She has contributed immensely to international law jurisprudence through the cases she has heard, often with dissenting opinions.

    Regarding her voting record in this case, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Uganda to the United Nations stated,

    Justice Sebutinde ruling at the International Court of Justice does not represent the Government of Uganda’s position on the situation in Palestine. She has previously voted against Uganda’s case on DRC. Uganda’s support for the plight of the Palestinian people has been expressed through Uganda ‘s voting pattern at the United Nations.

    Aharon Barak – voted against most motions

    Barak is an Israeli lawyer who was appointed to the 15-judge panel of the ICJ ahead of South Africa’s case against Israel. Under the ICJ’s rules, a country that does not have a judge to represent its own on the bench can choose an ad hoc judge.

    The 87-year-old is a retired judge from the Israeli Supreme Court and a recipient of the Israel Prize for Legal Studies. Barak was born in Lithuania and, studied law in Hebrew University.

    He was appointed to the Israeli Supreme Court in 1978, where he went on to serve for 28 years.

    The ICJ full panel is led by President Joan E. Donoghue from the US and Vice-President Kirill Gevorgian from Russia. They head a diverse bench with judges from 13 other countries including Slovakia, France, Morocco, Somalia, China, Uganda, India, Jamaica, Lebanon, Japan, Germany, Australia, and Brazil. Two ad hoc judges appointed to the panel for this case were from Israel and South Africa.

    FAQ: Are decisions of the Court binding?

    reposted from the ICJ website

    Judgments delivered by the Court (or by one of its Chambers) in disputes between States are binding upon the parties concerned. Article 94 of the United Nations Charter provides that “[e]ach Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of [the Court] in any case to which it is a party”.

    Judgments are final and without appeal. If there is a dispute about the meaning or scope of a judgment, the only possibility is for one of the parties to make a request to the Court for an interpretation. In the event of the discovery of a fact hitherto unknown to the Court which might be a decisive factor, either party may apply for revision of the judgment.

    As regards advisory opinions, it is usually for the United Nations organs and specialized agencies requesting them to give effect to them or not, by whichever means they see fit.

    The ICJ ruling is a repudiation of Israel and its western backers

    by Kenneth Roth, reposted from the Guardian

    The international court of justice’s (ICJ) ruling in South Africa’s genocide case was a powerful repudiation of Israel’s denialism. By an overwhelming majority, the court found a “plausible” case that provisional measures were needed to avoid “irreparable prejudice” from further Israeli acts in Gaza that could jeopardize Palestinian rights under the genocide convention.

    The public posture of various Israeli officials was, in essence: how dare anyone accuse us of genocide. After all, they pointed out, Israel was founded after the Holocaust to protect the Jewish people from genocide, Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October, and many of Hamas’s statements seem genocidal in intent.

    Yet none of that is a defense to the charge of genocide. Regardless of Israel’s history, regardless of its claim of self-defense, the means chosen to fight Hamas can still be genocidal. The court found enough merit in that claim to recognize that Palestinian civilians need the court’s protection.

    The court’s ruling was also a repudiation of Israel’s western backers. The Biden administration had called the suit “meritless”. The British government said it was “nonsense”. By a vote of 15 to 2, the ICJ judges found otherwise.

    On the need to allow humanitarian aid to a starving population in Gaza and to prevent and punish the incitement of genocide, even the respected Israeli judge, Aharon Barak, joined the majority, making the vote 16 to 1 – a powerful repudiation of those who try to chalk up challenges to Israel’s conduct in Gaza as an unfair double standard or antisemitism.

    The current proceedings were not about the ultimate merits of the case. It could take years to determine whether Israel has committed genocide in Gaza. But the provisional measures ordered by the court could make an enormous difference in curbing the death and suffering of Palestinian civilians now.

    What now?

    The key will be enforcement. The ICJ ruling is “binding”, as the court stressed, but the ICJ has no military or police force at its disposal. For coercive measures, it would need a resolution of the UN security council, which requires contending with the US government’s veto, so often deployed to protect Israel.

    But the political pressure to comply with the ruling will be enormous. Having trusted the court to send its lawyers to The Hague to present its case, Israel would look horrible to reject the court just because it lost. In calling the underlying genocide charges “outrageous” – a finding that, as mentioned, the court did not yet address – the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, notably did not say he would refuse to comply with the court’s provisional measures. Let’s hope he will.

    Some were disappointed that the ICJ did not order a ceasefire, a step that was unlikely because the court addresses only disputes between states, so Hamas was not a party. A ceasefire imposed on only one side to an ongoing armed conflict is not plausible.

    The court did order Israel to “take all measures within its power” to halt acts that contribute to genocide, to allow sufficient humanitarian aid into Gaza to end the suffering among Palestinian civilians, and to prevent and punish the public statements of incitement made by senior Israeli officials. Israel must report back to the court in a month on the steps it has taken.

    Yet there is a lot of wiggle room in those orders. That’s where Israel’s supporters come in. Will they move past their earlier skepticism toward the case and now urge Israel to comply? Western governments backed the ICJ in similar rulings against Myanmar, Russia and Syria. It would do enormous damage to the “rules-based order” that Western governments claim to uphold if they were to make an exception for Israel.

    Joe Biden holds the most powerful leverage. The US government provides $3.8bn in annual military aid to Israel and is its principal arms supplier. That support should stop if the Israeli government ignores the court’s ruling. The US president should no longer put his fear of domestic political consequences, or his personal identification with Israel, before the lives of so many Palestinian civilians.

    Other pressure for compliance could come from the international criminal court. Unlike the ICJ, which resolves disputes between states, the ICC prosecutes individuals for such crimes as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Better behavior now is no defense for crimes already committed, but if Israel were to ignore the ICJ ruling, that would be an added spur for the ICC prosecutor, Karim Khan, to act.

    Much is still unresolved, but today is a win for the rule of law. South Africa, a nation of the global south, was able to transcend power politics by invoking the world’s leading judicial institution. The court’s ruling shows that even governments with powerful friends can be held to account. That provides hope for the profoundly suffering Palestinian civilians of Gaza. It is also a small but important step toward a more lawful, rights-respecting world.

    Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch (1993-2022), is a visiting professor at Princeton’s School of Public and International Affairs

    Nine take-aways from the ICJ ruling

    by Huwaida Arraf, reposted from X

    While many are disappointed that the ICJ did not explicitly order a ceasefire, the ruling was historic and a huge defeat for Israel. Here’s what we need to take away and what we need to do:

    The Court found that RSA made a plausible case that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza and October 7 is no justification for Israel’s conduct. This is huge.
    The Court found that immediate protective measures are necessary to protect the Palestinian people from irreparable harm caused by Israel’s genocidal conduct and ordered such measures.
    In order for Israel to abide by the measures, including the provision of basic services (turning on water, electricity and allowing the entry of fuel) and humanitarian aid, it would need to cease its military assault. Aid organizations have said that one of the main reasons they are unable to deliver aid, besides Israel’s restrictions on entry of aid, is Israel’s military aggression which makes it too dangerous for them to reach many areas.
    The Court has also instituted a monitoring mechanism and Israel must report on everything it’s doing to abide by the Order of the Court within a month (should have been shorter).
    ALL countries signatory to the Genocide Convention have an obligation to prevent genocide. This means that, when there is reason to believe that there is a threat of genocide, states MUST act to prevent it. All countries are now on notice that there is a plausible threat of genocide.
    This means that, continuing to supply Israel with weapons and vetoing UNSC resolutions will amount to violations of that responsibility and also a potential violation of Art III of the Convention, prohibiting complicity in genocide.
    If Israel does not comply with the ICJ Order, the matter should be brought before the UNSC. If the US vetoes, this will be an indictment of the US, but not the end.
    States must then use UNGA 377 – Uniting for Peace – to not only bring the matter before the UNGA, but to make sure that the UNGA resolution includes implementation measures (without an agreement on such measures, the resolution will be ineffective). Such measures can include international sanctions on Israel and suspending Israel’s membership in the UN.
    Alongside all of this, we must continue our work in the streets and in national courts to hold Israel and enablers accountable. This includes:
    continuing to demand that our governments sanction Israel;
    demanding Israel’s suspension from international fora such as Eurovision and international sporting arenas;
    using the principle of universal jurisdiction to prosecute Israeli war criminals in national courts, which is already being pursued.
    The World Court has found that Israel may be committing genocide — the mother of all crimes. This is an indictment, not only on Israel, but on all who have been enabling Israel and using October 7, as justification.

    It must also be a wakeup call to all who have been silent. There’s no excuse.

    Huwaida Arraf is a Palestinian American activist and lawyer who co-founded the International Solidarity Movement, a Palestinian-led organization using non-violent protests and international pressure to support Palestinians.

    ICJ lands stunning blow on Israel over Gaza genocide charge

    A different Biden approach could have shaped war efforts and prevented this from happening in the first place.

    by Trita Parsi, reposted from Responsible Statecraft, January 26, 2024

    The International Court of Justice (ICJ) just ruled against Israel and determined that South Africa successfully argued that Israel’s conduct plausibly could constitute genocide. The Court imposes several injunctions against Israel and reminds Israel that its rulings are binding, according to international law.

    In its order, the court fell short of South Africa’s request for a ceasefire, but this ruling, however, is overwhelmingly in favor of South Africa’s case and will likely increase international pressure for a ceasefire as a result.

    On the question of whether Israel’s war in Gaza is genocide, that will still take more time, but today’s news will have significant political repercussions. Here are a few thoughts.

    This is a devastating blow to Israel’s global standing. To put it in context, Israel has worked ferociously for the last two decades to defeat the BDS movement — Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions — not because it will have a significant economic impact on Israel, but because of how it could delegitimize Israel internationally. However, the ruling of the ICJ that Israel is plausibly engaged in genocide is far more devastating to Israel’s legitimacy than anything BDS could have achieved.

    Just as much as Israel’s political system has been increasingly — and publicly — associated with apartheid in the past few years, Israel will now be similarly associated with the charge of genocide. As a result, those countries that have supported Israel and its military campaign in Gaza, such as the U.S. under President Biden, will be associated with that charge, too.

    The implications for the United States are significant. First because the court does not have the ability to implement its ruling. Instead, the matter will go to the United Nations Security Council, where the Biden administration will once again face the choice of protecting Israel politically by casting a veto, and by that, further isolate the United States, or allowing the Security Council to act and pay a domestic political cost for “not standing by Israel.”

    So far, the Biden administration has refused to say if it will respect ICJ’s decision. Of course, in previous cases in front of the ICJ, such as Myanmar, Ukraine and Syria, the U.S. and Western states stressed that ICJ provisional measures are binding and must be fully implemented.

    The double standards of U.S. foreign policy will hit a new low if, in this case, Biden not only argues against the ICJ, but actively acts to prevent and block the implementation of its ruling. It is perhaps not surprising that senior Biden administration officials have largely ceased using the term “rules-based order” since October 7.

    It also raises questions about how Biden’s policy of bear-hugging Israel may have contributed to Israel’s conduct. Biden could have offered more measured support and pushed back hard against Israeli excesses — and by that, prevented Israel from engaging in actions that could potentially fall under the category of genocide. But he didn’t.

    Instead, Biden offered unconditional support combined with zero public criticism of Israel’s conduct and only limited push-back behind the scenes. A different American approach could have shaped Israel’s war efforts in a manner that arguably would not have been preliminarily ruled by the ICJ as plausibly meeting the standards of genocide.

    This shows that America undermines its own interest as well as that of its partners when it offers them blank checks and complete and unquestionable protection. The absence of checks and balances that such protection offers fuels reckless behavior all around.

    As such, Biden’s unconditional support may have undermined Israel, in the final analysis.

    This ruling may also boost those arguing that all states that are party to the Genocide Convention have a positive obligation to prevent genocide. The Houthis, for instance, have justified their attacks against ships heading to Israeli ports in the Red Sea, citing this positive obligation. What legal implications will the court’s ruling have as a result on the U.S. and UK’s military action against the Houthis?

    The implications for Europe will also be considerable. The U.S. is rather accustomed to and comfortable with setting aside international law and ignoring international institutions. Europe is not.

    International law and institutions play a much more central role in European security thinking. The decision will continue to split Europe. But the fact that some key EU states will reject the ICJ’s ruling will profoundly contradict and undermine Europe’s broader security paradigm.

    One final point: The mere existence of South Africa’s application to the ICJ appears to have moderated Israel’s war conduct.* Any plans to ethnically cleanse Gaza and send its residents to third countries appear to have been somewhat paused, presumably because of how such actions would boost South Africa’s application. If so, it shows that the Court, in an era where the force of international law is increasingly questioned, has had a greater impact in terms of deterring unlawful Israeli actions than anything the Biden administration has done.

    * EDITOR’S NOTE: Israel appears to have done little, if anything, to moderate its war conduct since South Africa submitted its genocide accusation on December 29th. The numbers of Palestinians killed in Gaza and the West Bank has continued to climb steadily; while there has been a slight improvement in number of humanitarian aid trucks, it is not impressive, and not reaching the north where hundreds of thousands are starving. There is still no electricity, no water, almost no medical services, and no safety.

    Trita Parsi is the co-founder and Executive Vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

    Some reactions to ICJ ruling on South Africa’s genocide case against Israel

    reposted from Al Jazeera

    Palestinians in Gaza

    Palestinians in Gaza said they are devastated by the ICJ decision not to order Israel to cease its near-four-month bombardment and ground invasion of the strip.

    Ahmed al-Naffar, 54, who was intently following the court’s announcement in central Gaza’s Deir el-Balah, told Al Jazeera: “Although I don’t trust the international community, I had a small glimmer of hope that the court would rule on a ceasefire in Gaza,” later adding that “The court is a failure.”

    Palestinians in the occupied West Bank

    Lubna Farhat, a member of the Ramallah city council, told Al Jazeera she was somewhat disappointed by the ICJ decision but acknowledged it was a historic moment.

    “We are very grateful and thankful for South Africa for filing this case, but what Palestinians aspired for was an immediate ceasefire,” Farhat said, adding that it was disheartening that the court did not call for an end to Israel’s military operations so humanitarian aid could be allowed into Gaza.

    She said the ruling would only “escalate” settler attacks in the occupied West Bank and increase the attackers’ sense of impunity.

    Palestine

    Palestine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates welcomed the ICJ’s ruling, saying in a statement it is an “important reminder” that no state is above the law.

    Foreign Minister Riyadh Maliki noted that Israel failed to persuade the court that it is not violating the 1948 Genocide Convention.

    In a statement he said: “The ICJ judges saw through Israel’s politicization, deflection, and outright lies. They assessed the facts and the law and ordered provisional measures that recognized the gravity of the situation on the ground and the veracity of South Africa’s application. … Palestine calls on all states to ensure respect for the order of the International Court of Justice, including by Israel.”

    Israel

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu slammed the ruling as “outrageous”.

    In a video message shortly after the court order, he said Israel is fighting a “just war like no other”. He added that Israel will continue to defend itself and its citizens while adhering to international law.

    Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir mocked the ICJ after the court issued its interim ruling. “Hague shmague,” the minister wrote on the social media platform X.

    South Africa

    The South African government called the ICJ ruling a “decisive victory” for international law.

    “How do you provide aid and water without a ceasefire?” Pandor asked. “If you read the order, by implication, a ceasefire must happen.”

    United States

    The United States said the ruling of the ICJ was consistent with Washington’s view that Israel has the right to take action, in accordance with international law, to ensure the October 7 attack cannot be repeated.

    “We continue to believe that allegations of genocide are unfounded and note the court did not make a finding about genocide or call for a ceasefire in its ruling and that it called for the unconditional, immediate release of all hostages being held by Hamas,” a State Department spokesperson said.

    European Union

    “Orders of the International Court of Justice are binding on the parties and they must comply with them. The European Union expects their full, immediate and effective implementation,” the European Commission said in a statement.

    RELATED READING:

    The ICJ presentations on Israeli genocide against Palestinians
    Israel has repeatedly rejected Hamas truce offers
    John Mearsheimer: Genocide in Gaza
    Is the United Nations anti-Israel? – a survey of UN resolutions
    Essential facts and stats about the Hamas-Gaza-Israel war

    https://israelpalestinenews.org/synopsis-of-icjs-decision-on-israeli-genocide-reactions-and-take-aways/
    Synopsis of ICJ’s decision on Israeli genocide, reactions, and take-aways [email protected] January 27, 2024 genocide, icj, international court of justice Synopsis of ICJ’s decision on Israeli genocide, reactions, and take-aways World Court rules on Gaza emergency measures in Israel genocide case, in The Hague (photo) Get a handle on the ICJ ruling, the dissenting judges, the binding nature of the decision, take-aways from several important voices, and reactions from stakeholding parties. Summary of ICJ’s ruling reposted from Al Jazeera The World Court ordered Israel to take action to prevent acts of genocide as it wages war against the Hamas group in the Gaza Strip. (15-2) (vote 15-2) The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular: (a) killing members of the group (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group (vote 15-2) The State of Israel shall ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in point 1 above (vote 16-1) The State of Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip (vote 16-1) The State of Israel shall take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip (vote 15-2) The State of Israel shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II and Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip (vote 15-2) The State of Israel shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this order within one month as from the date of this Order. The court stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire. Who are the ICJ judges that voted against motions? Julia Sebutinde – voted against all motions In 1996, Sebutinde was appointed as one of the judges of the High Court of Uganda. In 2012, she became the first African woman to be appointed to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the world court. She has broken barriers and paved the way for countless other African women in the field of law. Sebutinde got her undergraduate degree in Uganda, and Master’s and Doctorate of Law at the University of Edinburgh. She has contributed immensely to international law jurisprudence through the cases she has heard, often with dissenting opinions. Regarding her voting record in this case, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Uganda to the United Nations stated, Justice Sebutinde ruling at the International Court of Justice does not represent the Government of Uganda’s position on the situation in Palestine. She has previously voted against Uganda’s case on DRC. Uganda’s support for the plight of the Palestinian people has been expressed through Uganda ‘s voting pattern at the United Nations. Aharon Barak – voted against most motions Barak is an Israeli lawyer who was appointed to the 15-judge panel of the ICJ ahead of South Africa’s case against Israel. Under the ICJ’s rules, a country that does not have a judge to represent its own on the bench can choose an ad hoc judge. The 87-year-old is a retired judge from the Israeli Supreme Court and a recipient of the Israel Prize for Legal Studies. Barak was born in Lithuania and, studied law in Hebrew University. He was appointed to the Israeli Supreme Court in 1978, where he went on to serve for 28 years. The ICJ full panel is led by President Joan E. Donoghue from the US and Vice-President Kirill Gevorgian from Russia. They head a diverse bench with judges from 13 other countries including Slovakia, France, Morocco, Somalia, China, Uganda, India, Jamaica, Lebanon, Japan, Germany, Australia, and Brazil. Two ad hoc judges appointed to the panel for this case were from Israel and South Africa. FAQ: Are decisions of the Court binding? reposted from the ICJ website Judgments delivered by the Court (or by one of its Chambers) in disputes between States are binding upon the parties concerned. Article 94 of the United Nations Charter provides that “[e]ach Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of [the Court] in any case to which it is a party”. Judgments are final and without appeal. If there is a dispute about the meaning or scope of a judgment, the only possibility is for one of the parties to make a request to the Court for an interpretation. In the event of the discovery of a fact hitherto unknown to the Court which might be a decisive factor, either party may apply for revision of the judgment. As regards advisory opinions, it is usually for the United Nations organs and specialized agencies requesting them to give effect to them or not, by whichever means they see fit. The ICJ ruling is a repudiation of Israel and its western backers by Kenneth Roth, reposted from the Guardian The international court of justice’s (ICJ) ruling in South Africa’s genocide case was a powerful repudiation of Israel’s denialism. By an overwhelming majority, the court found a “plausible” case that provisional measures were needed to avoid “irreparable prejudice” from further Israeli acts in Gaza that could jeopardize Palestinian rights under the genocide convention. The public posture of various Israeli officials was, in essence: how dare anyone accuse us of genocide. After all, they pointed out, Israel was founded after the Holocaust to protect the Jewish people from genocide, Hamas attacked Israel on 7 October, and many of Hamas’s statements seem genocidal in intent. Yet none of that is a defense to the charge of genocide. Regardless of Israel’s history, regardless of its claim of self-defense, the means chosen to fight Hamas can still be genocidal. The court found enough merit in that claim to recognize that Palestinian civilians need the court’s protection. The court’s ruling was also a repudiation of Israel’s western backers. The Biden administration had called the suit “meritless”. The British government said it was “nonsense”. By a vote of 15 to 2, the ICJ judges found otherwise. On the need to allow humanitarian aid to a starving population in Gaza and to prevent and punish the incitement of genocide, even the respected Israeli judge, Aharon Barak, joined the majority, making the vote 16 to 1 – a powerful repudiation of those who try to chalk up challenges to Israel’s conduct in Gaza as an unfair double standard or antisemitism. The current proceedings were not about the ultimate merits of the case. It could take years to determine whether Israel has committed genocide in Gaza. But the provisional measures ordered by the court could make an enormous difference in curbing the death and suffering of Palestinian civilians now. What now? The key will be enforcement. The ICJ ruling is “binding”, as the court stressed, but the ICJ has no military or police force at its disposal. For coercive measures, it would need a resolution of the UN security council, which requires contending with the US government’s veto, so often deployed to protect Israel. But the political pressure to comply with the ruling will be enormous. Having trusted the court to send its lawyers to The Hague to present its case, Israel would look horrible to reject the court just because it lost. In calling the underlying genocide charges “outrageous” – a finding that, as mentioned, the court did not yet address – the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, notably did not say he would refuse to comply with the court’s provisional measures. Let’s hope he will. Some were disappointed that the ICJ did not order a ceasefire, a step that was unlikely because the court addresses only disputes between states, so Hamas was not a party. A ceasefire imposed on only one side to an ongoing armed conflict is not plausible. The court did order Israel to “take all measures within its power” to halt acts that contribute to genocide, to allow sufficient humanitarian aid into Gaza to end the suffering among Palestinian civilians, and to prevent and punish the public statements of incitement made by senior Israeli officials. Israel must report back to the court in a month on the steps it has taken. Yet there is a lot of wiggle room in those orders. That’s where Israel’s supporters come in. Will they move past their earlier skepticism toward the case and now urge Israel to comply? Western governments backed the ICJ in similar rulings against Myanmar, Russia and Syria. It would do enormous damage to the “rules-based order” that Western governments claim to uphold if they were to make an exception for Israel. Joe Biden holds the most powerful leverage. The US government provides $3.8bn in annual military aid to Israel and is its principal arms supplier. That support should stop if the Israeli government ignores the court’s ruling. The US president should no longer put his fear of domestic political consequences, or his personal identification with Israel, before the lives of so many Palestinian civilians. Other pressure for compliance could come from the international criminal court. Unlike the ICJ, which resolves disputes between states, the ICC prosecutes individuals for such crimes as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Better behavior now is no defense for crimes already committed, but if Israel were to ignore the ICJ ruling, that would be an added spur for the ICC prosecutor, Karim Khan, to act. Much is still unresolved, but today is a win for the rule of law. South Africa, a nation of the global south, was able to transcend power politics by invoking the world’s leading judicial institution. The court’s ruling shows that even governments with powerful friends can be held to account. That provides hope for the profoundly suffering Palestinian civilians of Gaza. It is also a small but important step toward a more lawful, rights-respecting world. Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch (1993-2022), is a visiting professor at Princeton’s School of Public and International Affairs Nine take-aways from the ICJ ruling by Huwaida Arraf, reposted from X While many are disappointed that the ICJ did not explicitly order a ceasefire, the ruling was historic and a huge defeat for Israel. Here’s what we need to take away and what we need to do: The Court found that RSA made a plausible case that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza and October 7 is no justification for Israel’s conduct. This is huge. The Court found that immediate protective measures are necessary to protect the Palestinian people from irreparable harm caused by Israel’s genocidal conduct and ordered such measures. In order for Israel to abide by the measures, including the provision of basic services (turning on water, electricity and allowing the entry of fuel) and humanitarian aid, it would need to cease its military assault. Aid organizations have said that one of the main reasons they are unable to deliver aid, besides Israel’s restrictions on entry of aid, is Israel’s military aggression which makes it too dangerous for them to reach many areas. The Court has also instituted a monitoring mechanism and Israel must report on everything it’s doing to abide by the Order of the Court within a month (should have been shorter). ALL countries signatory to the Genocide Convention have an obligation to prevent genocide. This means that, when there is reason to believe that there is a threat of genocide, states MUST act to prevent it. All countries are now on notice that there is a plausible threat of genocide. This means that, continuing to supply Israel with weapons and vetoing UNSC resolutions will amount to violations of that responsibility and also a potential violation of Art III of the Convention, prohibiting complicity in genocide. If Israel does not comply with the ICJ Order, the matter should be brought before the UNSC. If the US vetoes, this will be an indictment of the US, but not the end. States must then use UNGA 377 – Uniting for Peace – to not only bring the matter before the UNGA, but to make sure that the UNGA resolution includes implementation measures (without an agreement on such measures, the resolution will be ineffective). Such measures can include international sanctions on Israel and suspending Israel’s membership in the UN. Alongside all of this, we must continue our work in the streets and in national courts to hold Israel and enablers accountable. This includes: continuing to demand that our governments sanction Israel; demanding Israel’s suspension from international fora such as Eurovision and international sporting arenas; using the principle of universal jurisdiction to prosecute Israeli war criminals in national courts, which is already being pursued. The World Court has found that Israel may be committing genocide — the mother of all crimes. This is an indictment, not only on Israel, but on all who have been enabling Israel and using October 7, as justification. It must also be a wakeup call to all who have been silent. There’s no excuse. Huwaida Arraf is a Palestinian American activist and lawyer who co-founded the International Solidarity Movement, a Palestinian-led organization using non-violent protests and international pressure to support Palestinians. ICJ lands stunning blow on Israel over Gaza genocide charge A different Biden approach could have shaped war efforts and prevented this from happening in the first place. by Trita Parsi, reposted from Responsible Statecraft, January 26, 2024 The International Court of Justice (ICJ) just ruled against Israel and determined that South Africa successfully argued that Israel’s conduct plausibly could constitute genocide. The Court imposes several injunctions against Israel and reminds Israel that its rulings are binding, according to international law. In its order, the court fell short of South Africa’s request for a ceasefire, but this ruling, however, is overwhelmingly in favor of South Africa’s case and will likely increase international pressure for a ceasefire as a result. On the question of whether Israel’s war in Gaza is genocide, that will still take more time, but today’s news will have significant political repercussions. Here are a few thoughts. This is a devastating blow to Israel’s global standing. To put it in context, Israel has worked ferociously for the last two decades to defeat the BDS movement — Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions — not because it will have a significant economic impact on Israel, but because of how it could delegitimize Israel internationally. However, the ruling of the ICJ that Israel is plausibly engaged in genocide is far more devastating to Israel’s legitimacy than anything BDS could have achieved. Just as much as Israel’s political system has been increasingly — and publicly — associated with apartheid in the past few years, Israel will now be similarly associated with the charge of genocide. As a result, those countries that have supported Israel and its military campaign in Gaza, such as the U.S. under President Biden, will be associated with that charge, too. The implications for the United States are significant. First because the court does not have the ability to implement its ruling. Instead, the matter will go to the United Nations Security Council, where the Biden administration will once again face the choice of protecting Israel politically by casting a veto, and by that, further isolate the United States, or allowing the Security Council to act and pay a domestic political cost for “not standing by Israel.” So far, the Biden administration has refused to say if it will respect ICJ’s decision. Of course, in previous cases in front of the ICJ, such as Myanmar, Ukraine and Syria, the U.S. and Western states stressed that ICJ provisional measures are binding and must be fully implemented. The double standards of U.S. foreign policy will hit a new low if, in this case, Biden not only argues against the ICJ, but actively acts to prevent and block the implementation of its ruling. It is perhaps not surprising that senior Biden administration officials have largely ceased using the term “rules-based order” since October 7. It also raises questions about how Biden’s policy of bear-hugging Israel may have contributed to Israel’s conduct. Biden could have offered more measured support and pushed back hard against Israeli excesses — and by that, prevented Israel from engaging in actions that could potentially fall under the category of genocide. But he didn’t. Instead, Biden offered unconditional support combined with zero public criticism of Israel’s conduct and only limited push-back behind the scenes. A different American approach could have shaped Israel’s war efforts in a manner that arguably would not have been preliminarily ruled by the ICJ as plausibly meeting the standards of genocide. This shows that America undermines its own interest as well as that of its partners when it offers them blank checks and complete and unquestionable protection. The absence of checks and balances that such protection offers fuels reckless behavior all around. As such, Biden’s unconditional support may have undermined Israel, in the final analysis. This ruling may also boost those arguing that all states that are party to the Genocide Convention have a positive obligation to prevent genocide. The Houthis, for instance, have justified their attacks against ships heading to Israeli ports in the Red Sea, citing this positive obligation. What legal implications will the court’s ruling have as a result on the U.S. and UK’s military action against the Houthis? The implications for Europe will also be considerable. The U.S. is rather accustomed to and comfortable with setting aside international law and ignoring international institutions. Europe is not. International law and institutions play a much more central role in European security thinking. The decision will continue to split Europe. But the fact that some key EU states will reject the ICJ’s ruling will profoundly contradict and undermine Europe’s broader security paradigm. One final point: The mere existence of South Africa’s application to the ICJ appears to have moderated Israel’s war conduct.* Any plans to ethnically cleanse Gaza and send its residents to third countries appear to have been somewhat paused, presumably because of how such actions would boost South Africa’s application. If so, it shows that the Court, in an era where the force of international law is increasingly questioned, has had a greater impact in terms of deterring unlawful Israeli actions than anything the Biden administration has done. * EDITOR’S NOTE: Israel appears to have done little, if anything, to moderate its war conduct since South Africa submitted its genocide accusation on December 29th. The numbers of Palestinians killed in Gaza and the West Bank has continued to climb steadily; while there has been a slight improvement in number of humanitarian aid trucks, it is not impressive, and not reaching the north where hundreds of thousands are starving. There is still no electricity, no water, almost no medical services, and no safety. Trita Parsi is the co-founder and Executive Vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. Some reactions to ICJ ruling on South Africa’s genocide case against Israel reposted from Al Jazeera Palestinians in Gaza Palestinians in Gaza said they are devastated by the ICJ decision not to order Israel to cease its near-four-month bombardment and ground invasion of the strip. Ahmed al-Naffar, 54, who was intently following the court’s announcement in central Gaza’s Deir el-Balah, told Al Jazeera: “Although I don’t trust the international community, I had a small glimmer of hope that the court would rule on a ceasefire in Gaza,” later adding that “The court is a failure.” Palestinians in the occupied West Bank Lubna Farhat, a member of the Ramallah city council, told Al Jazeera she was somewhat disappointed by the ICJ decision but acknowledged it was a historic moment. “We are very grateful and thankful for South Africa for filing this case, but what Palestinians aspired for was an immediate ceasefire,” Farhat said, adding that it was disheartening that the court did not call for an end to Israel’s military operations so humanitarian aid could be allowed into Gaza. She said the ruling would only “escalate” settler attacks in the occupied West Bank and increase the attackers’ sense of impunity. Palestine Palestine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates welcomed the ICJ’s ruling, saying in a statement it is an “important reminder” that no state is above the law. Foreign Minister Riyadh Maliki noted that Israel failed to persuade the court that it is not violating the 1948 Genocide Convention. In a statement he said: “The ICJ judges saw through Israel’s politicization, deflection, and outright lies. They assessed the facts and the law and ordered provisional measures that recognized the gravity of the situation on the ground and the veracity of South Africa’s application. … Palestine calls on all states to ensure respect for the order of the International Court of Justice, including by Israel.” Israel Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu slammed the ruling as “outrageous”. In a video message shortly after the court order, he said Israel is fighting a “just war like no other”. He added that Israel will continue to defend itself and its citizens while adhering to international law. Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir mocked the ICJ after the court issued its interim ruling. “Hague shmague,” the minister wrote on the social media platform X. South Africa The South African government called the ICJ ruling a “decisive victory” for international law. “How do you provide aid and water without a ceasefire?” Pandor asked. “If you read the order, by implication, a ceasefire must happen.” United States The United States said the ruling of the ICJ was consistent with Washington’s view that Israel has the right to take action, in accordance with international law, to ensure the October 7 attack cannot be repeated. “We continue to believe that allegations of genocide are unfounded and note the court did not make a finding about genocide or call for a ceasefire in its ruling and that it called for the unconditional, immediate release of all hostages being held by Hamas,” a State Department spokesperson said. European Union “Orders of the International Court of Justice are binding on the parties and they must comply with them. The European Union expects their full, immediate and effective implementation,” the European Commission said in a statement. RELATED READING: The ICJ presentations on Israeli genocide against Palestinians Israel has repeatedly rejected Hamas truce offers John Mearsheimer: Genocide in Gaza Is the United Nations anti-Israel? – a survey of UN resolutions Essential facts and stats about the Hamas-Gaza-Israel war https://israelpalestinenews.org/synopsis-of-icjs-decision-on-israeli-genocide-reactions-and-take-aways/
    ISRAELPALESTINENEWS.ORG
    Synopsis of ICJ's decision on Israeli genocide, reactions, and take-aways
    Get a handle on the ICJ ruling, dissenting judges, take-aways from several important voices, and reactions from stakeholding parties.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 17174 Views
  • Global pandemic agreement at risk of falling apart, WHO warns
    The accord, aimed at preventing another health catastrophe, is losing momentum due to ‘lies and conspiracy theories’

    Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director general of WHO, at a press conference in Geneva.
    Plans for a global pandemic preparedness agreement risk falling apart amid wrangling and disinformation, according to the chief of the World Health Organization, who has warned that future generations “may not forgive us”.

    Shaken by the Covid-19 pandemic, the WHO’s 194 member states decided more than two years ago to start negotiating an international accord aimed at ensuring countries are better equipped to deal with the next health catastrophe, or to prevent it altogether.

    The plan was to seal the agreement at the 2024 World Health Assembly, the WHO’s decision-making body, which convenes on 27 May.

    However, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO’s director-general, said the momentum had been slowed down by entrenched positions and “a torrent of fake news, lies, and conspiracy theories”.

    He warned that if nobody was prepared to seize the initiative or give ground, the whole project risked going nowhere.

    Tedros told the WHO’s executive board in Geneva on Monday: “Time is very short. And there are several outstanding issues that remain to be resolved.”

    Failure to strike an agreement would be “a missed opportunity for which future generations may not forgive us”, he said.

    Tedros said all countries needed the capacity to detect and share pathogens presenting a risk, and timely access to tests, treatments and vaccines.

    He called for a “strong agreement that will help to protect our children and grandchildren from future pandemics”.

    Tedros said claims that the accord would cede sovereignty to the WHO or give it the power to impose lockdowns and vaccine mandates were “completely false”.

    “We cannot allow this historic agreement, this milestone in global health, to be sabotaged.”

    WHO member states decided in December 2021 to create a new international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, aimed at ensuring the flaws that turned Covid-19 into a global crisis could never happen again.

    The WHO emergencies director, Michael Ryan, reminded countries how the pandemic “ripped apart our social, economic and political systems and became a multi-trillion dollar problem”.

    In the midst of major geopolitical conflicts, “this is one thing the world agrees on”, he said.

    Roland Driece, who is co-chairing the negotiations, said the project had condensed a seven-year process into two years.

    He said the accord should be ambitious, innovative and with clear commitments.

    On the disagreements, he said European countries wanted more money invested in pandemic prevention, while Africa wanted the knowledge and financing to make that work, plus proper access to pandemic “countermeasures” such as vaccines and treatments.

    He said there were two sessions of two weeks left to do an “extreme” amount of work.

    Parallel negotiations are also going on to reform the international health regulations (IHR), which many countries felt had been found badly wanting.

    Under these, Tedros declared Covid-19 a public health emergency of international concern on 30 January 2020 – the highest level of alert available under the regulations.

    But it was not until March 2020 when he described the worsening situation as a pandemic – a word that does not exist in the IHR vocabulary – that the world jolted into action, by which time the virus was already widespread.

    Tedros declared an end to the international emergency in May 2023.

    Ashley Bloomfield, the chief executive of New Zealand’s health ministry during the pandemic, is co-chairing the IHR negotiations.

    Like Tedros, he criticised a “coordinated and sophisticated campaign” of misinformation and disinformation attempting to undermine the process.

    He said there were 300 proposed amendments to plough through during the talks.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/22/global-pandemic-agreement-at-risk-of-falling-apart-who-warns
    Global pandemic agreement at risk of falling apart, WHO warns The accord, aimed at preventing another health catastrophe, is losing momentum due to ‘lies and conspiracy theories’ Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director general of WHO, at a press conference in Geneva. Plans for a global pandemic preparedness agreement risk falling apart amid wrangling and disinformation, according to the chief of the World Health Organization, who has warned that future generations “may not forgive us”. Shaken by the Covid-19 pandemic, the WHO’s 194 member states decided more than two years ago to start negotiating an international accord aimed at ensuring countries are better equipped to deal with the next health catastrophe, or to prevent it altogether. The plan was to seal the agreement at the 2024 World Health Assembly, the WHO’s decision-making body, which convenes on 27 May. However, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the WHO’s director-general, said the momentum had been slowed down by entrenched positions and “a torrent of fake news, lies, and conspiracy theories”. He warned that if nobody was prepared to seize the initiative or give ground, the whole project risked going nowhere. Tedros told the WHO’s executive board in Geneva on Monday: “Time is very short. And there are several outstanding issues that remain to be resolved.” Failure to strike an agreement would be “a missed opportunity for which future generations may not forgive us”, he said. Tedros said all countries needed the capacity to detect and share pathogens presenting a risk, and timely access to tests, treatments and vaccines. He called for a “strong agreement that will help to protect our children and grandchildren from future pandemics”. Tedros said claims that the accord would cede sovereignty to the WHO or give it the power to impose lockdowns and vaccine mandates were “completely false”. “We cannot allow this historic agreement, this milestone in global health, to be sabotaged.” WHO member states decided in December 2021 to create a new international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, aimed at ensuring the flaws that turned Covid-19 into a global crisis could never happen again. The WHO emergencies director, Michael Ryan, reminded countries how the pandemic “ripped apart our social, economic and political systems and became a multi-trillion dollar problem”. In the midst of major geopolitical conflicts, “this is one thing the world agrees on”, he said. Roland Driece, who is co-chairing the negotiations, said the project had condensed a seven-year process into two years. He said the accord should be ambitious, innovative and with clear commitments. On the disagreements, he said European countries wanted more money invested in pandemic prevention, while Africa wanted the knowledge and financing to make that work, plus proper access to pandemic “countermeasures” such as vaccines and treatments. He said there were two sessions of two weeks left to do an “extreme” amount of work. Parallel negotiations are also going on to reform the international health regulations (IHR), which many countries felt had been found badly wanting. Under these, Tedros declared Covid-19 a public health emergency of international concern on 30 January 2020 – the highest level of alert available under the regulations. But it was not until March 2020 when he described the worsening situation as a pandemic – a word that does not exist in the IHR vocabulary – that the world jolted into action, by which time the virus was already widespread. Tedros declared an end to the international emergency in May 2023. Ashley Bloomfield, the chief executive of New Zealand’s health ministry during the pandemic, is co-chairing the IHR negotiations. Like Tedros, he criticised a “coordinated and sophisticated campaign” of misinformation and disinformation attempting to undermine the process. He said there were 300 proposed amendments to plough through during the talks. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/22/global-pandemic-agreement-at-risk-of-falling-apart-who-warns
    WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM
    Global pandemic agreement at risk of falling apart, WHO warns
    The accord, aimed at preventing another health catastrophe, is losing momentum due to ‘lies and conspiracy theories’
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 3867 Views
  • A summary of the evidence against the COVID vaccines
    Here's a quick summary of the key pieces of evidence that taken together show that the COVID vaccines are unsafe and that the medical community should not be trusted.

    Steve Kirsch
    What is evidence-based practice?
    Here is a short list of reasons that everyone should be concerned about the COVID vaccine. This is not an exhaustive list.

    Doctors are told to trust the FDA and CDC, but not verify, when prescribing vaccines. All the post-marketing safety data is kept hidden by health authorities so not even doctors can look at the data themselves to find out if any vaccine is safe. Doctors have to trust the authorities. They are essentially told: “trust, do not verify.”

    Zero Trust “Don't trust any, but verify, every time all the time.”
    The CDC itself doesn’t have the data to make a post-marketing independent vaccine safety assessment and they are not interested in obtaining the data either! The CDC relies on the FDA who relies on the manufacturer to test the product. The CDC could ask states for vaccination records tied to death records, but they don’t want to even ask because if they did an analysis, it could be discovered in a FOIA request. The CDC basically has no interest whatsoever in verifying what the actual safety data is.

    Lack of transparency by health authorities. Not a single health authority anywhere in the world has ever released anonymized record-level patient data for independent researchers to assess the safety of any vaccine. There isn’t any paper in a peer-reviewed journal showing that health outcomes are improved if public health data is kept secret.

    Lack of interest in data transparency by the medical community. Can you name a single high-profile pro-vaccine member of the medical community who has called for data transparency of public health data? Time-series cohort analyses can be easily produced by health authorities and published for everyone to see. These would show safety signals and do not jeopardize patient privacy. These are all kept hidden.

    We aren’t allowed to see even the simplest of charts. Wouldn’t it be great to define two cohorts on July 1, 2021: COVID vaccinated vs. COVID unvaccinated. Then you simply record the deaths from that point forward and plot them. Why isn’t this being published?

    Misinformation is deemed to be a problem, but the people making these statements are unwilling to take any steps to stop the so-called misinformation. These steps include: open public discussion to resolve differences of opinion and making public health data available/public in a way that preserves privacy. For example, HHS (as well as every state health department) should welcome all of us with open arms and invite us to query their databases (such as VSD and Medicare in the case of HHS) and publish whatever we find. Why does this information need to be hidden? The numbers tell the story, not the individual records.

    No response from health authorities to reasonable requests. I’ve sent emails to Sarah Caul of the UK ONS on four ways the ONS can increase data transparency. There was no response.

    No response when asked to explain damaging evidence. When credible scientists receive government data that shows very troubling safety signals, there is a total unwillingness of any health authority to discuss the matter and resolve it.

    The US Medicare data clearly shows mortality increases after people take the jab. Is there any epidemiologist who can explain why deaths rose during a period in time when they should have been falling (per the Medicare death data)?


    For the first 120 days after the shots given in March 2021, death rates overall were falling. But if you got the vaccine, your death rates went up. We know from data from other vaccines that the baseline death rate of 81-year olds in Medicare is 3.85%, so the baseline death rate of this group is <800 deaths a day. These deaths climb far above baseline after you took the COVID shot.
    The patient-level data released from NZ data confirms that mortality increases after the shots are given despite the fact that most of the shots were given during time periods when deaths were falling


    NZ data: Doses 2 and 4 were given while background mortality was falling, dose 3 while rising. So we’d expect the slope to fall in the first 6 months after vaccination. It does the opposite.
    Anecdotes such as the one from Jay Bonnar who lost 15 of his DIRECT friends unexpectedly since the shots rolled out. Four of the 15 died on the same day as that vaccine was given. Before the shots rolled out, Jay had lost only one friend unexpectedly. The probability this happened by chance is given by poisson.sf(14, .25) which is 5.6e-22. So this can’t happen by chance. SOMETHING killed Jay’s friends and 4 of the 15 died on the same day as they were vaccinated. Is there a more plausible explanation for what killed Jay’s friends? All of them who died were vaccinated with the COVID vaccines.

    Well done studies like the one done by Denis Rancourt showing 1 death per 800 shots on average. Jay Bonnar estimates he has around 14,000 friends so Jay’s numbers are consistent with Rancourt’s results.

    Survey data like Skidmore and Rasmussen Reports showing that hundreds of thousands of Americans have been killed by the COVID shots. There have never been any counter surveys published showing this not to be the case.

    The lack of any success stories. It appears that “vaccine success stories” where COVID infection fatality ratios dropped or that myocarditis cases plummeted do not exist. The US Nursing home data shows that the infection fatality rate (IFR) increased after the vaccine rolled out. There is nobody using that data making the claim it reduced the IFR.

    Anecdotes from healthcare are extremely troubling. One nurse reported a hospital admission rate that was 3X higher than anything in the 33-year history of the hospital after the COVID vaccines rolled out. Symptoms rarely ever seen were common after vaccines rolled out in that age group.

    Lack of autopsies in clinical trials and post-marketing. The CDC doesn’t request anyone to do autopsies even for people who die on the same day as they got the vaccine. Don’t they want to know what killed those people… just to be sure?

    Young people dying in sleep. There are way too many cases of young people who die in their sleep after being vaccinated. Doctors say this is a rare event. Now it is much more common. If the shots are safe, why is this happening?

    I have direct personal experience with the vaccine: two people I know were killed by the vaccine, none from COVID. I know many people who are vaccine injured from the COVID vaccine.

    Corruption in the VAERS system used to track adverse events. See this presentation by Albert Albert Benavides. In addition, the v-safe system showed that 8% of the people who got the vaccine had to see medical attention (which is in itself a train wreck), but the CDC refused to voluntarily disclose this important information and even today they don’t talk about it.

    The CDC covered up 770 safety signals. They didn’t tell the public about them at all. Not even hinting at them. A safety signal is very serious. To get one safety signal would be concerning. But to get 770 safety signals triggered (on 770 different adverse event types) and then not say anything to the public about it is a sure sign of a very corrupt public agency whose job is to protect the manufacturers, not the public.

    Ed Dowd’s book statistics. This very popular book (“Cause Unknown”) listed 500 who died unexpectedly. Ed didn’t know how many were unvaccinated. Only one person has come forward saying that one of the people in the book who died after the vaccines rolled out was unvaccinated.

    Prominent doctor/scientists switching sides. Paul Marik is one of the top intensivists in the world. After seeing many COVID vaccine injured patients, he changed his mind about the safety of vaccines. When he was not allowed to practice medicine consistent with his Hippocratic Oath, he resigned his position.

    The corruption with COVID protocols. The COVID hospital protocols likely caused 90% of the COVID deaths in hospitals. This led to Paul Marik resigning. See details in this article. Why are doctors forced to use hospital protocols that kill a huge percentage of patients instead of using their best judgment to save patients?

    This JAMA paper shows that COVID and influenza vaccines don’t work. Why are we pushing a vaccine where the statistics clearly show the vaccines don’t work?

    The consistency of the data. There have been no counter-anecdotes showing the vaccines are safe. I keep looking for one and come up empty.

    No debates with anyone prominent promoting the government narrative. Those who promote the narrative refuse to engage in any scientific discussions to resolve differences of opinion. This is similar to the question of whether vaccines cause autism: nobody who thinks it doesn’t is willing to engage in a public discussion about it to discuss the evidence. Why not resolve the issue through dialog? It isn’t resolved in the peer-review literature where half the papers say vaccines cause autism and the other half don’t. Why can’t we talk about it?

    Fear and intimidation tactics are used to silence dissent. Open debate would be more productive. But people are not allowed to hold or discuss views that go against the “consensus” or they will lose their jobs, their certifications, or their medical licenses. Health care workers are told they will be fired if they report an adverse event to VAERS, there are nurses who won’t talk about anaphylaxis after getting the vaccine for fear of being fired, vaccine injuries are covered up, hospital workers are afraid to talk about it at work.

    The cognitive dissonance is very disturbing. When healthcare workers bring up the topic of mortality and morbidity due to the vaccine, their peers say nothing and walk away.

    Censorship tactics employed by the US government to silence dissent instead of public recorded open debates. History has shown that purveyors of censorship are always on the wrong side of the issue.

    Liberty Justice Center Wins Battle for Doctors' First Amendment Rights as California Repeals Physician Censorship Law - Liberty Justice Center

    https://open.substack.com/pub/stevekirsch/p/a-summary-of-the-evidence-against?r=29hg4d&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
    A summary of the evidence against the COVID vaccines Here's a quick summary of the key pieces of evidence that taken together show that the COVID vaccines are unsafe and that the medical community should not be trusted. Steve Kirsch What is evidence-based practice? Here is a short list of reasons that everyone should be concerned about the COVID vaccine. This is not an exhaustive list. Doctors are told to trust the FDA and CDC, but not verify, when prescribing vaccines. All the post-marketing safety data is kept hidden by health authorities so not even doctors can look at the data themselves to find out if any vaccine is safe. Doctors have to trust the authorities. They are essentially told: “trust, do not verify.” Zero Trust “Don't trust any, but verify, every time all the time.” The CDC itself doesn’t have the data to make a post-marketing independent vaccine safety assessment and they are not interested in obtaining the data either! The CDC relies on the FDA who relies on the manufacturer to test the product. The CDC could ask states for vaccination records tied to death records, but they don’t want to even ask because if they did an analysis, it could be discovered in a FOIA request. The CDC basically has no interest whatsoever in verifying what the actual safety data is. Lack of transparency by health authorities. Not a single health authority anywhere in the world has ever released anonymized record-level patient data for independent researchers to assess the safety of any vaccine. There isn’t any paper in a peer-reviewed journal showing that health outcomes are improved if public health data is kept secret. Lack of interest in data transparency by the medical community. Can you name a single high-profile pro-vaccine member of the medical community who has called for data transparency of public health data? Time-series cohort analyses can be easily produced by health authorities and published for everyone to see. These would show safety signals and do not jeopardize patient privacy. These are all kept hidden. We aren’t allowed to see even the simplest of charts. Wouldn’t it be great to define two cohorts on July 1, 2021: COVID vaccinated vs. COVID unvaccinated. Then you simply record the deaths from that point forward and plot them. Why isn’t this being published? Misinformation is deemed to be a problem, but the people making these statements are unwilling to take any steps to stop the so-called misinformation. These steps include: open public discussion to resolve differences of opinion and making public health data available/public in a way that preserves privacy. For example, HHS (as well as every state health department) should welcome all of us with open arms and invite us to query their databases (such as VSD and Medicare in the case of HHS) and publish whatever we find. Why does this information need to be hidden? The numbers tell the story, not the individual records. No response from health authorities to reasonable requests. I’ve sent emails to Sarah Caul of the UK ONS on four ways the ONS can increase data transparency. There was no response. No response when asked to explain damaging evidence. When credible scientists receive government data that shows very troubling safety signals, there is a total unwillingness of any health authority to discuss the matter and resolve it. The US Medicare data clearly shows mortality increases after people take the jab. Is there any epidemiologist who can explain why deaths rose during a period in time when they should have been falling (per the Medicare death data)? For the first 120 days after the shots given in March 2021, death rates overall were falling. But if you got the vaccine, your death rates went up. We know from data from other vaccines that the baseline death rate of 81-year olds in Medicare is 3.85%, so the baseline death rate of this group is <800 deaths a day. These deaths climb far above baseline after you took the COVID shot. The patient-level data released from NZ data confirms that mortality increases after the shots are given despite the fact that most of the shots were given during time periods when deaths were falling NZ data: Doses 2 and 4 were given while background mortality was falling, dose 3 while rising. So we’d expect the slope to fall in the first 6 months after vaccination. It does the opposite. Anecdotes such as the one from Jay Bonnar who lost 15 of his DIRECT friends unexpectedly since the shots rolled out. Four of the 15 died on the same day as that vaccine was given. Before the shots rolled out, Jay had lost only one friend unexpectedly. The probability this happened by chance is given by poisson.sf(14, .25) which is 5.6e-22. So this can’t happen by chance. SOMETHING killed Jay’s friends and 4 of the 15 died on the same day as they were vaccinated. Is there a more plausible explanation for what killed Jay’s friends? All of them who died were vaccinated with the COVID vaccines. Well done studies like the one done by Denis Rancourt showing 1 death per 800 shots on average. Jay Bonnar estimates he has around 14,000 friends so Jay’s numbers are consistent with Rancourt’s results. Survey data like Skidmore and Rasmussen Reports showing that hundreds of thousands of Americans have been killed by the COVID shots. There have never been any counter surveys published showing this not to be the case. The lack of any success stories. It appears that “vaccine success stories” where COVID infection fatality ratios dropped or that myocarditis cases plummeted do not exist. The US Nursing home data shows that the infection fatality rate (IFR) increased after the vaccine rolled out. There is nobody using that data making the claim it reduced the IFR. Anecdotes from healthcare are extremely troubling. One nurse reported a hospital admission rate that was 3X higher than anything in the 33-year history of the hospital after the COVID vaccines rolled out. Symptoms rarely ever seen were common after vaccines rolled out in that age group. Lack of autopsies in clinical trials and post-marketing. The CDC doesn’t request anyone to do autopsies even for people who die on the same day as they got the vaccine. Don’t they want to know what killed those people… just to be sure? Young people dying in sleep. There are way too many cases of young people who die in their sleep after being vaccinated. Doctors say this is a rare event. Now it is much more common. If the shots are safe, why is this happening? I have direct personal experience with the vaccine: two people I know were killed by the vaccine, none from COVID. I know many people who are vaccine injured from the COVID vaccine. Corruption in the VAERS system used to track adverse events. See this presentation by Albert Albert Benavides. In addition, the v-safe system showed that 8% of the people who got the vaccine had to see medical attention (which is in itself a train wreck), but the CDC refused to voluntarily disclose this important information and even today they don’t talk about it. The CDC covered up 770 safety signals. They didn’t tell the public about them at all. Not even hinting at them. A safety signal is very serious. To get one safety signal would be concerning. But to get 770 safety signals triggered (on 770 different adverse event types) and then not say anything to the public about it is a sure sign of a very corrupt public agency whose job is to protect the manufacturers, not the public. Ed Dowd’s book statistics. This very popular book (“Cause Unknown”) listed 500 who died unexpectedly. Ed didn’t know how many were unvaccinated. Only one person has come forward saying that one of the people in the book who died after the vaccines rolled out was unvaccinated. Prominent doctor/scientists switching sides. Paul Marik is one of the top intensivists in the world. After seeing many COVID vaccine injured patients, he changed his mind about the safety of vaccines. When he was not allowed to practice medicine consistent with his Hippocratic Oath, he resigned his position. The corruption with COVID protocols. The COVID hospital protocols likely caused 90% of the COVID deaths in hospitals. This led to Paul Marik resigning. See details in this article. Why are doctors forced to use hospital protocols that kill a huge percentage of patients instead of using their best judgment to save patients? This JAMA paper shows that COVID and influenza vaccines don’t work. Why are we pushing a vaccine where the statistics clearly show the vaccines don’t work? The consistency of the data. There have been no counter-anecdotes showing the vaccines are safe. I keep looking for one and come up empty. No debates with anyone prominent promoting the government narrative. Those who promote the narrative refuse to engage in any scientific discussions to resolve differences of opinion. This is similar to the question of whether vaccines cause autism: nobody who thinks it doesn’t is willing to engage in a public discussion about it to discuss the evidence. Why not resolve the issue through dialog? It isn’t resolved in the peer-review literature where half the papers say vaccines cause autism and the other half don’t. Why can’t we talk about it? Fear and intimidation tactics are used to silence dissent. Open debate would be more productive. But people are not allowed to hold or discuss views that go against the “consensus” or they will lose their jobs, their certifications, or their medical licenses. Health care workers are told they will be fired if they report an adverse event to VAERS, there are nurses who won’t talk about anaphylaxis after getting the vaccine for fear of being fired, vaccine injuries are covered up, hospital workers are afraid to talk about it at work. The cognitive dissonance is very disturbing. When healthcare workers bring up the topic of mortality and morbidity due to the vaccine, their peers say nothing and walk away. Censorship tactics employed by the US government to silence dissent instead of public recorded open debates. History has shown that purveyors of censorship are always on the wrong side of the issue. Liberty Justice Center Wins Battle for Doctors' First Amendment Rights as California Repeals Physician Censorship Law - Liberty Justice Center https://open.substack.com/pub/stevekirsch/p/a-summary-of-the-evidence-against?r=29hg4d&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
    OPEN.SUBSTACK.COM
    A summary of the evidence against the COVID vaccines
    Here's a quick summary of the key pieces of evidence that taken together show that the COVID vaccines are unsafe and that the medical community should not be trusted.
    Like
    1
    1 Comments 1 Shares 9849 Views
  • Covid Vaccine Injury Suit May Fuel Federal Overhaul, Litigation
    A lawsuit by Covid-19 vaccine recipients claiming they were injured by their shots may usher in long-awaited changes to how the federal government handles immunization injuries.

    Individuals frustrated by the HHS program designed to compensate them for their injuries are taking their grievances to court. In a lawsuit lodged with the US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, they say the program is unconstitutional, depriving them of their rights to due process and a jury trial.

    Lawyers say the move could spur Congress and the Department of Health and Human Services to reform how they handle vaccine injuries, as well as push more of the individuals alleging injuries to not just sue the government, but the drugmakers that the program is meant to shield from litigation.

    “‘This is the first domino to fall,” said David Carney, a Green & Schafle LLC attorney representing people injured by vaccines. “We’re going to start to see a windfall.”

    For years, attorneys and activists representing Americans injured by routine vaccinations have been pushing lawmakers to reform how the HHS reviews requests for compensation. They say that the process, dubbed the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, is in desperate need for more special masters to review the backlog of nearly 4,000 injury claims.

    Congress, they add, needs to expedite the process for adding new vaccines to the program, though lawmakers have yet to pull the trigger on legislation that’s been several years in the works.

    Covid vaccine injuries are not among those currently under the VICP. Those are filed with the HHS’ Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program.

    Created in 2010 to pay out damages for people injured in sudden health crises like Ebola and the Anthrax scare, critics say the CICP program is slow moving, opaque, and poorly equipped for handling the nearly 11,000 claims alleging Covid-related injuries awaiting or in review as of Oct. 1. And with a little more than 1,000 decisions reached, vaccine attorneys don’t expect the others to be resolved any time soon.

    Vaccine law experts say the path forward is reforming the VICP and bringing Covid-19 immunization injuries under its umbrella. But doing so takes both the HHS and Congress, and attorneys say efforts from both appear lagging.

    ‘Best Interest’

    Adding a vaccine to the VICP is no small feat. The HHS first has to recommend a jab for routine administration to children, and then the agency has two years to recommend that it be covered by the VICP.

    In the case for Covid vaccines, the HHS has already recommended jabs for routine administration to children. Through informal conversations with HHS employees, Carney said he and others in the vaccine law space were led to believe Covid vaccines were going to be moved over to the VICP, though the agency has yet to take any action to make that happen.

    Now, people suffering injuries allegedly from Covid vaccines “feel like the government is not acting in their best interest,” and are hiring attorneys, he said.

    The burden, however, doesn’t entirely lie with the HHS. In order for the VICP to actually pay out for Covid injuries, Congress would have to sign off on taxing the doses for the program, a process that applies to any vaccine added to the program.

    Over the past several years, lawmakers have put forth legislation to modernize the program. Earlier this year, Reps. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) and Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.) introduced bills that would move pending Covid-19 vaccine injury claims to the VICP, bring on more special masters to review cases, and eliminate the need for Congress to sign off on a tax for every vaccine added to the table.

    In October, React19—a group for people injured by Covid vaccines and a plaintiff in the lawsuit—briefed lawmakers about the need for changes.

    Renee Gentry, director of George Washington University Law School’s Vaccine Injury Litigation Clinic, presented alongside React19 and has been urging lawmakers for reforms for a decade.

    When it comes to getting Congress on board, she said “talking about vaccine on the Hill is a little bit like walking on the edge of a razorblade that’s on fire.”

    “It’s a very, very subtle dance up there,” she said, adding it’s nearly impossible to have a “reasoned, calm, specific” conversation about vaccines.

    Insufficient Remedy

    An HHS spokesperson likewise called out Congress for not fully funding the HHS’s budget request for the CICP, though noted the agency has tried making “meaningful CICP process improvement,” such as bringing on more medical reviewers and improving communications with people requesting benefits from the program.

    The spokesperson also said the Health Resources and Services Administration, the HHS entity that oversees the VICP and Countermeasures Program, is “working to establish” a table that would “list and explain injuries that, based on the statutory compelling, reliable, valid, medical, and scientific evidence standard, are presumed to be caused by covered COVID-19 countermeasures.”

    Gentry, however, said there’s a growing frustration with the CICP’s handling of Covid claims, and that the program is “not appropriate for anything on this scale.”

    In total, 12,233 Covid-19 claims have been filed with the CICP. More than 9,000 of those allege Covid-19 vaccines were involved in injuries or deaths. That’s the bulk of the 12,775 claims brought to the program over the past 13 years.

    While only a small fraction of Countermeasure Program’s Covid claims have been addressed, the overwhelming majority of those—1,235—have been denied. Most missed a filing deadline.

    The program has deemed 32 claims eligible for compensation; only 6 have resulted in compensation, all of which involved Covid-19 vaccines.

    “An unsatisfactory remedy has now shown itself to be unsatisfactory,” said Christina Ciampolillo, past president of the Vaccine Injured Petitioners Bar Association. “There’s not a lot of promise that you can point to for changes to the CICP in the future.”

    Nevertheless, in May, the HHS extended liability protections under the CICP until the end of 2024. After that, Ciampolillo said, it becomes an open question as to whether Covid vaccine manufacturers would be open to lawsuits from people alleging injury.

    “There’s a deadline there,” said Ciampolillo, an attorney at Conway Homer PC. “That’s kind of the no man’s land that everybody is wondering about.”

    More Lawsuits

    The lawsuit against the HHS may serve as the catalyst for ushering in change.

    “If case does move forward, I would suspect HHS would work more closely in concert to finally get these important bills that will streamline compensation moving,” said Brianne Dressen, co-chair of React19 who experienced blurred vision, severe paresthesia, and other afflictions after a shot of AstraZeneca’s Covid vaccine during a clinical trial.

    However, should the case fail, Dressen said her group would “continue to seek other avenues through the legal system,” including “other types of lawsuits” and applying more “pressure in the halls of Washington.”

    Likewise, vaccine injury attorneys said more lawsuits could follow.

    “There’s probably a large number of injured people, and the more negative outcomes that are realized through the CICP, I think you’ll have more frustrated individuals,” Ciampolillo said.

    The CICP essentially shields drugmakers from lawsuits. But Carney said that given there’s “not a sufficient legal forum to adjudicate” Covid-19 injury claims and that the CICP isn’t “a suitable alternative to civil tort litigation,” it is arguable that pharmaceutical companies could be next in line to be sued.

    “Very soon, we’re going to see people sue the vaccine manufacturers,” Carney said.


    PM can grace bloomberg forum but bloomberg might get POFMA?

    https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/covid-vaccine-injury-suit-may-fuel-federal-overhaul-litigation

    No paywall site
    https://archive.is/1qIga
    Covid Vaccine Injury Suit May Fuel Federal Overhaul, Litigation A lawsuit by Covid-19 vaccine recipients claiming they were injured by their shots may usher in long-awaited changes to how the federal government handles immunization injuries. Individuals frustrated by the HHS program designed to compensate them for their injuries are taking their grievances to court. In a lawsuit lodged with the US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, they say the program is unconstitutional, depriving them of their rights to due process and a jury trial. Lawyers say the move could spur Congress and the Department of Health and Human Services to reform how they handle vaccine injuries, as well as push more of the individuals alleging injuries to not just sue the government, but the drugmakers that the program is meant to shield from litigation. “‘This is the first domino to fall,” said David Carney, a Green & Schafle LLC attorney representing people injured by vaccines. “We’re going to start to see a windfall.” For years, attorneys and activists representing Americans injured by routine vaccinations have been pushing lawmakers to reform how the HHS reviews requests for compensation. They say that the process, dubbed the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, is in desperate need for more special masters to review the backlog of nearly 4,000 injury claims. Congress, they add, needs to expedite the process for adding new vaccines to the program, though lawmakers have yet to pull the trigger on legislation that’s been several years in the works. Covid vaccine injuries are not among those currently under the VICP. Those are filed with the HHS’ Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program. Created in 2010 to pay out damages for people injured in sudden health crises like Ebola and the Anthrax scare, critics say the CICP program is slow moving, opaque, and poorly equipped for handling the nearly 11,000 claims alleging Covid-related injuries awaiting or in review as of Oct. 1. And with a little more than 1,000 decisions reached, vaccine attorneys don’t expect the others to be resolved any time soon. Vaccine law experts say the path forward is reforming the VICP and bringing Covid-19 immunization injuries under its umbrella. But doing so takes both the HHS and Congress, and attorneys say efforts from both appear lagging. ‘Best Interest’ Adding a vaccine to the VICP is no small feat. The HHS first has to recommend a jab for routine administration to children, and then the agency has two years to recommend that it be covered by the VICP. In the case for Covid vaccines, the HHS has already recommended jabs for routine administration to children. Through informal conversations with HHS employees, Carney said he and others in the vaccine law space were led to believe Covid vaccines were going to be moved over to the VICP, though the agency has yet to take any action to make that happen. Now, people suffering injuries allegedly from Covid vaccines “feel like the government is not acting in their best interest,” and are hiring attorneys, he said. The burden, however, doesn’t entirely lie with the HHS. In order for the VICP to actually pay out for Covid injuries, Congress would have to sign off on taxing the doses for the program, a process that applies to any vaccine added to the program. Over the past several years, lawmakers have put forth legislation to modernize the program. Earlier this year, Reps. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) and Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.) introduced bills that would move pending Covid-19 vaccine injury claims to the VICP, bring on more special masters to review cases, and eliminate the need for Congress to sign off on a tax for every vaccine added to the table. In October, React19—a group for people injured by Covid vaccines and a plaintiff in the lawsuit—briefed lawmakers about the need for changes. Renee Gentry, director of George Washington University Law School’s Vaccine Injury Litigation Clinic, presented alongside React19 and has been urging lawmakers for reforms for a decade. When it comes to getting Congress on board, she said “talking about vaccine on the Hill is a little bit like walking on the edge of a razorblade that’s on fire.” “It’s a very, very subtle dance up there,” she said, adding it’s nearly impossible to have a “reasoned, calm, specific” conversation about vaccines. Insufficient Remedy An HHS spokesperson likewise called out Congress for not fully funding the HHS’s budget request for the CICP, though noted the agency has tried making “meaningful CICP process improvement,” such as bringing on more medical reviewers and improving communications with people requesting benefits from the program. The spokesperson also said the Health Resources and Services Administration, the HHS entity that oversees the VICP and Countermeasures Program, is “working to establish” a table that would “list and explain injuries that, based on the statutory compelling, reliable, valid, medical, and scientific evidence standard, are presumed to be caused by covered COVID-19 countermeasures.” Gentry, however, said there’s a growing frustration with the CICP’s handling of Covid claims, and that the program is “not appropriate for anything on this scale.” In total, 12,233 Covid-19 claims have been filed with the CICP. More than 9,000 of those allege Covid-19 vaccines were involved in injuries or deaths. That’s the bulk of the 12,775 claims brought to the program over the past 13 years. While only a small fraction of Countermeasure Program’s Covid claims have been addressed, the overwhelming majority of those—1,235—have been denied. Most missed a filing deadline. The program has deemed 32 claims eligible for compensation; only 6 have resulted in compensation, all of which involved Covid-19 vaccines. “An unsatisfactory remedy has now shown itself to be unsatisfactory,” said Christina Ciampolillo, past president of the Vaccine Injured Petitioners Bar Association. “There’s not a lot of promise that you can point to for changes to the CICP in the future.” Nevertheless, in May, the HHS extended liability protections under the CICP until the end of 2024. After that, Ciampolillo said, it becomes an open question as to whether Covid vaccine manufacturers would be open to lawsuits from people alleging injury. “There’s a deadline there,” said Ciampolillo, an attorney at Conway Homer PC. “That’s kind of the no man’s land that everybody is wondering about.” More Lawsuits The lawsuit against the HHS may serve as the catalyst for ushering in change. “If case does move forward, I would suspect HHS would work more closely in concert to finally get these important bills that will streamline compensation moving,” said Brianne Dressen, co-chair of React19 who experienced blurred vision, severe paresthesia, and other afflictions after a shot of AstraZeneca’s Covid vaccine during a clinical trial. However, should the case fail, Dressen said her group would “continue to seek other avenues through the legal system,” including “other types of lawsuits” and applying more “pressure in the halls of Washington.” Likewise, vaccine injury attorneys said more lawsuits could follow. “There’s probably a large number of injured people, and the more negative outcomes that are realized through the CICP, I think you’ll have more frustrated individuals,” Ciampolillo said. The CICP essentially shields drugmakers from lawsuits. But Carney said that given there’s “not a sufficient legal forum to adjudicate” Covid-19 injury claims and that the CICP isn’t “a suitable alternative to civil tort litigation,” it is arguable that pharmaceutical companies could be next in line to be sued. “Very soon, we’re going to see people sue the vaccine manufacturers,” Carney said. PM can grace bloomberg forum but bloomberg might get POFMA? https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/covid-vaccine-injury-suit-may-fuel-federal-overhaul-litigation No paywall site https://archive.is/1qIga
    NEWS.BLOOMBERGLAW.COM
    Covid Vaccine Injury Suit May Fuel Federal Overhaul, Litigation
    A lawsuit by Covid-19 vaccine recipients claiming they were injured by their shots may usher in long-awaited changes to how the federal government handles immunization injuries.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 9118 Views
  • Israeli October 7 posterchild was killed by Israeli tank, eyewitnesses reveal
    Max BlumenthalNovember 25, 2023

    Eyewitnesses to the October 7 hostage standoff in Kibbutz Be’eri have exposed Israel for misleading the world about the killings of 12-year-old Liel Hetzroni, her family and her neighbors.

    Update: A video transcript of Yasmin Porat’s testimony translated by David Sheen for Electronic Intifada follows this article.

    In a desperate bid for international sympathy, the Israeli government has sought to stir outrage over the killing of a 12-year-old girl during the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7.

    “This little girl’s body was burned so badly that it took forensic archeologists more than six weeks to identify her,” the Israeli Foreign Ministry declared on its official Twitter/X account. “All that remains of 12 year old Liel Hetzroni is ash and bone fragments. May her memory be a blessing.”


    Aviva Klompas, a former speechwriter for Israel’s United Nations mission and one of the country’s top English language social media propagandists, claimed on Twitter/X, “The terrorists massacred all of [the Hetzroni’s], then torched the building.”

    Naftali Bennett, the former Israeli Prime Minister, chimed in to proclaim that “Liel Hetzroni of Kibbutz Beeri was murdered in her home by Hamas monsters… We’re fighting the most just war: to ensure this can never happen again.”

    Liel Hetzroni was among the noncombatants killed in Kibbutz Be’eri when the small southern Israeli community was momentarily taken over by Hamas militants seeking captives to spur a prisoner exchange. During the standoff that ensued, she was killed instantly alongside twin brother, great-aunt and several other residents of Be’eri.

    However, the 12-year-old Hetzroni was not slain by Hamas. According to new testimony by an Israeli eyewitness to the girl’s death, she was killed by an Israeli tank shell alongside several neighbors.

    The revelation of Hetzroni’s friendly fire death came as reporting by the Israeli paper Haaretz confirmed a viral Grayzone investigation which highlighted disclosures by Israeli helicopter pilots and security officials of friendly fire orders throughout the fateful day.

    One came from a member of the security team for Kibbutz Be’eri, who told Haaretz that “the commanders in the field made difficult decisions – including shelling houses on their occupants in order to eliminate the terrorists along with the hostages.”

    A tank battalion commander recalled receiving the same orders when he arrived on the scene, stating in a video interview, “I arrived in Be’eri to see Brig. Gen. Barak Hiram and the first thing he asks me to do is to fire a shell into a house [where Hamas members were sheltering].”

    The decision to use heavy weapons on the small homes of Be’eri wound up costing many Israeli lives. Among them was the girl whose death has been weaponized to justify Israel’s brutal assault on Gaza. And for the first time, an eyewitness to the attack has come forward with the uncomfortable truth about the killing.

    “when those two shells hit, [Liel] stopped screaming”

    Yasmin Porat was among the Israelis taken hostage by Hamas militants in Be’eri on October 7. She had fled the Nova electronic music festival and sought shelter in the community when the militants arrived. In a November 15 interview with the Israeli national broadcaster, Kan News, Porat provided exclusive details of the standoff which badly undercut her government’s official narrative.

    Under the mistaken impression that they were surrounded by Israeli troops, who were actually largely absent at the time and in a discombobulated state, the Hamas gunmen sent hostages outside the home and phoned the Israeli police in an apparent attempt to negotiate their own exit.

    “You see that most of the kidnappings occurred in the morning, at 10, 11, 12,” Porat said. “By 3 [in the afternoon], every [Israeli] citizen thought the army was already everywhere. [The Hamas militants] could have taken us out and back [to Gaza] ten times. But they didn’t believe that was the situation, so they asked for the police.”

    When the Israeli special forces finally arrived on the scene, Porat said, a “ceasefire” ensued between Hamas and Israeli forces, and her own captor decided to surrender. To ensure his own safety, he stripped himself naked and used her as a human shield as he made his way toward the Israeli soldiers.

    After Porat was freed and her captor surrendered, she said 14 Israelis remained hostage under the guard of 39 Hamas militants. Among those left behind, she said, were twins, Liel and Yanai Hetzroni, along with their great-aunt and guardian, Ayala Hetzroni.

    “I sat there with the commander of the unit,” Porat recalled, “and I described to him what the house looks like, and where the terrorists are, and where the hostages are. I actually drew it for him: ‘Look, here, on the lawn there are four hostages that are lying this way on the lawn. Here are two that are lying under the terrace. And in the living room there is a woman lying like this, and a woman lying like this.”

    Porat explained, “I told [the Israeli commander] about the twins (Yanai and Liel Hatzroni) and their great-aunt (Ayala), I didn’t see them. You know what, when I left, they were the only ones I didn’t see. I heard Liel the whole time, so I know for certain that they were there.. I tried to explain to [the commander] that from somewhere near the kitchen, that’s where I heard the screams coming from. I didn’t see her, but I heard her, and I heard where the screams were coming from. I tried to explain to them where all the hostages were.”

    Underscoring the shoddy Israeli intelligence that made the October 7 Hamas operation possible, Porat said the soldiers did not believe that so many militants could be inside one home, or that such a large force could have penetrated the high-tech siege walls Israel had constructed around Gaza. “The first time I told [the Israeli special forces] that there are about 40 terrorists, they told me, ‘It can’t be. It seems like you’re exaggerating’… I told them, ‘There’s more of them than you.’ They didn’t believe me! It was still the naiveté of our army, as well.”

    By 4 PM, a gun battle began to rage between the militants inside the home and the Israeli special forces stationed across the street. After failing to dislodge the Hamas fighters, the Israelis called in a tank at 7:30 PM.

    Porat described a sense of panic as she watched the tank trundle into the small community: “I thought to myself, ‘Why are they shooting tank shells into the house?’ And I asked one of the people that was with me, “Why are they shooting?’ So they explained to me that it was to break the walls, in order to help cleanse the house.”

    From across the street, Porat heard two loud explosions. The tank had fired a couple of shells into the home. Laying down outside the house was her partner, Tal, another man named Tal, and the couple who owned the house, Adi and Hadas Dagan. There were also the 12-year-old twins, Liel and Yanai Hatsroni, along with their great-aunt.

    When the dust cleared, only Hadas Dagan emerged from the house alive.

    Porat said Dagan later told her, “‘Yasmin, when the two big booms hit, I felt like I flew in the air… It took me 2-3 minutes to open my eyes, I didn’t feel my body. I was completely paralyzed. When I opened my eyes, I saw that my Adi [Dagan] is dying… Your Tal also stopped moving at that point.”

    Dagan confirmed that the tank shells killed Liel Hatsroni: “‘The girl did not stop screaming for all those hours,” she told Porat, referring to Liel. “She didn’t stop screaming… [but] when those two shells hit, [Liel] stopped screaming. There was silence then.”

    Porat concluded, “So what can you take away from that? That after that very massive incident, the shooting, which concluded with two shells, that is pretty much when everyone died.”

    Dagan emphasized to Porat that none of the hostages had been intentionally killed by the Hamas fighters. “There were no executions, or anything like that. At least not the people with her,” Porat said.

    In a separate interview on October 15, Porat insisted the Palestinian militants “did not abuse us. They treated us very humanely.”

    It is impossible to know if the standoff between Israeli and Hamas forces at the Dagan home could have been resolved without bloodshed. But it is clear that the Israeli decision to shell the home with tanks wound up killing almost everyone inside, including the child who has become a centerpiece of Israel’s international anti-Hamas propaganda campaign. All the Israelis left behind, Porat said, was “a house full of corpses.”



    https://thegrayzone.com/2023/11/25/israels-october-7-propaganda-tank-eyewitnesses/
    Israeli October 7 posterchild was killed by Israeli tank, eyewitnesses reveal Max BlumenthalNovember 25, 2023 Eyewitnesses to the October 7 hostage standoff in Kibbutz Be’eri have exposed Israel for misleading the world about the killings of 12-year-old Liel Hetzroni, her family and her neighbors. Update: A video transcript of Yasmin Porat’s testimony translated by David Sheen for Electronic Intifada follows this article. In a desperate bid for international sympathy, the Israeli government has sought to stir outrage over the killing of a 12-year-old girl during the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7. “This little girl’s body was burned so badly that it took forensic archeologists more than six weeks to identify her,” the Israeli Foreign Ministry declared on its official Twitter/X account. “All that remains of 12 year old Liel Hetzroni is ash and bone fragments. May her memory be a blessing.” Aviva Klompas, a former speechwriter for Israel’s United Nations mission and one of the country’s top English language social media propagandists, claimed on Twitter/X, “The terrorists massacred all of [the Hetzroni’s], then torched the building.” Naftali Bennett, the former Israeli Prime Minister, chimed in to proclaim that “Liel Hetzroni of Kibbutz Beeri was murdered in her home by Hamas monsters… We’re fighting the most just war: to ensure this can never happen again.” Liel Hetzroni was among the noncombatants killed in Kibbutz Be’eri when the small southern Israeli community was momentarily taken over by Hamas militants seeking captives to spur a prisoner exchange. During the standoff that ensued, she was killed instantly alongside twin brother, great-aunt and several other residents of Be’eri. However, the 12-year-old Hetzroni was not slain by Hamas. According to new testimony by an Israeli eyewitness to the girl’s death, she was killed by an Israeli tank shell alongside several neighbors. The revelation of Hetzroni’s friendly fire death came as reporting by the Israeli paper Haaretz confirmed a viral Grayzone investigation which highlighted disclosures by Israeli helicopter pilots and security officials of friendly fire orders throughout the fateful day. One came from a member of the security team for Kibbutz Be’eri, who told Haaretz that “the commanders in the field made difficult decisions – including shelling houses on their occupants in order to eliminate the terrorists along with the hostages.” A tank battalion commander recalled receiving the same orders when he arrived on the scene, stating in a video interview, “I arrived in Be’eri to see Brig. Gen. Barak Hiram and the first thing he asks me to do is to fire a shell into a house [where Hamas members were sheltering].” The decision to use heavy weapons on the small homes of Be’eri wound up costing many Israeli lives. Among them was the girl whose death has been weaponized to justify Israel’s brutal assault on Gaza. And for the first time, an eyewitness to the attack has come forward with the uncomfortable truth about the killing. “when those two shells hit, [Liel] stopped screaming” Yasmin Porat was among the Israelis taken hostage by Hamas militants in Be’eri on October 7. She had fled the Nova electronic music festival and sought shelter in the community when the militants arrived. In a November 15 interview with the Israeli national broadcaster, Kan News, Porat provided exclusive details of the standoff which badly undercut her government’s official narrative. Under the mistaken impression that they were surrounded by Israeli troops, who were actually largely absent at the time and in a discombobulated state, the Hamas gunmen sent hostages outside the home and phoned the Israeli police in an apparent attempt to negotiate their own exit. “You see that most of the kidnappings occurred in the morning, at 10, 11, 12,” Porat said. “By 3 [in the afternoon], every [Israeli] citizen thought the army was already everywhere. [The Hamas militants] could have taken us out and back [to Gaza] ten times. But they didn’t believe that was the situation, so they asked for the police.” When the Israeli special forces finally arrived on the scene, Porat said, a “ceasefire” ensued between Hamas and Israeli forces, and her own captor decided to surrender. To ensure his own safety, he stripped himself naked and used her as a human shield as he made his way toward the Israeli soldiers. After Porat was freed and her captor surrendered, she said 14 Israelis remained hostage under the guard of 39 Hamas militants. Among those left behind, she said, were twins, Liel and Yanai Hetzroni, along with their great-aunt and guardian, Ayala Hetzroni. “I sat there with the commander of the unit,” Porat recalled, “and I described to him what the house looks like, and where the terrorists are, and where the hostages are. I actually drew it for him: ‘Look, here, on the lawn there are four hostages that are lying this way on the lawn. Here are two that are lying under the terrace. And in the living room there is a woman lying like this, and a woman lying like this.” Porat explained, “I told [the Israeli commander] about the twins (Yanai and Liel Hatzroni) and their great-aunt (Ayala), I didn’t see them. You know what, when I left, they were the only ones I didn’t see. I heard Liel the whole time, so I know for certain that they were there.. I tried to explain to [the commander] that from somewhere near the kitchen, that’s where I heard the screams coming from. I didn’t see her, but I heard her, and I heard where the screams were coming from. I tried to explain to them where all the hostages were.” Underscoring the shoddy Israeli intelligence that made the October 7 Hamas operation possible, Porat said the soldiers did not believe that so many militants could be inside one home, or that such a large force could have penetrated the high-tech siege walls Israel had constructed around Gaza. “The first time I told [the Israeli special forces] that there are about 40 terrorists, they told me, ‘It can’t be. It seems like you’re exaggerating’… I told them, ‘There’s more of them than you.’ They didn’t believe me! It was still the naiveté of our army, as well.” By 4 PM, a gun battle began to rage between the militants inside the home and the Israeli special forces stationed across the street. After failing to dislodge the Hamas fighters, the Israelis called in a tank at 7:30 PM. Porat described a sense of panic as she watched the tank trundle into the small community: “I thought to myself, ‘Why are they shooting tank shells into the house?’ And I asked one of the people that was with me, “Why are they shooting?’ So they explained to me that it was to break the walls, in order to help cleanse the house.” From across the street, Porat heard two loud explosions. The tank had fired a couple of shells into the home. Laying down outside the house was her partner, Tal, another man named Tal, and the couple who owned the house, Adi and Hadas Dagan. There were also the 12-year-old twins, Liel and Yanai Hatsroni, along with their great-aunt. When the dust cleared, only Hadas Dagan emerged from the house alive. Porat said Dagan later told her, “‘Yasmin, when the two big booms hit, I felt like I flew in the air… It took me 2-3 minutes to open my eyes, I didn’t feel my body. I was completely paralyzed. When I opened my eyes, I saw that my Adi [Dagan] is dying… Your Tal also stopped moving at that point.” Dagan confirmed that the tank shells killed Liel Hatsroni: “‘The girl did not stop screaming for all those hours,” she told Porat, referring to Liel. “She didn’t stop screaming… [but] when those two shells hit, [Liel] stopped screaming. There was silence then.” Porat concluded, “So what can you take away from that? That after that very massive incident, the shooting, which concluded with two shells, that is pretty much when everyone died.” Dagan emphasized to Porat that none of the hostages had been intentionally killed by the Hamas fighters. “There were no executions, or anything like that. At least not the people with her,” Porat said. In a separate interview on October 15, Porat insisted the Palestinian militants “did not abuse us. They treated us very humanely.” It is impossible to know if the standoff between Israeli and Hamas forces at the Dagan home could have been resolved without bloodshed. But it is clear that the Israeli decision to shell the home with tanks wound up killing almost everyone inside, including the child who has become a centerpiece of Israel’s international anti-Hamas propaganda campaign. All the Israelis left behind, Porat said, was “a house full of corpses.” https://thegrayzone.com/2023/11/25/israels-october-7-propaganda-tank-eyewitnesses/
    THEGRAYZONE.COM
    Israeli October 7 posterchild was killed by Israeli tank, eyewitnesses reveal - The Grayzone
    Eyewitnesses to the October 7 hostage standoff in Kibbutz Be’eri have exposed Israel for misleading the world about the killings of 12-year-old Liel Hetzroni, her family and her neighbors. Update: A video transcript of Yasmin Porat’s testimony translated by David Sheen for Electronic Intifada follows this article. In a desperate bid for international sympathy, the Israeli government has sought to stir outrage over the killing of a 12-year-old girl during the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7. “This […]
    0 Comments 0 Shares 10465 Views
  • “Zionism is Not Judaism”, “Insane Megalomania”: The Zionist Cause Is a Dark Reversal of the Real Destiny of Israel — A True Story

    All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

    To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

    Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

    ***

    During the Summer of 1975 I worked as a volunteer on a Kibbutz in Northern Israel, close to the border with Lebanon. As a recent organic farming exponent in the UK, I wanted to explore how this unique socioeconomic experiment on the land was working.

    Although my stay in Israel was relatively short, it was an intense and meaningful experience. One which, as you will see as this story unfolds, throws a highly prescient light on the current catastrophe.

    There were maybe two hundred residents of the kibbutz, named ‘Rosh Ha Nikra’.

    One rose early and went to work on the land, coming back for a common breakfast at 9.a.m. It was too hot to work later in the mornings so one returned to the fields late afternoon to put in another session.

    At its inception, the basis of this community was carved out of a desert. Only an intense commitment to establishing an enduring self-sufficient village could turn the sour, salty land into something capable of growing sufficient food to provide for its occupants and a trading income.

    By the time I visited, there was already a thriving rural economy in operation, growing and exporting avocado pears and dairy products. Houses and land are integrated as a cooperative in the kibbutz movement, with no private ownership.

    Being situated close to the Lebanese border had its disadvantages. Missiles were periodically launched into surrounding territory as unresolved hostilities flared-up intermittently on the border land. It was disconcerting to an outsider, but the Rosh Ha Nikra community was hardened to this reality and did not let it break their daily routines.

    I am not Jewish, but have worked closely with Jewish colleagues in theatre and education projects based largely in the USA and Belgium. This led me to become interested in further exploring the background to the Israeli/Palestinian tensions that dog the peaceful functioning of the ‘two-state’ land division established in 1948.

    In a break from the Kibbutz work schedule, I was fortuitously given the opportunity to meet a senior figure of the Israeli military in Haifa. A kind, thoughtful individual who was close to retirement.

    Questioning him about his perspective on Israeli/Palestinian tensions, he responded in a way that threw a highly significant light on the reality. I recount here my memory of the deeply prescient contents of what he said:

    “Israel is not a country. The word in Hebrew means ‘to strive with God’ (to work with God). It is a tribal aspiration, it is not a place. To give the name Israel to this area of land is a falsification. It comes from the Zionist belief that this country is the original homeland of the Jews. There is no historical evidence for this belief, it is a dangerous fixation. Zionism is not Judaism.”

    At the time I was not fully aware of the ramifications of this reply; however it vividly endured in my mind from there on.

    My host asked what places I intended to visit in Israel. Definitely Jerusalem, I replied. His response was quite firm “Go beyond Jerusalem into the West Bank; into Jordan. Experience this place where Jordanians and Palestinian refugees live and work together.”

    I took his advice, initially boarding a bus to Jerusalem. It was here that I first experienced an uneasy tension between Palestinian and Jewish citizens.

    It should be remembered that a number of holy sites in Jerusalem are places of worship for both Palestinians and Jews. The ancient claims of both parties to the rights of ‘ownership’ of these sites causes an atmosphere of distrust and suspicion to never be far from the surface. Over the years, many bloody incidents have flared-up out of this febrile tension.

    Within deeper spiritual texts of old, bestowing imaginary religious powers on material objects and buildings, is considered a form of blasphemy of God, whose omniscient presence is recognised as a manifestation of infinite spirit, giving equal status to all races, colours, creeds and places. A manifestation of universal truth, not a proclamation about rights of ownership.

    This reflects on just why associating ‘Israel’ with a material possession would completely distort the true significance the epithet ‘To strive with God’.

    After exploring the impressive but austere architecture of old Jerusalem, I stepped into a colourful, creaking bus heading down into the ancient city of Jericho.

    Immediately the atmosphere lifted. The bus and its occupants slowly weaved its way down a long twisting road into the fertile valley below, while Arabic songs wailed out from the radio and the air became perfumed by sweet incense. Arabic headdresses replaced the casual Westernised attire of most Israelis.

    Outside, barren mountain slopes predominated, but in a number of places basic agricultural cultivations were in progress.

    Upon arriving in Old Jericho, a hoard of young men exuberantly offered their services to show visitors the local sites. I duly accepted the services of a young man with a broad smile, a good approximation of the English language and a promise of full knowledge of the relics of this ancient city.

    After a long day spent walking the ruins and rugged path ways, my guide asked me where I was staying. I don’t know, was my reply. Did he recommend anywhere?

    No he didn’t, advising it was not a good idea to stay in a local hotel. Instead, he invited me to his family home and to attend a ceremony celebrating the birth of his brother’s first child. A raucous event of much fraternal dancing and singing into which I was fully integrated.

    During more quiet moments my host told me about living in a form of Israeli police state. He admitted the tensions, but never spoke badly of the occupiers of his homeland, even praising Jewish agricultural achievements made on the barren hills East of Jerusalem.

    I spent a further few days visiting local townships; mostly peaceful, but some of the larger market towns, like Nablus, widely patrolled by Israeli armed police clearly expecting trouble.

    A few weeks later I left the country, with a strong impression left imprinted on my mind: on the kibbutz I was treated as a co-worker – and in Jordan I was treated as a brother. It was possible for me to see how these two quite different cultures could coexist in peace.

    But this could only work if the Israeli population would adopt the wisdom of the military leader I met in Haifa; and the Palestinians echo the respect for Israeli workers shown by my young Jordanian friend. Such qualities, forming the foundation of humanitarian inter-cultural respect, are the best, and perhaps only, chance for lasting peace and unity.

    Almost fifty years later, my reflections are not dimmed. However they have been dashed on the rocks of a terrible political deception which has now emerged as the catalyst for an ethnic cleansing nightmare that blows apart any opportunity for a peaceful resolution.

    This is a conflict created by the dark spin doctors of the New World Order. It is part of a deadly and carefully planned chess game designed to wipe Palestine, Gaza and the Palestinian people off the map and free-up the country of Israel to become the Zionist capital of the world.

    Prime Minister Netanyahu has publicly declared as much. For him and his fanatical Zionist colleagues, it is ‘God’s will’ that they should obliterate any and all opposition to the ‘chosen race’ achieving its ends.

    The great majority of Jews I know – and I believe the one’s I don’t – are appalled by this utterly insane megalomania. They have seen through the distortions and lies that surround the supposed preordained right of total ‘possession’ of this ancient strip of land at the Eastern most point of the Mediterranean sea.

    Those warm hearted brothers, sisters and elders who presently live in Israel, hold the key to the restoration of sanity.

    I most ardently call upon them to show the courage and irrevocable determination to resist Netanyahu’s mass extermination plans.

    Such resistance has the potential to catalyse a large ground swell of bottom-up support from around the world; but to do so – it must start from within Israel itself and embody:

    Total non compliance with political orders.
    A nationwide refusal to to be party to the murder of fellow human beings.
    A solid rebuttal of the demands of military recruitment.
    A ‘pro humanity’ expression of unequivocal solidarity with Palestinian brothers, sisters and children who share the same territory and know it as home; and whose fate it is to be subject to the view that they are ‘animals’ destined for the slaughter house.
    No thinking, feeling, self-respecting Israelite could fall into line with such depravity.

    Israel, as I learned, means ‘to strive with God’. A fine and liberating ideal. So if one is proud to be an Israeli citizen, one should know that this means to carry out actions that will be smiled upon by one’s Creator.

    This is the true ideological goal of the tribe of Israel.

    Anything else is a falsehood and must be recognised as that.

    Not just for the sake of preventing an unimaginable tragedy for the people of Palestine and of Israel, but for all of humanity.

    *

    Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

    Julian Rose is an organic farmer, writer, broadcaster and international activist. He is author of four books of which the latest ‘Overcoming the Robotic Mind’ is a clarion call to resist the despotic New World Order takeover of our lives. Do visit his website for further information www.julianrose.info

    He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

    Featured image is by Latuff, 2006 (Source: Looking out at the World from Canada)


    https://www.globalresearch.ca/zionist-cause-dark-reversal-real-destiny-israel-true-story/5840693
    “Zionism is Not Judaism”, “Insane Megalomania”: The Zionist Cause Is a Dark Reversal of the Real Destiny of Israel — A True Story All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name. To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here. Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles. *** During the Summer of 1975 I worked as a volunteer on a Kibbutz in Northern Israel, close to the border with Lebanon. As a recent organic farming exponent in the UK, I wanted to explore how this unique socioeconomic experiment on the land was working. Although my stay in Israel was relatively short, it was an intense and meaningful experience. One which, as you will see as this story unfolds, throws a highly prescient light on the current catastrophe. There were maybe two hundred residents of the kibbutz, named ‘Rosh Ha Nikra’. One rose early and went to work on the land, coming back for a common breakfast at 9.a.m. It was too hot to work later in the mornings so one returned to the fields late afternoon to put in another session. At its inception, the basis of this community was carved out of a desert. Only an intense commitment to establishing an enduring self-sufficient village could turn the sour, salty land into something capable of growing sufficient food to provide for its occupants and a trading income. By the time I visited, there was already a thriving rural economy in operation, growing and exporting avocado pears and dairy products. Houses and land are integrated as a cooperative in the kibbutz movement, with no private ownership. Being situated close to the Lebanese border had its disadvantages. Missiles were periodically launched into surrounding territory as unresolved hostilities flared-up intermittently on the border land. It was disconcerting to an outsider, but the Rosh Ha Nikra community was hardened to this reality and did not let it break their daily routines. I am not Jewish, but have worked closely with Jewish colleagues in theatre and education projects based largely in the USA and Belgium. This led me to become interested in further exploring the background to the Israeli/Palestinian tensions that dog the peaceful functioning of the ‘two-state’ land division established in 1948. In a break from the Kibbutz work schedule, I was fortuitously given the opportunity to meet a senior figure of the Israeli military in Haifa. A kind, thoughtful individual who was close to retirement. Questioning him about his perspective on Israeli/Palestinian tensions, he responded in a way that threw a highly significant light on the reality. I recount here my memory of the deeply prescient contents of what he said: “Israel is not a country. The word in Hebrew means ‘to strive with God’ (to work with God). It is a tribal aspiration, it is not a place. To give the name Israel to this area of land is a falsification. It comes from the Zionist belief that this country is the original homeland of the Jews. There is no historical evidence for this belief, it is a dangerous fixation. Zionism is not Judaism.” At the time I was not fully aware of the ramifications of this reply; however it vividly endured in my mind from there on. My host asked what places I intended to visit in Israel. Definitely Jerusalem, I replied. His response was quite firm “Go beyond Jerusalem into the West Bank; into Jordan. Experience this place where Jordanians and Palestinian refugees live and work together.” I took his advice, initially boarding a bus to Jerusalem. It was here that I first experienced an uneasy tension between Palestinian and Jewish citizens. It should be remembered that a number of holy sites in Jerusalem are places of worship for both Palestinians and Jews. The ancient claims of both parties to the rights of ‘ownership’ of these sites causes an atmosphere of distrust and suspicion to never be far from the surface. Over the years, many bloody incidents have flared-up out of this febrile tension. Within deeper spiritual texts of old, bestowing imaginary religious powers on material objects and buildings, is considered a form of blasphemy of God, whose omniscient presence is recognised as a manifestation of infinite spirit, giving equal status to all races, colours, creeds and places. A manifestation of universal truth, not a proclamation about rights of ownership. This reflects on just why associating ‘Israel’ with a material possession would completely distort the true significance the epithet ‘To strive with God’. After exploring the impressive but austere architecture of old Jerusalem, I stepped into a colourful, creaking bus heading down into the ancient city of Jericho. Immediately the atmosphere lifted. The bus and its occupants slowly weaved its way down a long twisting road into the fertile valley below, while Arabic songs wailed out from the radio and the air became perfumed by sweet incense. Arabic headdresses replaced the casual Westernised attire of most Israelis. Outside, barren mountain slopes predominated, but in a number of places basic agricultural cultivations were in progress. Upon arriving in Old Jericho, a hoard of young men exuberantly offered their services to show visitors the local sites. I duly accepted the services of a young man with a broad smile, a good approximation of the English language and a promise of full knowledge of the relics of this ancient city. After a long day spent walking the ruins and rugged path ways, my guide asked me where I was staying. I don’t know, was my reply. Did he recommend anywhere? No he didn’t, advising it was not a good idea to stay in a local hotel. Instead, he invited me to his family home and to attend a ceremony celebrating the birth of his brother’s first child. A raucous event of much fraternal dancing and singing into which I was fully integrated. During more quiet moments my host told me about living in a form of Israeli police state. He admitted the tensions, but never spoke badly of the occupiers of his homeland, even praising Jewish agricultural achievements made on the barren hills East of Jerusalem. I spent a further few days visiting local townships; mostly peaceful, but some of the larger market towns, like Nablus, widely patrolled by Israeli armed police clearly expecting trouble. A few weeks later I left the country, with a strong impression left imprinted on my mind: on the kibbutz I was treated as a co-worker – and in Jordan I was treated as a brother. It was possible for me to see how these two quite different cultures could coexist in peace. But this could only work if the Israeli population would adopt the wisdom of the military leader I met in Haifa; and the Palestinians echo the respect for Israeli workers shown by my young Jordanian friend. Such qualities, forming the foundation of humanitarian inter-cultural respect, are the best, and perhaps only, chance for lasting peace and unity. Almost fifty years later, my reflections are not dimmed. However they have been dashed on the rocks of a terrible political deception which has now emerged as the catalyst for an ethnic cleansing nightmare that blows apart any opportunity for a peaceful resolution. This is a conflict created by the dark spin doctors of the New World Order. It is part of a deadly and carefully planned chess game designed to wipe Palestine, Gaza and the Palestinian people off the map and free-up the country of Israel to become the Zionist capital of the world. Prime Minister Netanyahu has publicly declared as much. For him and his fanatical Zionist colleagues, it is ‘God’s will’ that they should obliterate any and all opposition to the ‘chosen race’ achieving its ends. The great majority of Jews I know – and I believe the one’s I don’t – are appalled by this utterly insane megalomania. They have seen through the distortions and lies that surround the supposed preordained right of total ‘possession’ of this ancient strip of land at the Eastern most point of the Mediterranean sea. Those warm hearted brothers, sisters and elders who presently live in Israel, hold the key to the restoration of sanity. I most ardently call upon them to show the courage and irrevocable determination to resist Netanyahu’s mass extermination plans. Such resistance has the potential to catalyse a large ground swell of bottom-up support from around the world; but to do so – it must start from within Israel itself and embody: Total non compliance with political orders. A nationwide refusal to to be party to the murder of fellow human beings. A solid rebuttal of the demands of military recruitment. A ‘pro humanity’ expression of unequivocal solidarity with Palestinian brothers, sisters and children who share the same territory and know it as home; and whose fate it is to be subject to the view that they are ‘animals’ destined for the slaughter house. No thinking, feeling, self-respecting Israelite could fall into line with such depravity. Israel, as I learned, means ‘to strive with God’. A fine and liberating ideal. So if one is proud to be an Israeli citizen, one should know that this means to carry out actions that will be smiled upon by one’s Creator. This is the true ideological goal of the tribe of Israel. Anything else is a falsehood and must be recognised as that. Not just for the sake of preventing an unimaginable tragedy for the people of Palestine and of Israel, but for all of humanity. * Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles. Julian Rose is an organic farmer, writer, broadcaster and international activist. He is author of four books of which the latest ‘Overcoming the Robotic Mind’ is a clarion call to resist the despotic New World Order takeover of our lives. Do visit his website for further information www.julianrose.info He is a regular contributor to Global Research. Featured image is by Latuff, 2006 (Source: Looking out at the World from Canada) https://www.globalresearch.ca/zionist-cause-dark-reversal-real-destiny-israel-true-story/5840693
    WWW.GLOBALRESEARCH.CA
    "Zionism is Not Judaism", "Insane Megalomania": The Zionist Cause Is a Dark Reversal of the Real Destiny of Israel — A True Story
    All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name. To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here. Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 26140 Views
  • In a world inundated with self-help gurus and get-rich-quick schemes, it's rare to stumble upon a narrative as intriguing as the one shared by Alex Maxwell in his captivating video on wealth manifestation. The hook is simple but compelling: humans use only 8% of their DNA, and the key to unimaginable wealth lies dormant in the remaining 92%. As skeptical as one might be, Maxwell promises a revelation that challenges conventional wisdom about money and success.

    Maxwell introduces the concept of "Wealth DNA," nestled within the supposedly dismissed 92% labeled as "Junk DNA" by mainstream scientists. According to Maxwell, this dormant genetic treasure trove holds the secret to financial abundance, and it's a truth he stumbled upon through an unexpected encounter with a former NASA scientist, Jim.

    Jim's clandestine journey from NASA to a local dive bar, where he reveals the suppressed findings of a secret experiment, adds an element of intrigue to Maxwell's story. The experiment, involving the activation of DNA through sound frequencies, seems like a blend of science fiction and ancient mysticism. The revelation that NASA's interest in Chakras and frequencies was tied to attracting wealth adds a layer of credibility to an otherwise extraordinary tale.

    The connection between DNA and Chakras is a pivotal point in Maxwell's narrative. While Chakras have been part of spiritual discourse for centuries, Maxwell argues that they are, in fact, our spiritual DNA. The link between the 12 strands of human DNA and the 12 Chakra points is a novel perspective that bridges the gap between ancient spiritual teachings and modern scientific discoveries.

    The story takes an unexpected turn as Maxwell and Jim attempt to decode the notes obtained from NASA. The involvement of Maxwell's nephew, a codebreaker at the FBI, adds a suspenseful twist to the narrative. The revelation of specific frequencies, reminiscent of Pythagoras's "sacred geometry" and the power of sound waves, further fuels the story's mystique.

    However, the tale encounters a hurdle when the promised activation of Wealth DNA through audio tracks fails to yield immediate results. Maxwell's candid admission of disappointment and doubt injects a relatable human element into the story. The narrative, despite its fantastical elements, becomes grounded in the shared experience of frustration and skepticism.

    As Maxwell contemplates giving up on the experiment, the audience is left in suspense. The unresolved nature of the story leaves room for anticipation, questioning the legitimacy of the experiment and the effectiveness of the discovered frequencies. It's a cliffhanger that invites viewers to ponder the delicate balance between scientific inquiry and the quest for personal transformation.

    In conclusion, Alex Maxwell's journey from financial struggle to the pursuit of wealth manifestation, intertwined with NASA's secret experiment and the unlocking of Wealth DNA, offers a unique blend of science and spirituality. Whether the tale ultimately leads to financial prosperity or remains a cautionary fable, Maxwell's storytelling prowess keeps the audience engaged, prompting them to question the boundaries of belief and the untapped potential within their own DNA.

    CLICK HERE==>> https://sites.google.com/view/wealthmanifestation23/home



    In a world inundated with self-help gurus and get-rich-quick schemes, it's rare to stumble upon a narrative as intriguing as the one shared by Alex Maxwell in his captivating video on wealth manifestation. The hook is simple but compelling: humans use only 8% of their DNA, and the key to unimaginable wealth lies dormant in the remaining 92%. As skeptical as one might be, Maxwell promises a revelation that challenges conventional wisdom about money and success. Maxwell introduces the concept of "Wealth DNA," nestled within the supposedly dismissed 92% labeled as "Junk DNA" by mainstream scientists. According to Maxwell, this dormant genetic treasure trove holds the secret to financial abundance, and it's a truth he stumbled upon through an unexpected encounter with a former NASA scientist, Jim. Jim's clandestine journey from NASA to a local dive bar, where he reveals the suppressed findings of a secret experiment, adds an element of intrigue to Maxwell's story. The experiment, involving the activation of DNA through sound frequencies, seems like a blend of science fiction and ancient mysticism. The revelation that NASA's interest in Chakras and frequencies was tied to attracting wealth adds a layer of credibility to an otherwise extraordinary tale. The connection between DNA and Chakras is a pivotal point in Maxwell's narrative. While Chakras have been part of spiritual discourse for centuries, Maxwell argues that they are, in fact, our spiritual DNA. The link between the 12 strands of human DNA and the 12 Chakra points is a novel perspective that bridges the gap between ancient spiritual teachings and modern scientific discoveries. The story takes an unexpected turn as Maxwell and Jim attempt to decode the notes obtained from NASA. The involvement of Maxwell's nephew, a codebreaker at the FBI, adds a suspenseful twist to the narrative. The revelation of specific frequencies, reminiscent of Pythagoras's "sacred geometry" and the power of sound waves, further fuels the story's mystique. However, the tale encounters a hurdle when the promised activation of Wealth DNA through audio tracks fails to yield immediate results. Maxwell's candid admission of disappointment and doubt injects a relatable human element into the story. The narrative, despite its fantastical elements, becomes grounded in the shared experience of frustration and skepticism. As Maxwell contemplates giving up on the experiment, the audience is left in suspense. The unresolved nature of the story leaves room for anticipation, questioning the legitimacy of the experiment and the effectiveness of the discovered frequencies. It's a cliffhanger that invites viewers to ponder the delicate balance between scientific inquiry and the quest for personal transformation. In conclusion, Alex Maxwell's journey from financial struggle to the pursuit of wealth manifestation, intertwined with NASA's secret experiment and the unlocking of Wealth DNA, offers a unique blend of science and spirituality. Whether the tale ultimately leads to financial prosperity or remains a cautionary fable, Maxwell's storytelling prowess keeps the audience engaged, prompting them to question the boundaries of belief and the untapped potential within their own DNA. CLICK HERE==>> https://sites.google.com/view/wealthmanifestation23/home
    0 Comments 0 Shares 9330 Views
  • A Planned US-Israeli Attack on Iran is Contemplated
    The U.S. led War on the People of Palestine and the Middle East is a Criminal Undertaking


    Introduction

    We stand in Solidarity with Palestine. But we must recognize that the United States Military and Intelligence apparatus is firmly behind Israel’s genocide directed against the People of Palestine.

    .

    And this must be part of the solidarity campaign, namely to Reveal the Truth regarding Washington’s insidious role, which is part of a carefully planned military agenda directed against Palestine and the broader Middle East. Netanyahu is a proxy, with a criminal record. He has the unbending support of Western Europe’s “Classe politique”.

    .

    The U.S. led War on the People of Palestine and the Middle East is a Criminal Undertaking

    Israel and the Zionist lobby in the U.S. are NOT exerting undue influence AGAINST U.S. Foreign Policy as outlined by numerous analysts.

    Quite the opposite. The Zionist lobby is firmly aligned with U.S. foreign policy, and Vice Versa. It targets those who are opposed to war, who call for a cease fire. It exerts influence in favour of the conduct of the U.S. military agenda in support of Israel.



    The US military-intelligence establishment in coordination with powerful financial interests is calling the shots in regards to Israel’s genocidal intent to “Wipe Palestine off the Map”.

    .

    America’s Military Doctrine: Deliberately Targeting and Killing Civilians

    The targeting of civilians and the killing of children in Gaza is modelled on numerous US sponsored massacres of civilians (1945-2023) including the 2004 attack on Fallujah. (More than 30 Million mainly civilian deaths in US-led wars in what is euphemistically called the “post War Era”).
    .

    Veteran War correspondent Felicity Arbuthnot reflected on the indescribable barbarity of the 2004 Fallujah massacre, which resulted in countless deaths and destruction. It was a genocide conducted by the U.S military:
    .

    “The Americans invaded, chillingly: “house to house, room to room”, raining death and destruction on the proud, ancient “City of Mosques.”

    Marines killed so many civilians that the municipal soccer stadium had to be turned into a graveyard …

    One correspondent wrote: “There has been nothing like the attack on Fallujah since the Nazi invasion and occupation of much of the European continent – the shelling and bombing of Warsaw in September 1939, the terror bombing of Rotterdam in May 1940.”



    Fallujah, 2004

    .

    The U.S. is supportive of the Israeli genocide directed against the people of Palestine. Prime Minister Netanyahu is a criminal. He is Washington’s proxy, unreservedly endorsed and supported by the Biden Administration as well as the U.S. Congress.

    .

    Zionism constitutes the ideological underpinnings of contemporary U.S. imperialism and its unending war against the people of the Middle East.

    .

    The Zionist “Greater Israel” dogma –as in all wars of religion since the dawn of mankind– is there to mislead people Worldwide as to “who is really pulling the strings”.

    .

    Zionism has become a useful instrument which is embodied in U.S. military doctrine. The “Promised Land” broadly coincides with America’s hegemonic agenda in the Middle East, namely what the U.S. military has designated as the “New Middle East”.

    .

    Cui Bono: “To Whom Does it Benefit”

    There are strategic, geopolitical and economic objectives behind Israel’s genocide directed against the people of Palestine. “Crimes are often committed to benefit their perpetrators”: Israel’s War against the People of Palestine serves the interests of Big Money, the Military Industrial Complex, Corrupt Politicians…

    The Genocide is implemented by Netanyahu on behalf of the United States.

    The US military and intelligence apparatus are behind Israel’s criminal bombing and invasion of Gaza. The unfolding Middle East War is largely directed against Iran.

    .

    .

    Iran and the Nuclear Issue

    Historical Antecedents. Using Israel As a Means to Attacking Iran

    In 2003, the war on Iran project (Operation Theatre Iran Near Term, TIRANNT)) was already Déjà Vu. It had been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than 15 years.

    Let us recall that at the outset of Bush’s Second Term, Vice President Dick Cheney dropped a bombshell, hinting, in no uncertain terms, that Iran was “right at the top of the list” of the rogue enemies of America. And that Israel would, so to speak,

    “be doing the bombing for us” [paraphrase] , without US military involvement and without us putting pressure on them “to do it”. For further details see my article below was first published by Global Research in May 2005, as well as PBS Interview with Z. Brzezinski

    This Dick Cheney-style option is currently (November 2023) once more on the drawing board of the Pentagon, namely the possibility that Israel which is already bombing Lebanon and Syria, would be incited to wage an attack on Iran (acting on behalf of the United States).

    US Congress Resolution (H. RES. 559) Accuses Iran of Possessing Nuclear Weapons

    Careful timing: In June 2023, the US House of Representatives adopted Resolution (H. RES. 559) which provides a “Green Light” to wage war on Iran.

    The US House passed a resolution that allows the use of force against Iran, intimating without a shred of evidence that Iran has Nuclear Weapons:

    Resolved, That the House of Representatives declares it is the policy of the United States—

    (1) that a nuclear Islamic Republic of Iran is not acceptable;

    (2) that Iran must not be able to obtain a nuclear weapon under any circumstances or conditions;

    (3) to use all means necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon; and

    (4) to recognize and support the freedom of action of partners and allies, including Israel, to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

    Click below to access the complete text of H. RES 559



    Israel’s Undeclared Nuclear Weapons Arsenal

    Whereas Iran is tagged (without evidence) as a Nuclear Power by the U.S. House of Representatives, Washington fails to acknowledge that Israel is an undeclared nuclear power.

    In recent developments, Israeli Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu, “admitted to the world that Israel has nuclear weapons ready to be used against Palestinians”

    The Times of Israel reported that: “Amichai Eliyahu said Sunday [November 5, 2023] that one of Israel’s options in the war against Hamas was to drop a nuclear bomb on the Gaza Strip”

    Video on Israel’s Nuclear Weapons Facility

    English subtitles



    .

    .

    The War on Energy

    Unspoken Objective of a US-NATO-Israel War against Iran: Natural Gas

    Reserves of Natural Gas: Iran ranks Second after Russia. Russia, Iran and Qatar possess 54.1 percent of the World’s reserves of natural gas.

    -Russia 24.3%,

    -Iran 17.3%,

    -Qatar, 12.5 % (in partnership with Iran)

    versus

    -5.3 % for the US

    President Joe Biden ordered to “blow up” (September 2022) the Nordstream Pipeline, which constitutes a U.S. Act of War against the European Union.

    In the words of Joe Biden:

    “There will be no longer a Nord Stream 2”. Statement at White House Press Conference (February 7, 2022)

    America’s strategic objective was, despite its meagre reserves of natural gas:

    To Force the European Union to buy LNG “Made in America”.

    What this implies is that America’s military agenda against Russia and Iran constitutes a means to hike up EU energy prices, which is an act economic warfare against the People of Europe.






    The Iran-Qatar Natural Gas Partnership

    The maritime gas reserves of the Persian Gulf are under a (joint ownership) partnership between Qatar and Iran (See diagram below).





    The Biden Administration is Intent upon Destabilizing the Iran-Qatar Partnership

    This partnership is supportive of the People of Palestine.

    In March 2022, “President Joe Biden following a meeting with Qatar’s Emir Sheik Tamim “designated Qatar as a major non-NATO ally of the United States, fulfilling the promise that he had made to Qatar earlier this year [2022], the White House said” Reuters



    “The designation is granted by the United States to close, non-NATO allies that have strategic working relationships with the U.S. military.

    Biden promised Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, in January [2022] during a meeting at the White House that he would grant Qatar the special status.” Reuters See also followup Reuters article.

    What is at stake are cross-cutting coalitions. Qatar is a “Partner” of Iran in relation to the strategic reserves of maritime gas in the Persian Gulf. There is no formaI military cooperation between the two countries.

    Washington’s unspoken agenda is to break and/or destabilize Qatar’s Partnership with Iran, by integrating Qatar into the US-NATO military orbit.

    It is worth noting that a few days prior to the October 7, 2023 Hamas operation, the Emir of Qatar Sheik Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani “laid the foundation stone for the Northern Dome expansion project” in Iran’s Pars South Field (See map above).

    “the Emir of Qatar said the groundbreaking for the Northern Dome expansion project was laid today, which is in line with Qatar’s strategy to strengthen its position as a global LNG producer …

    This joint gas field, known as “South Pars” in Iran, is the largest natural gas field in the world and contains 50.97 trillion cubic meters of gas and about 7.9 billion cubic meters of natural gas condensate.

    At the time of writing, the implications of Qatar’s “Special Status” Military Alliance with the U.S. remain unclear.

    America’s Al-Udeid military base in Qatar (left) is the largest US base in the Middle East.

    Have the status and functions of Al Udeid changed since the signing of the March 2022 agreement designating Qatar as a “Major Non NATO Ally of the US”

    Qatar is both A Partner of Iran as well as a Major Non NATO Ally of the U.S. Reports confirm the development of a close relationship between the commanders of the US Air Force and the Qatari Emiri Air Force.

    Qatar is a “Powder Keg”?

    The U.S. foreign policy objective is to ultimately destroy and undermine that “friendship” with Iran which is highly valued and supported by Qatari citizens.

    The export of gas from South Pars North Dome transits through Iran, Turkey and Russia.

    Qatar, Russia and Iran (the 3 largest holders Worldwide of natural gas reserves) reached an agreement in 2009 to create a ‘Gas Troika’, a trilateral gas cooperation entity including the development of joint projects.

    A large number of countries including South Korea, India, Japan, China are importing LNG from Qatar.

    Last year (November 2022), “QatarEnergy signed a 27-year deal to supply China’s Sinopec with liquefied natural gas”. Qatar has also a strategic alliance with China.

    Washington’s objective under the disguise of America’s “Major Non-NATO Alliance” with Qatar is to:

    Break the Qatar-Iran Partnership
    Exclude Iran from the Joint Maritime Gas Field
    Exert US Control over the Maritime Gas Field in the Persian Gulf
    Weaken and Disable the “Gas Troika” (Russia, Iran, Qatar)
    Create Chaos in the Global Energy Market,
    Undermine the Trade in Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) to Numerous Countries
    .

    Iran. Third Largest Reserves of Oil Worldwide

    Iran is not only second in terms of its gas reserves after Russia, it ranks third Worldwide in relation to its oil reserves (12% of Worldwide oil reserves) versus a meagre 4% for the U.S.








    The Ben Gurion Canal Project

    .

    U.S. Seeks Dominance over Strategic International Waterways

    The Ben Gurion Canal Project was initially a “secret” (classified) U.S. project formulated in 1963 by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory LLNG, a strategic think tank (focussing on nuclear radiation) on contract with the U.S Department of Energy. The LLNG project was formulated in response to the nationalization of the Suez Canal in July 1956 by President Gamal Abdel Nasser (1956-1970). Its intent was to bypass the Suez Canal.

    The Ben Gurion Canal project is currently contemplated as means control the channels of international maritime trade to the detriment of the people of the Middle East. It also seeks to destabilize China’s maritime commodity trade.



    In the context of the broader US-led Middle East War, the Ben Gurion Canal Project is part of America’s hegemonic military agenda. It is consistent with Netanyahu’s “Plan to Wipe Palestine Off the Map”.

    According to Yvonne Ridley:

    “The only thing stopping the newly-revised [Ben Gurion Canal] project from being revived and rubber-stamped is the presence of the Palestinians in Gaza. As far as Netanyahu is concerned they are standing in the way of the project” (Yvonne Ridley, November 10, 2023, emphasis added)

    The U.S led war is intent upon confiscating all Palestinian territories, which would be appropriated by the State of Israel, acting as a strategic “Anglo-American Hub” in the Middle East:

    The Ben Gurion Canal will give Israel in particular and other friendly nations the freedom from blackmail arising out of access to the Suez Canal.

    Arab states have been leveraging the Red Sea to pressure Israel and in response, Israel has decided to gain more control of the Red Sea. These African countries have cultural and economic affinities with the Arab states. One of the main military benefits for Israel is that it gives Israel the strategic options as the Ben Gurion Canal will totally take away the importance of Suez for the US military if needed in the aid for Israel.

    Israel aims to push Egypt further into a corner by eliminating Suez in the global trade and energy corridor and becoming a global trade and energy logistics center.

    Experts are of the opinion that this situation will shake the strategic-energy balance of China’s Belt and Road Project initiative in the Mediterranean, along with the Strait of Hormuz, which is the transfer point of 30 percent of the world’s energy. The Ben Gurion Canal would have the solid backing of the West. (Eurasia Review, November 7, 2023, emphasis added)

    .

    “Greater Israel”.

    Strategic “Anglo-American Hub”

    The Promised Land of Greater Israel coincides with America’s Colonial Design in the Middle East

    The Greater Israel design is not strictly a Zionist Project for the Middle East, it is an integral part of US foreign policy, its strategic objective is to extend US hegemony as well as fracture and balkanize the Middle East.

    In this regard, Washington’s strategy consists in destabilizing and weakening regional economic powers in the Middle East including Turkey and Iran. This policy –which is consistent with the Greater Israel– is accompanied by a process of political fragmentation.



    Since the Gulf war (1991), the Pentagon has contemplated the creation of a “Free Kurdistan” which would include the annexation of parts of Iraq, Syria and Iran as well as Turkey



    “The New Middle East”: Unofficial US Military Academy Map by Lt. Col. Ralph Peters

    .

    “America’s Promised Land”. Global Warfare

    When viewed in the current context, including the siege on Gaza, the Zionist Plan for the Middle East coincides with America’s long war against the Middle East. As we mentioned earlier the Zionist agenda provides an ideological and religious justification of America’s long war against the Middle East.

    The 1979-80. the so-called Soviet Afghan War, engineered by the CIA
    The 1980-88 Iraq-Iran War engineered by the U.S.
    The 1991 Gulf War against Iraq,
    The 2001 The US-NATO Invasion of Afghanistan,
    The 2003 Invasion of Iraq
    The 2006 War on Lebanon,
    The Arab Spring,
    The 2011 war on Libya,
    The 2015 war on Yemen
    Obama’s 2014-2017 “Counter-Terrorism” Operation against Iraq and Syria
    The ongoing wars against Syria, Iraq and Yemen
    The “Greater Israel” project consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of a US-Israeli expansionist project, with the support of NATO.

    Needless to day, the ideological and religious underpinnings of the “Greater Israel” project are consistent with America’s imperial design.

    While the Zionist agenda is not the driving force, it serves the useful purpose of misleading public opinion concerning America’s long war against the people of the Middle East.

    The Historical Context: A Sequence of Military Plans and Scenarios to Wage War on Iran

    Since the launching of the Theater Iran Near Term (TIRANNT) war games scenario in May 2003 (leaked classified doc), an escalation scenario involving military action directed against Iran and Syria had been envisaged, of which Syria was the first stage.

    TIRANNT was followed by a series of military plans pertaining to Iran. Numerous post 9/11 official statements and US military documents had pointed to an expanded Middle East war, involving the active participation of Israel.

    Israel is America’s ally. Military operations are closely coordinated. Israel does not act without Washington’s approval.

    U.S.-Israeli Air Defense

    Barely acknowledged by the media, the US and Israel have an integrated air defense system, which was set up in early 2009, shortly after the Israel invasion of Gaza under “Operation Cast Led”.

    The X-band radar air defense system set up by the US in Israel in 2009 would

    “integrate Israel’s missile defenses with the U.S. global missile detection network, which includes satellites, Aegis ships on the Mediterranean, Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and land-based Patriot radars and interceptors.” (Sen. Joseph Azzolina, Protecting Israel from Iran’s missiles, Bayshore News, December 26, 2008). )

    What this means is that Washington calls the shots. Confirmed by the Pentagon, the US military controls Israel’s Air Defense:

    ”This is and will remain a U.S. radar system,’ Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said.

    ‘So this is not something we are giving or selling to the Israelis and it is something that will likely require U.S. personnel on-site to operate.’” (Quoted in Israel National News, January 9, 2009, emphasis added).

    At the outset of Obama’s Second Term, the US and Israel initiated discussions pertaining to a “US personnel on site” presence in Israel, namely the establishment of a “permanent” and “official” military base inside Israel.

    And on September 17, 2017, a US Air Defense base located in the Negev desert was inaugurated.

    According to the Israeli IDF spokesperson, the objective is to send a “message to the region, ” including Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Palestine.

    Of utmost relevance:

    Israel would not be able to act unilaterally against Iran, without a green light from the Pentagon which controls key components of Israel’s air defense system.

    In practice, a war on Iran, would be a joint US-NATO-Israeli endeavor, coordinated by US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with America’s allies playing a key (subordinate) role.

    Michel Chossudovsky, October 31, 2017, November 11, 2023

    Planned US-Israeli Attack on Iran

    by

    Michel Chossudovsky

    May 2005

    At the outset of Bush’s second term, Vice President Dick Cheney dropped a bombshell. He hinted, in no uncertain terms, that Iran was “right at the top of the list” of the rogue enemies of America, and that Israel would, so to speak, “be doing the bombing for us”, without US military involvement and without us putting pressure on them “to do it”:

    “One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it without being asked… Given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards,” (quoted from an MSNBC Interview Jan 2005)

    Israel is a Rottweiler on a leash: The US wants to “set Israel loose” to attack Iran. Commenting the Vice President’s assertion, former National Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski in an interview on PBS, confirmed with some apprehension, yes: Cheney wants Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to act on America’s behalf and “do it” for us:

    “Iran I think is more ambiguous. And there the issue is certainly not tyranny; it’s nuclear weapons. And the vice president today in a kind of a strange parallel statement to this declaration of freedom hinted that the Israelis may do it and in fact used language which sounds like a justification or even an encouragement for the Israelis to do it.”

    The foregoing statements are misleading. The US is not “encouraging Israel”. What we are dealing with is a joint US-Israeli military operation to bomb Iran, which has been in the active planning stage for more than a year. The Neocons in the Defense Department, under Douglas Feith, have been working assiduously with their Israeli military and intelligence counterparts, carefully identifying targets inside Iran (see Seymour Hersh)

    Under this working arrangement, Israel will not act unilaterally, without a green light from Washington. In other words, Israel will not implement an attack without the participation of the US.

    Covert Intelligence Operations: Stirring Ethnic Tensions in Iran

    Meanwhile, for the last two years, Washington has been involved in covert intelligence operations inside Iran. American and British intelligence and special forces (working with their Israeli counterparts) are involved in this operation.

    “A British intelligence official said that any campaign against Iran would not be a ground war like the one in Iraq. The Americans will use different tactics, said the intelligence officer. ‘It is getting quite scary.'” (Evening Standard, 17 June 2003)

    The expectation is that a US-Israeli bombing raid of Iran’s nuclear facilities will stir up ethnic tensions and trigger “regime change” in favor of the US. (See Arab Monitor).

    Bush advisers believe that the “Iranian opposition movement” will unseat the Mullahs. This assessment constitutes a gross misjudgment of social forces inside Iran. What is more likely to occur is that Iranians will consistently rally behind a wartime government against foreign aggression. In fact, the entire Middle East and beyond would rise up against US interventionism.

    Retaliation in the Case of a US-Israeli Aerial Attack

    Tehran has confirmed that it will retaliate if attacked, in the form of ballistic missile strikes directed against Israel (CNN, 8 Feb 2005). These attacks, could also target US military facilities in the Persian Gulf, which would immediately lead us into a scenario of military escalation and all out war.

    In other words, the air strikes against Iran could contribute to unleashing a war in the broader Middle East Central Asian region.

    Moreover, the planned attack on Iran should also be understood in relation to the timely withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon, which has opened up a new space, for the deployment of Israeli forces. The participation of Turkey in the US-Israeli military operation is also a factor, following an agreement reached between Ankara and Tel Aviv.

    In other words, US and Israeli military planners must carefully weigh the far-reaching implications of their actions.

    Israel Builds up its Stockpile of Deadly Military Hardware

    A massive buildup in military hardware has occurred in preparation for a possible attack on Iran.

    Israel has recently taken delivery from the US of some 5,000 “smart air launched weapons” including some 500 BLU 109 ‘bunker-buster bombs. The (uranium coated) munitions are said to be more than “adequate to address the full range of Iranian targets, with the possible exception of the buried facility at Natanz, which may require the [more powerful] BLU-113 bunker buster“:

    “Given Israel’s already substantial holdings of such weapons, this increase in its inventory would allow a sustained assault with or without further US involvement.” (See Richard Bennett)

    Gbu 28 Guided Bomb Unit-28 (GBU-28)

    The Israeli Air Force would attack Iran’s nuclear facility at Bushehr using US as well Israeli produced bunker buster bombs. The attack would be carried out in three separate waves “with the radar and communications jamming protection being provided by U.S. Air Force AWACS and other U.S. aircraft in the area”. (See W Madsen)

    Bear in mind that the bunker buster bombs can also be used to deliver tactical nuclear bombs. The B61-11 is the “nuclear version” of the “conventional” BLU 113. It can be delivered in much same way as the conventional bunker buster bomb. (See Michel Chossudovsky, see also this)

    According to the Pentagon, tactical nuclear weapons are “safe for civilians”. Their use has been authorized by the US Senate. (See Michel Chossudovsky)

    Moreover, reported in late 2003, Israeli Dolphin-class submarines equipped with US Harpoon missiles armed with nuclear warheads are now aimed at Iran. (See Gordon Thomas)

    Even if tactical nuclear weapons are not used by Israel, an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities not only raises the specter of a broader war, but also of nuclear radiation over a wide area:

    “To attack Iran’s nuclear facilities will not only provoke war, but it could also unleash clouds of radiation far beyond the targets and the borders of Iran.” (Statement of Prof Elias Tuma, Arab Internet Network, Federal News Service, 1 March 2005)

    Moreover, while most reports have centered on the issue of punitive air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the strikes would most probably extend to other targets.

    While a ground war is contemplated as a possible “scenario” at the level of military planning, the US military would not be able to wage a an effective ground war, given the situation in Iraq. In the words of former National Security Adviser Lawrence Eagelberger:

    “We are not going to get in a ground war in Iran, I hope. If we get into that, we are in serious trouble. I don’t think anyone in Washington is seriously considering that.” ( quoted in the National Journal, 4 December 2004).

    Iran’s Military Capabilities

    Despite its overall weaknesses in relation to Israel and the US, Iran has an advanced air defense system, deployed to protect its nuclear sites; “they are dispersed and underground making potential air strikes difficult and without any guarantees of success.” (Jerusalem Post, 20 April 2005).

    It has upgraded its Shahab-3 missile, which can reach targets in Israel. Iran’s armed forces have recently conducted high-profile military exercises in anticipation of a US led attack. Iran also possesses some 12 X-55 strategic cruise missiles, produced by Ukraine. Iran’s air defense systems is said to feature Russian SA-2, SA-5, SA-6 as well as shoulder-launched SA-7 missiles (Jaffa Center for Strategic Studies).

    The US “Military Road Map”

    The Bush administration has officially identified Iran and Syria as the next stage of “the road map to war”.

    Targeting Iran is a bipartisan project, which broadly serves the interests of the Anglo-American oil conglomerates, the Wall Street financial establishment and the military-industrial complex.

    The broader Middle East-Central Asian region encompasses more than 70% of the World’s reserves of oil and natural gas. Iran possesses 10% of the world’s oil and ranks third after Saudi Arabia (25 %) and Iraq (11 %) in the size of its reserves. In comparison, the US possesses less than 2.8 % of global oil reserves. (See Eric Waddell, The Battle for Oil)

    The announcement to target Iran should come as no surprise. It is part of the battle for oil. Already during the Clinton administration, US Central Command (USCENTCOM) had formulated “in war theater plans” to invade both Iraq and Iran:

    “The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the President’s National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Chairman’s National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of the United States Central Command’s theater strategy. The NSS directs implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests, to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. Dual containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM’s theater strategy is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement, as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States’ vital interest in the region – uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil. (USCENTCOM, USPolicy , emphasis added)

    Main Military Actors

    While the US, Israel, as well as Turkey (with borders with both Iran and Syria) are the main actors in this process, a number of other countries, in the region, allies of the US, including several Central Asian former Soviet republics have been enlisted. Britain is closely involved despite its official denials at the diplomatic level. Turkey occupies a central role in the Iran operation. It has an extensive military cooperation agreement with Israel. There are indications that NATO is also formally involved in the context of an Israel-NATO agreement reached in November 2004.

    Planning The Aerial Attack on Iran

    According to former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, George W. Bush has already signed off on orders for an aerial attack on Iran, scheduled for June.(See this)

    The June cut-off date should be understood. It does not signify that the attack will occur in June. What it suggests is that the US and Israel are “in a state of readiness” and are prepared to launch an attack by June or at a later date. In other words, the decision to launch the attack has not been made.

    Ritter’s observation concerning an impending military operation should nonetheless be taken seriously. In recent months, there is ample evidence that a major military operation is in preparation:

    1) several high profile military exercises have been conducted in recent months, involving military deployment and the testing of weapons systems.

    2) military planning meetings have been held between the various parties involved. There has been a shuttle of military and government officials between Washington, Tel Aviv and Ankara.

    3) A significant change in the military command structure in Israel has occurred, with the appointment of a new Chief of Staff.

    4) Intense diplomatic exchanges have been carried out at the international level with a view to securing areas of military cooperation and/or support for a US-Israeli led military operation directed against Iran.

    5) Ongoing intelligence operations inside Iran have been stepped up.

    6) Consensus Building: Media propaganda on the need to intervene in Iran has been stepped up, with daily reports on how Iran constitutes a threat to peace and global security.

    Timeline of Key Initiatives

    In the last few months, various key initiatives have been taken, which are broadly indicative that an aerial bombing of Iran is in the military pipeline:

    November 2004 in Brussels: NATO-Israel protocol: Israel’s IDF delegation to the NATO conference to met with military brass of six members of the Mediterranean basin nations, including Egypt, Jordan, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria and Mauritania. NATO seeks to revive the framework, known as the Mediterranean Dialogue program, which would include Israel. The Israeli delegation accepted to participate in military exercises and “anti-terror maneuvers” together with several Arab countries.

    January 2005: the US, Israel and Turkey held military exercises in the Eastern Mediterranean, off the coast of Syria. These exercises, which have been held in previous years were described as routine.

    February 2005. Following the decision reached in Brussels in November 2004, Israel was involved for the first time in military exercises with NATO, which also included several Arab countries.

    February 2005: Assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The assassination, which was blamed on Syria, serves Israeli and US interests and was used as a pretext to demand the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon.

    February 2005: Sharon fires his Chief-of-Staff, Moshe Ya’alon and appoints Air Force General Dan Halutz. This is the first time in Israeli history that an Air Force General is appointed Chief of Staff (See Uri Avnery)

    The appointment of Major General Dan Halutz as IDF Chief of Staff is considered in Israeli political circles as “the appointment of the right man at the right time.” The central issue is that a major aerial operation against Iran is in the planning stage, and Maj General Halutz is slated to coordinate the aerial bombing raids on Iran. Halutz’s appointment was specifically linked to Israel’s Iran agenda: “As chief of staff, he will in the best position to prepare the military for such a scenario.”

    March 2005: NATO’s Secretary General was in Jerusalem for follow-up talks with Ariel Sharon and Israel’s military brass, following the joint NATO-Israel military exercise in February. These military cooperation ties are viewed by the Israeli military as a means to “enhance Israel’s deterrence capability regarding potential enemies threatening it, mainly Iran and Syria.” The premise underlying NATO-Israel military cooperation is that Israel is under attack:

    “The more Israel’s image is strengthened as a country facing enemies who attempt to attack it for no justified reason, the greater will be the possibility that aid will be extended to Israel by NATO. Furthermore, Iran and Syria will have to take into account the possibility that the increasing cooperation between Israel and NATO will strengthen Israel’s links with Turkey, also a member of NATO. Given Turkey’s impressive military potential and its geographic proximity to both Iran and Syria, Israel’s operational options against them, if and when it sees the need, could gain considerable strength. ” (Jaffa Center for Strategic Studies, http://www.tau.ac.il/jcss/sa/v7n4p4Shalom.html )

    The Israel-NATO protocol is all the more important because it obligates NATO to align itself with the US-Israeli plan to bomb Iran, as an act of self defense on the part of Israel. It also means that NATO is also involved in the process of military consultations relating to the planned aerial bombing of Iran. It is of course related to the bilateral military cooperation agreement between Israel and Turkey and the likelihood that part of the military operation will be launched from Turkey, which is a member of NATO.

    Late March 2005: News leaks in Israel indicated an “initial authorization” by Prime Minster Ariel Sharon of an Israeli attack on Iran’s Natanz uranium enrichment plant “if diplomacy failed to stop Iran’s nuclear program”. (The Hindu, 28 March 2005)

    March-April 2005: The Holding in Israel of Joint US-Israeli military exercises specifically pertaining to the launching of Patriot missiles.

    US Patriot missile crews stationed in Germany were sent to Israel to participate in the joint Juniper Cobra exercise with the Israeli military. The exercise was described as routine and “unconnected to events in the Middle East”: “As always, we are interested in implementing lessons learned from training exercises.” (UPI, 9 March 2005).

    April 2005: Donald Rumsfeld (right) was on an official visits to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan and Azerbaijan. His diplomatic endeavors were described by the Russian media as “literally circling Iran in an attempt to find the best bridgehead for a possible military operation against that country.”

    In Baku, Azerbaijan Rumsfeld was busy discussing the date for deployment of US troops in Azerbaijan on Iran’s North-Western border. US military bases described as “mobile groups” in Azerbaijan are slated to play a role in a military operation directed against Iran.

    Azerbaijan is a member of GUUAM, a military cooperation agreement with the US and NATO, which allows for the stationing of US troops in several of the member countries, including Georgia, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan. The stated short term objective is to “neutralize Iran”. The longer term objective under the Pentagon’s “Caspian Plan” is to exert military and economic control over the entire Caspian sea basin, with a view to ensuring US authority over oil reserves and pipeline corridors.

    During his visit in April, Rumsfeld was pushing the US initiative of establishing “American special task forces and military bases to secure US influence in the Caspian region:

    “Called Caspian Watch, the project stipulates a network of special task forces and police units in the countries of the regions to be used in emergencies including threats to objects of the oil complex and pipelines. Project Caspian Watch will be financed by the United States ($100 million). It will become an advance guard of the US European Command whose zone of responsibility includes the Caspian region. Command center of the project with a powerful radar is to be located in Baku.” ( Defense and Security Russia, April 27, 2005)

    Rumsfeld’s visit followed shortly after that of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami’s to Baku.

    April 2005: Iran signs a military cooperation with Tajikistan, which occupies a strategic position bordering Afghanistan’s Northern frontier. Tajikistan is a member of “The Shanghai Five” military cooperation group, which also includes Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia. Iran also has economic cooperation agreements with Turkmenistan.

    Mid April 2005: Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon meets George W Bush at his Texas Ranch. Iran is on the agenda of bilateral talks. More significantly, the visit of Ariel Sharon was used to carry out high level talks between US and Israeli military planners pertaining to Iran.

    Late April 2005. President Vladmir Putin is in Israel on an official visit. He announces Russia’s decision to sell short-range anti-aircraft missiles to Syria and to continue supporting Iran’s nuclear industry. Beneath the gilded surface of international diplomacy, Putin’s timely visit to Israel must be interpreted as “a signal to Israel” regarding its planned aerial attack on Iran.

    Late April 2005: US pressure in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been exerted with a view to blocking the re-appointment of Mohammed Al Baradei, who according to US officials “is not being tough enough on Iran…” Following US pressures, the vote on the appointment of a new IAEA chief was put off until June. These developments suggest that Washington wants to put forth their own hand-picked nominee prior to launching US-Israeli aerial attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities. (See VOA). (In February 2003, Al Baradei along with UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix challenged the (phony) intelligence on WMD presented by the US to the UN Security Council, with a view to justifying the war on Iraq.)

    Late April 2005. Sale of deadly military hardware to Israel. GBU-28 Buster Bunker Bombs: Coinciding with Putin’s visit to Israel, the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency (Department of Defense) announced the sale of an additional 100 bunker-buster bombs produced by Lockheed Martin to Israel. This decision was viewed by the US media as “a warning to Iran about its nuclear ambitions.”

    The sale pertains to the larger and more sophisticated “Guided Bomb Unit-28 (GBU-28) BLU-113 Penetrator” (including the WGU-36A/B guidance control unit and support equipment). The GBU-28 is described as “a special weapon for penetrating hardened command centers located deep underground. The fact of the matter is that the GBU-28 is among the World’s most deadly “conventional” weapons used in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, capable of causing thousands of civilian deaths through massive explosions.

    The Israeli Air Force are slated to use the GBU-28s on their F-15 aircraft. (See text of DSCA news release)

    Late April 2005- early May: Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (right) in Israel for follow-up talks with Ariel Sharon. He was accompanied by his Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul, who met with senior Israeli military officials. On the official agenda of these talks: joint defense projects, including the joint production of Arrow II Theater Missile Defense and Popeye II missiles. The latter also known as the Have Lite, are advanced small missiles, designed for deployment on fighter planes. Tel Aviv and Ankara decide to establish a hotline to share intelligence.

    May 2005: Syrian troops scheduled to withdraw from Lebanon, leading to a major shift in the Middle East security situation, in favor of Israel and the US.

    Iran Surrounded

    The US has troops and military bases in Turkey, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, and of course Iraq.

    In other words, Iran is virtually surrounded by US military bases. (see Map below). These countries as well as Turkmenistan, are members of NATO`s partnership for Peace Program and have military cooperation agreements with NATO.



    Copyright Eric Waddell, Global Research, 2003

    In other words, we are dealing with a potentially explosive scenario in which a number of countries, including several former Soviet republics, could be brought into a US led war with Iran. IranAtom.ru, a Russian based news and military analysis group has suggested, in this regard:

    “since Iranian nuclear objects are scattered all over the country, Israel will need a mass strike with different fly-in and fly-out approaches – Jordan, Iraq, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and other countries… Azerbaijan seriously fears Tehran’s reaction should Baku issue a permit to Israeli aircraft to overfly its territory.” (Defense and Security Russia, 12 April 2005).

    Concluding remarks

    The World is at an important crossroads.

    The Bush Administration has embarked upon a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity.

    Iran is the next military target. The planned military operation, which is by no means limited to punitive strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities, is part of a project of World domination, a military roadmap, launched at the end of the Cold War.

    Military action against Iran would directly involve Israel’s participation, which in turn is likely to trigger a broader war throughout the Middle East, not to mention an implosion in the Palestinian occupied territories. Turkey is closely associated with the proposed aerial attacks.

    Israel is a nuclear power with a sophisticated nuclear arsenal. (See text box below). The use of nuclear weapons by Israel or the US cannot be excluded, particularly in view of the fact that tactical nuclear weapons have now been reclassified as a variant of the conventional bunker buster bombs and are authorized by the US Senate for use in conventional war theaters. (“they are harmless to civilians because the explosion is underground”)

    In this regard, Israel and the US rather than Iran constitute a nuclear threat.

    The planned attack on Iran must be understood in relation to the existing active war theaters in the Middle East, namely Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine.

    The conflict could easily spread from the Middle East to the Caspian sea basin. It could also involve the participation of Azerbaijan and Georgia, where US troops are stationed.

    An attack on Iran would have a direct impact on the resistance movement inside Iraq. It would also put pressure on America’s overstretched military capabilities and resources in both the Iraqi and Afghan war theaters. (The 150,000 US troops in Iraq are already fully engaged and could not be redeployed in the case of a war with Iran.)

    In other words, the shaky geopolitics of the Central Asia- Middle East region, the three existing war theaters in which America is currently, involved, the direct participation of Israel and Turkey, the structure of US sponsored military alliances, etc. raises the specter of a broader conflict.

    Moreover, US military action on Iran not only threatens Russian and Chinese interests, which have geopolitical interests in the Caspian sea basin and which have bilateral agreements with Iran. It also backlashes on European oil interests in Iran and is likely to produce major divisions between Western allies, between the US and its European partners as well as within the European Union.

    Through its participation in NATO, Europe, despite its reluctance, would be brought into the Iran operation. The participation of NATO largely hinges on a military cooperation agreement reached between NATO and Israel. This agreement would bind NATO to defend Israel against Syria and Iran. NATO would therefore support a preemptive attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, and could take on a more active role if Iran were to retaliate following US-Israeli air strikes.

    Needless to say, the war against Iran is part of a longer term US military agenda which seeks to militarize the entire Caspian sea basin, eventually leading to the destabilization and conquest of the Russian Federation.

    The Antiwar Movement

    The antiwar movement must act, consistently, to prevent the next phase of this war from happening.

    This is no easy matter. The holding of large antiwar rallies will not in itself reverse the tide of war.

    High ranking officials of the Bush administration, members of the military and the US Congress have been granted the authority to uphold an illegal war agenda.

    What is required is a grass roots network, a mass movement at national and international levels, which challenges the legitimacy of the military and political actors, and which is ultimately instrumental in unseating those who rule in our name.

    War criminals occupy positions of authority. The citizenry is galvanized into supporting the rulers, who are “committed to their safety and well-being”. Through media disinformation, war is given a humanitarian mandate.

    To reverse the tide of war, military bases must be closed down, the war machine (namely the production of advanced weapons systems) must be stopped and the burgeoning police state must be dismantled.

    The corporate backers and sponsors of war and war crimes must also be targeted including the oil companies, the defense contractors, the financial institutions and the corporate media, which has become an integral part of the war propaganda machine.

    Antiwar sentiment does not dismantle a war agenda. The war criminals in the US, Israel and Britain must be removed from high office.

    What is needed is to reveal the true face of the American Empire and the underlying criminalization of US foreign policy, which uses the “war on terrorism” and the threat of Al Qaeda to galvanize public opinion in support of a global war agenda.

    Israel’s Nuclear Capabilities

    With between 200 and 500 thermonuclear weapons and a sophisticated delivery system, Israel has quietly supplanted Britain as the World’s 5th Largest nuclear power, and may currently rival France and China in the size and sophistication of its nuclear arsenal. Although dwarfed by the nuclear arsenals of the U.S. and Russia, each possessing over 10,000 nuclear weapons, Israel nonetheless is a major nuclear power, and should be publicly recognized as such.

    Today, estimates of the Israeli nuclear arsenal range from a minimum of 200 to a maximum of about 500. Whatever the number, there is little doubt that Israeli nukes are among the world’s most sophisticated, largely designed for “war fighting” in the Middle East. A staple of the Israeli nuclear arsenal are “neutron bombs,” miniaturized thermonuclear bombs designed to maximize deadly gamma radiation while minimizing blast effects and long term radiation- in essence designed to kill people while leaving property intact.(16) Weapons include ballistic missiles and bombers capable of reaching Moscow…

    The bombs themselves range in size from “city busters” larger than the Hiroshima Bomb to tactical mini nukes. The Israeli arsenal of weapons of mass destruction clearly dwarfs the actual or potential arsenals of all other Middle Eastern states combined, and is vastly greater than any conceivable need for “deterrence.”

    Many Middle East Peace activists have been reluctant to discuss, let alone challenge, the Israeli monopoly on nuclear weapons in the region, often leading to incomplete and uninformed analyses and flawed action strategies. Placing the issue of Israeli weapons of mass destruction directly and honestly on the table and action agenda would have several salutary effects. First, it would expose a primary destabilizing dynamic driving the Middle East arms race and compelling the region’s states to each seek their own “deterrent.”

    Second, it would expose the grotesque double standard which sees the U.S. and Europe on the one hand condemning Iraq, Iran and Syria for developing weapons of mass destruction, while simultaneously protecting and enabling the principal culprit. Third, exposing Israel’s nuclear strategy would focus international public attention, resulting in increased pressure to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction and negotiate a just peace in good faith. Finally, a nuclear free Israel would make a Nuclear Free Middle East and a comprehensive regional peace agreement much more likely. Unless and until the world community confronts Israel over its covert nuclear program it is unlikely that there will be any meaningful resolution of the Israeli/Arab conflict, a fact that Israel may be counting on as the Sharon era dawns.

    From John Steinbach, Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal, Global Research



    https://www.globalresearch.ca/planned-us-israeli-attack-on-iran-2/5615443
    A Planned US-Israeli Attack on Iran is Contemplated The U.S. led War on the People of Palestine and the Middle East is a Criminal Undertaking Introduction We stand in Solidarity with Palestine. But we must recognize that the United States Military and Intelligence apparatus is firmly behind Israel’s genocide directed against the People of Palestine. . And this must be part of the solidarity campaign, namely to Reveal the Truth regarding Washington’s insidious role, which is part of a carefully planned military agenda directed against Palestine and the broader Middle East. Netanyahu is a proxy, with a criminal record. He has the unbending support of Western Europe’s “Classe politique”. . The U.S. led War on the People of Palestine and the Middle East is a Criminal Undertaking Israel and the Zionist lobby in the U.S. are NOT exerting undue influence AGAINST U.S. Foreign Policy as outlined by numerous analysts. Quite the opposite. The Zionist lobby is firmly aligned with U.S. foreign policy, and Vice Versa. It targets those who are opposed to war, who call for a cease fire. It exerts influence in favour of the conduct of the U.S. military agenda in support of Israel. The US military-intelligence establishment in coordination with powerful financial interests is calling the shots in regards to Israel’s genocidal intent to “Wipe Palestine off the Map”. . America’s Military Doctrine: Deliberately Targeting and Killing Civilians The targeting of civilians and the killing of children in Gaza is modelled on numerous US sponsored massacres of civilians (1945-2023) including the 2004 attack on Fallujah. (More than 30 Million mainly civilian deaths in US-led wars in what is euphemistically called the “post War Era”). . Veteran War correspondent Felicity Arbuthnot reflected on the indescribable barbarity of the 2004 Fallujah massacre, which resulted in countless deaths and destruction. It was a genocide conducted by the U.S military: . “The Americans invaded, chillingly: “house to house, room to room”, raining death and destruction on the proud, ancient “City of Mosques.” Marines killed so many civilians that the municipal soccer stadium had to be turned into a graveyard … One correspondent wrote: “There has been nothing like the attack on Fallujah since the Nazi invasion and occupation of much of the European continent – the shelling and bombing of Warsaw in September 1939, the terror bombing of Rotterdam in May 1940.” Fallujah, 2004 . The U.S. is supportive of the Israeli genocide directed against the people of Palestine. Prime Minister Netanyahu is a criminal. He is Washington’s proxy, unreservedly endorsed and supported by the Biden Administration as well as the U.S. Congress. . Zionism constitutes the ideological underpinnings of contemporary U.S. imperialism and its unending war against the people of the Middle East. . The Zionist “Greater Israel” dogma –as in all wars of religion since the dawn of mankind– is there to mislead people Worldwide as to “who is really pulling the strings”. . Zionism has become a useful instrument which is embodied in U.S. military doctrine. The “Promised Land” broadly coincides with America’s hegemonic agenda in the Middle East, namely what the U.S. military has designated as the “New Middle East”. . Cui Bono: “To Whom Does it Benefit” There are strategic, geopolitical and economic objectives behind Israel’s genocide directed against the people of Palestine. “Crimes are often committed to benefit their perpetrators”: Israel’s War against the People of Palestine serves the interests of Big Money, the Military Industrial Complex, Corrupt Politicians… The Genocide is implemented by Netanyahu on behalf of the United States. The US military and intelligence apparatus are behind Israel’s criminal bombing and invasion of Gaza. The unfolding Middle East War is largely directed against Iran. . . Iran and the Nuclear Issue Historical Antecedents. Using Israel As a Means to Attacking Iran In 2003, the war on Iran project (Operation Theatre Iran Near Term, TIRANNT)) was already Déjà Vu. It had been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than 15 years. Let us recall that at the outset of Bush’s Second Term, Vice President Dick Cheney dropped a bombshell, hinting, in no uncertain terms, that Iran was “right at the top of the list” of the rogue enemies of America. And that Israel would, so to speak, “be doing the bombing for us” [paraphrase] , without US military involvement and without us putting pressure on them “to do it”. For further details see my article below was first published by Global Research in May 2005, as well as PBS Interview with Z. Brzezinski This Dick Cheney-style option is currently (November 2023) once more on the drawing board of the Pentagon, namely the possibility that Israel which is already bombing Lebanon and Syria, would be incited to wage an attack on Iran (acting on behalf of the United States). US Congress Resolution (H. RES. 559) Accuses Iran of Possessing Nuclear Weapons Careful timing: In June 2023, the US House of Representatives adopted Resolution (H. RES. 559) which provides a “Green Light” to wage war on Iran. The US House passed a resolution that allows the use of force against Iran, intimating without a shred of evidence that Iran has Nuclear Weapons: Resolved, That the House of Representatives declares it is the policy of the United States— (1) that a nuclear Islamic Republic of Iran is not acceptable; (2) that Iran must not be able to obtain a nuclear weapon under any circumstances or conditions; (3) to use all means necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon; and (4) to recognize and support the freedom of action of partners and allies, including Israel, to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Click below to access the complete text of H. RES 559 Israel’s Undeclared Nuclear Weapons Arsenal Whereas Iran is tagged (without evidence) as a Nuclear Power by the U.S. House of Representatives, Washington fails to acknowledge that Israel is an undeclared nuclear power. In recent developments, Israeli Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu, “admitted to the world that Israel has nuclear weapons ready to be used against Palestinians” The Times of Israel reported that: “Amichai Eliyahu said Sunday [November 5, 2023] that one of Israel’s options in the war against Hamas was to drop a nuclear bomb on the Gaza Strip” Video on Israel’s Nuclear Weapons Facility English subtitles . . The War on Energy Unspoken Objective of a US-NATO-Israel War against Iran: Natural Gas Reserves of Natural Gas: Iran ranks Second after Russia. Russia, Iran and Qatar possess 54.1 percent of the World’s reserves of natural gas. -Russia 24.3%, -Iran 17.3%, -Qatar, 12.5 % (in partnership with Iran) versus -5.3 % for the US President Joe Biden ordered to “blow up” (September 2022) the Nordstream Pipeline, which constitutes a U.S. Act of War against the European Union. In the words of Joe Biden: “There will be no longer a Nord Stream 2”. Statement at White House Press Conference (February 7, 2022) America’s strategic objective was, despite its meagre reserves of natural gas: To Force the European Union to buy LNG “Made in America”. What this implies is that America’s military agenda against Russia and Iran constitutes a means to hike up EU energy prices, which is an act economic warfare against the People of Europe. The Iran-Qatar Natural Gas Partnership The maritime gas reserves of the Persian Gulf are under a (joint ownership) partnership between Qatar and Iran (See diagram below). The Biden Administration is Intent upon Destabilizing the Iran-Qatar Partnership This partnership is supportive of the People of Palestine. In March 2022, “President Joe Biden following a meeting with Qatar’s Emir Sheik Tamim “designated Qatar as a major non-NATO ally of the United States, fulfilling the promise that he had made to Qatar earlier this year [2022], the White House said” Reuters “The designation is granted by the United States to close, non-NATO allies that have strategic working relationships with the U.S. military. Biden promised Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, in January [2022] during a meeting at the White House that he would grant Qatar the special status.” Reuters See also followup Reuters article. What is at stake are cross-cutting coalitions. Qatar is a “Partner” of Iran in relation to the strategic reserves of maritime gas in the Persian Gulf. There is no formaI military cooperation between the two countries. Washington’s unspoken agenda is to break and/or destabilize Qatar’s Partnership with Iran, by integrating Qatar into the US-NATO military orbit. It is worth noting that a few days prior to the October 7, 2023 Hamas operation, the Emir of Qatar Sheik Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani “laid the foundation stone for the Northern Dome expansion project” in Iran’s Pars South Field (See map above). “the Emir of Qatar said the groundbreaking for the Northern Dome expansion project was laid today, which is in line with Qatar’s strategy to strengthen its position as a global LNG producer … This joint gas field, known as “South Pars” in Iran, is the largest natural gas field in the world and contains 50.97 trillion cubic meters of gas and about 7.9 billion cubic meters of natural gas condensate. At the time of writing, the implications of Qatar’s “Special Status” Military Alliance with the U.S. remain unclear. America’s Al-Udeid military base in Qatar (left) is the largest US base in the Middle East. Have the status and functions of Al Udeid changed since the signing of the March 2022 agreement designating Qatar as a “Major Non NATO Ally of the US” Qatar is both A Partner of Iran as well as a Major Non NATO Ally of the U.S. Reports confirm the development of a close relationship between the commanders of the US Air Force and the Qatari Emiri Air Force. Qatar is a “Powder Keg”? The U.S. foreign policy objective is to ultimately destroy and undermine that “friendship” with Iran which is highly valued and supported by Qatari citizens. The export of gas from South Pars North Dome transits through Iran, Turkey and Russia. Qatar, Russia and Iran (the 3 largest holders Worldwide of natural gas reserves) reached an agreement in 2009 to create a ‘Gas Troika’, a trilateral gas cooperation entity including the development of joint projects. A large number of countries including South Korea, India, Japan, China are importing LNG from Qatar. Last year (November 2022), “QatarEnergy signed a 27-year deal to supply China’s Sinopec with liquefied natural gas”. Qatar has also a strategic alliance with China. Washington’s objective under the disguise of America’s “Major Non-NATO Alliance” with Qatar is to: Break the Qatar-Iran Partnership Exclude Iran from the Joint Maritime Gas Field Exert US Control over the Maritime Gas Field in the Persian Gulf Weaken and Disable the “Gas Troika” (Russia, Iran, Qatar) Create Chaos in the Global Energy Market, Undermine the Trade in Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) to Numerous Countries . Iran. Third Largest Reserves of Oil Worldwide Iran is not only second in terms of its gas reserves after Russia, it ranks third Worldwide in relation to its oil reserves (12% of Worldwide oil reserves) versus a meagre 4% for the U.S. The Ben Gurion Canal Project . U.S. Seeks Dominance over Strategic International Waterways The Ben Gurion Canal Project was initially a “secret” (classified) U.S. project formulated in 1963 by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory LLNG, a strategic think tank (focussing on nuclear radiation) on contract with the U.S Department of Energy. The LLNG project was formulated in response to the nationalization of the Suez Canal in July 1956 by President Gamal Abdel Nasser (1956-1970). Its intent was to bypass the Suez Canal. The Ben Gurion Canal project is currently contemplated as means control the channels of international maritime trade to the detriment of the people of the Middle East. It also seeks to destabilize China’s maritime commodity trade. In the context of the broader US-led Middle East War, the Ben Gurion Canal Project is part of America’s hegemonic military agenda. It is consistent with Netanyahu’s “Plan to Wipe Palestine Off the Map”. According to Yvonne Ridley: “The only thing stopping the newly-revised [Ben Gurion Canal] project from being revived and rubber-stamped is the presence of the Palestinians in Gaza. As far as Netanyahu is concerned they are standing in the way of the project” (Yvonne Ridley, November 10, 2023, emphasis added) The U.S led war is intent upon confiscating all Palestinian territories, which would be appropriated by the State of Israel, acting as a strategic “Anglo-American Hub” in the Middle East: The Ben Gurion Canal will give Israel in particular and other friendly nations the freedom from blackmail arising out of access to the Suez Canal. Arab states have been leveraging the Red Sea to pressure Israel and in response, Israel has decided to gain more control of the Red Sea. These African countries have cultural and economic affinities with the Arab states. One of the main military benefits for Israel is that it gives Israel the strategic options as the Ben Gurion Canal will totally take away the importance of Suez for the US military if needed in the aid for Israel. Israel aims to push Egypt further into a corner by eliminating Suez in the global trade and energy corridor and becoming a global trade and energy logistics center. Experts are of the opinion that this situation will shake the strategic-energy balance of China’s Belt and Road Project initiative in the Mediterranean, along with the Strait of Hormuz, which is the transfer point of 30 percent of the world’s energy. The Ben Gurion Canal would have the solid backing of the West. (Eurasia Review, November 7, 2023, emphasis added) . “Greater Israel”. Strategic “Anglo-American Hub” The Promised Land of Greater Israel coincides with America’s Colonial Design in the Middle East The Greater Israel design is not strictly a Zionist Project for the Middle East, it is an integral part of US foreign policy, its strategic objective is to extend US hegemony as well as fracture and balkanize the Middle East. In this regard, Washington’s strategy consists in destabilizing and weakening regional economic powers in the Middle East including Turkey and Iran. This policy –which is consistent with the Greater Israel– is accompanied by a process of political fragmentation. Since the Gulf war (1991), the Pentagon has contemplated the creation of a “Free Kurdistan” which would include the annexation of parts of Iraq, Syria and Iran as well as Turkey “The New Middle East”: Unofficial US Military Academy Map by Lt. Col. Ralph Peters . “America’s Promised Land”. Global Warfare When viewed in the current context, including the siege on Gaza, the Zionist Plan for the Middle East coincides with America’s long war against the Middle East. As we mentioned earlier the Zionist agenda provides an ideological and religious justification of America’s long war against the Middle East. The 1979-80. the so-called Soviet Afghan War, engineered by the CIA The 1980-88 Iraq-Iran War engineered by the U.S. The 1991 Gulf War against Iraq, The 2001 The US-NATO Invasion of Afghanistan, The 2003 Invasion of Iraq The 2006 War on Lebanon, The Arab Spring, The 2011 war on Libya, The 2015 war on Yemen Obama’s 2014-2017 “Counter-Terrorism” Operation against Iraq and Syria The ongoing wars against Syria, Iraq and Yemen The “Greater Israel” project consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of a US-Israeli expansionist project, with the support of NATO. Needless to day, the ideological and religious underpinnings of the “Greater Israel” project are consistent with America’s imperial design. While the Zionist agenda is not the driving force, it serves the useful purpose of misleading public opinion concerning America’s long war against the people of the Middle East. The Historical Context: A Sequence of Military Plans and Scenarios to Wage War on Iran Since the launching of the Theater Iran Near Term (TIRANNT) war games scenario in May 2003 (leaked classified doc), an escalation scenario involving military action directed against Iran and Syria had been envisaged, of which Syria was the first stage. TIRANNT was followed by a series of military plans pertaining to Iran. Numerous post 9/11 official statements and US military documents had pointed to an expanded Middle East war, involving the active participation of Israel. Israel is America’s ally. Military operations are closely coordinated. Israel does not act without Washington’s approval. U.S.-Israeli Air Defense Barely acknowledged by the media, the US and Israel have an integrated air defense system, which was set up in early 2009, shortly after the Israel invasion of Gaza under “Operation Cast Led”. The X-band radar air defense system set up by the US in Israel in 2009 would “integrate Israel’s missile defenses with the U.S. global missile detection network, which includes satellites, Aegis ships on the Mediterranean, Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and land-based Patriot radars and interceptors.” (Sen. Joseph Azzolina, Protecting Israel from Iran’s missiles, Bayshore News, December 26, 2008). ) What this means is that Washington calls the shots. Confirmed by the Pentagon, the US military controls Israel’s Air Defense: ”This is and will remain a U.S. radar system,’ Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said. ‘So this is not something we are giving or selling to the Israelis and it is something that will likely require U.S. personnel on-site to operate.’” (Quoted in Israel National News, January 9, 2009, emphasis added). At the outset of Obama’s Second Term, the US and Israel initiated discussions pertaining to a “US personnel on site” presence in Israel, namely the establishment of a “permanent” and “official” military base inside Israel. And on September 17, 2017, a US Air Defense base located in the Negev desert was inaugurated. According to the Israeli IDF spokesperson, the objective is to send a “message to the region, ” including Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Palestine. Of utmost relevance: Israel would not be able to act unilaterally against Iran, without a green light from the Pentagon which controls key components of Israel’s air defense system. In practice, a war on Iran, would be a joint US-NATO-Israeli endeavor, coordinated by US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with America’s allies playing a key (subordinate) role. Michel Chossudovsky, October 31, 2017, November 11, 2023 Planned US-Israeli Attack on Iran by Michel Chossudovsky May 2005 At the outset of Bush’s second term, Vice President Dick Cheney dropped a bombshell. He hinted, in no uncertain terms, that Iran was “right at the top of the list” of the rogue enemies of America, and that Israel would, so to speak, “be doing the bombing for us”, without US military involvement and without us putting pressure on them “to do it”: “One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it without being asked… Given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards,” (quoted from an MSNBC Interview Jan 2005) Israel is a Rottweiler on a leash: The US wants to “set Israel loose” to attack Iran. Commenting the Vice President’s assertion, former National Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski in an interview on PBS, confirmed with some apprehension, yes: Cheney wants Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to act on America’s behalf and “do it” for us: “Iran I think is more ambiguous. And there the issue is certainly not tyranny; it’s nuclear weapons. And the vice president today in a kind of a strange parallel statement to this declaration of freedom hinted that the Israelis may do it and in fact used language which sounds like a justification or even an encouragement for the Israelis to do it.” The foregoing statements are misleading. The US is not “encouraging Israel”. What we are dealing with is a joint US-Israeli military operation to bomb Iran, which has been in the active planning stage for more than a year. The Neocons in the Defense Department, under Douglas Feith, have been working assiduously with their Israeli military and intelligence counterparts, carefully identifying targets inside Iran (see Seymour Hersh) Under this working arrangement, Israel will not act unilaterally, without a green light from Washington. In other words, Israel will not implement an attack without the participation of the US. Covert Intelligence Operations: Stirring Ethnic Tensions in Iran Meanwhile, for the last two years, Washington has been involved in covert intelligence operations inside Iran. American and British intelligence and special forces (working with their Israeli counterparts) are involved in this operation. “A British intelligence official said that any campaign against Iran would not be a ground war like the one in Iraq. The Americans will use different tactics, said the intelligence officer. ‘It is getting quite scary.'” (Evening Standard, 17 June 2003) The expectation is that a US-Israeli bombing raid of Iran’s nuclear facilities will stir up ethnic tensions and trigger “regime change” in favor of the US. (See Arab Monitor). Bush advisers believe that the “Iranian opposition movement” will unseat the Mullahs. This assessment constitutes a gross misjudgment of social forces inside Iran. What is more likely to occur is that Iranians will consistently rally behind a wartime government against foreign aggression. In fact, the entire Middle East and beyond would rise up against US interventionism. Retaliation in the Case of a US-Israeli Aerial Attack Tehran has confirmed that it will retaliate if attacked, in the form of ballistic missile strikes directed against Israel (CNN, 8 Feb 2005). These attacks, could also target US military facilities in the Persian Gulf, which would immediately lead us into a scenario of military escalation and all out war. In other words, the air strikes against Iran could contribute to unleashing a war in the broader Middle East Central Asian region. Moreover, the planned attack on Iran should also be understood in relation to the timely withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon, which has opened up a new space, for the deployment of Israeli forces. The participation of Turkey in the US-Israeli military operation is also a factor, following an agreement reached between Ankara and Tel Aviv. In other words, US and Israeli military planners must carefully weigh the far-reaching implications of their actions. Israel Builds up its Stockpile of Deadly Military Hardware A massive buildup in military hardware has occurred in preparation for a possible attack on Iran. Israel has recently taken delivery from the US of some 5,000 “smart air launched weapons” including some 500 BLU 109 ‘bunker-buster bombs. The (uranium coated) munitions are said to be more than “adequate to address the full range of Iranian targets, with the possible exception of the buried facility at Natanz, which may require the [more powerful] BLU-113 bunker buster“: “Given Israel’s already substantial holdings of such weapons, this increase in its inventory would allow a sustained assault with or without further US involvement.” (See Richard Bennett) Gbu 28 Guided Bomb Unit-28 (GBU-28) The Israeli Air Force would attack Iran’s nuclear facility at Bushehr using US as well Israeli produced bunker buster bombs. The attack would be carried out in three separate waves “with the radar and communications jamming protection being provided by U.S. Air Force AWACS and other U.S. aircraft in the area”. (See W Madsen) Bear in mind that the bunker buster bombs can also be used to deliver tactical nuclear bombs. The B61-11 is the “nuclear version” of the “conventional” BLU 113. It can be delivered in much same way as the conventional bunker buster bomb. (See Michel Chossudovsky, see also this) According to the Pentagon, tactical nuclear weapons are “safe for civilians”. Their use has been authorized by the US Senate. (See Michel Chossudovsky) Moreover, reported in late 2003, Israeli Dolphin-class submarines equipped with US Harpoon missiles armed with nuclear warheads are now aimed at Iran. (See Gordon Thomas) Even if tactical nuclear weapons are not used by Israel, an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities not only raises the specter of a broader war, but also of nuclear radiation over a wide area: “To attack Iran’s nuclear facilities will not only provoke war, but it could also unleash clouds of radiation far beyond the targets and the borders of Iran.” (Statement of Prof Elias Tuma, Arab Internet Network, Federal News Service, 1 March 2005) Moreover, while most reports have centered on the issue of punitive air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the strikes would most probably extend to other targets. While a ground war is contemplated as a possible “scenario” at the level of military planning, the US military would not be able to wage a an effective ground war, given the situation in Iraq. In the words of former National Security Adviser Lawrence Eagelberger: “We are not going to get in a ground war in Iran, I hope. If we get into that, we are in serious trouble. I don’t think anyone in Washington is seriously considering that.” ( quoted in the National Journal, 4 December 2004). Iran’s Military Capabilities Despite its overall weaknesses in relation to Israel and the US, Iran has an advanced air defense system, deployed to protect its nuclear sites; “they are dispersed and underground making potential air strikes difficult and without any guarantees of success.” (Jerusalem Post, 20 April 2005). It has upgraded its Shahab-3 missile, which can reach targets in Israel. Iran’s armed forces have recently conducted high-profile military exercises in anticipation of a US led attack. Iran also possesses some 12 X-55 strategic cruise missiles, produced by Ukraine. Iran’s air defense systems is said to feature Russian SA-2, SA-5, SA-6 as well as shoulder-launched SA-7 missiles (Jaffa Center for Strategic Studies). The US “Military Road Map” The Bush administration has officially identified Iran and Syria as the next stage of “the road map to war”. Targeting Iran is a bipartisan project, which broadly serves the interests of the Anglo-American oil conglomerates, the Wall Street financial establishment and the military-industrial complex. The broader Middle East-Central Asian region encompasses more than 70% of the World’s reserves of oil and natural gas. Iran possesses 10% of the world’s oil and ranks third after Saudi Arabia (25 %) and Iraq (11 %) in the size of its reserves. In comparison, the US possesses less than 2.8 % of global oil reserves. (See Eric Waddell, The Battle for Oil) The announcement to target Iran should come as no surprise. It is part of the battle for oil. Already during the Clinton administration, US Central Command (USCENTCOM) had formulated “in war theater plans” to invade both Iraq and Iran: “The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the President’s National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Chairman’s National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of the United States Central Command’s theater strategy. The NSS directs implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests, to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. Dual containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM’s theater strategy is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement, as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States’ vital interest in the region – uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil. (USCENTCOM, USPolicy , emphasis added) Main Military Actors While the US, Israel, as well as Turkey (with borders with both Iran and Syria) are the main actors in this process, a number of other countries, in the region, allies of the US, including several Central Asian former Soviet republics have been enlisted. Britain is closely involved despite its official denials at the diplomatic level. Turkey occupies a central role in the Iran operation. It has an extensive military cooperation agreement with Israel. There are indications that NATO is also formally involved in the context of an Israel-NATO agreement reached in November 2004. Planning The Aerial Attack on Iran According to former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, George W. Bush has already signed off on orders for an aerial attack on Iran, scheduled for June.(See this) The June cut-off date should be understood. It does not signify that the attack will occur in June. What it suggests is that the US and Israel are “in a state of readiness” and are prepared to launch an attack by June or at a later date. In other words, the decision to launch the attack has not been made. Ritter’s observation concerning an impending military operation should nonetheless be taken seriously. In recent months, there is ample evidence that a major military operation is in preparation: 1) several high profile military exercises have been conducted in recent months, involving military deployment and the testing of weapons systems. 2) military planning meetings have been held between the various parties involved. There has been a shuttle of military and government officials between Washington, Tel Aviv and Ankara. 3) A significant change in the military command structure in Israel has occurred, with the appointment of a new Chief of Staff. 4) Intense diplomatic exchanges have been carried out at the international level with a view to securing areas of military cooperation and/or support for a US-Israeli led military operation directed against Iran. 5) Ongoing intelligence operations inside Iran have been stepped up. 6) Consensus Building: Media propaganda on the need to intervene in Iran has been stepped up, with daily reports on how Iran constitutes a threat to peace and global security. Timeline of Key Initiatives In the last few months, various key initiatives have been taken, which are broadly indicative that an aerial bombing of Iran is in the military pipeline: November 2004 in Brussels: NATO-Israel protocol: Israel’s IDF delegation to the NATO conference to met with military brass of six members of the Mediterranean basin nations, including Egypt, Jordan, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria and Mauritania. NATO seeks to revive the framework, known as the Mediterranean Dialogue program, which would include Israel. The Israeli delegation accepted to participate in military exercises and “anti-terror maneuvers” together with several Arab countries. January 2005: the US, Israel and Turkey held military exercises in the Eastern Mediterranean, off the coast of Syria. These exercises, which have been held in previous years were described as routine. February 2005. Following the decision reached in Brussels in November 2004, Israel was involved for the first time in military exercises with NATO, which also included several Arab countries. February 2005: Assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The assassination, which was blamed on Syria, serves Israeli and US interests and was used as a pretext to demand the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon. February 2005: Sharon fires his Chief-of-Staff, Moshe Ya’alon and appoints Air Force General Dan Halutz. This is the first time in Israeli history that an Air Force General is appointed Chief of Staff (See Uri Avnery) The appointment of Major General Dan Halutz as IDF Chief of Staff is considered in Israeli political circles as “the appointment of the right man at the right time.” The central issue is that a major aerial operation against Iran is in the planning stage, and Maj General Halutz is slated to coordinate the aerial bombing raids on Iran. Halutz’s appointment was specifically linked to Israel’s Iran agenda: “As chief of staff, he will in the best position to prepare the military for such a scenario.” March 2005: NATO’s Secretary General was in Jerusalem for follow-up talks with Ariel Sharon and Israel’s military brass, following the joint NATO-Israel military exercise in February. These military cooperation ties are viewed by the Israeli military as a means to “enhance Israel’s deterrence capability regarding potential enemies threatening it, mainly Iran and Syria.” The premise underlying NATO-Israel military cooperation is that Israel is under attack: “The more Israel’s image is strengthened as a country facing enemies who attempt to attack it for no justified reason, the greater will be the possibility that aid will be extended to Israel by NATO. Furthermore, Iran and Syria will have to take into account the possibility that the increasing cooperation between Israel and NATO will strengthen Israel’s links with Turkey, also a member of NATO. Given Turkey’s impressive military potential and its geographic proximity to both Iran and Syria, Israel’s operational options against them, if and when it sees the need, could gain considerable strength. ” (Jaffa Center for Strategic Studies, http://www.tau.ac.il/jcss/sa/v7n4p4Shalom.html ) The Israel-NATO protocol is all the more important because it obligates NATO to align itself with the US-Israeli plan to bomb Iran, as an act of self defense on the part of Israel. It also means that NATO is also involved in the process of military consultations relating to the planned aerial bombing of Iran. It is of course related to the bilateral military cooperation agreement between Israel and Turkey and the likelihood that part of the military operation will be launched from Turkey, which is a member of NATO. Late March 2005: News leaks in Israel indicated an “initial authorization” by Prime Minster Ariel Sharon of an Israeli attack on Iran’s Natanz uranium enrichment plant “if diplomacy failed to stop Iran’s nuclear program”. (The Hindu, 28 March 2005) March-April 2005: The Holding in Israel of Joint US-Israeli military exercises specifically pertaining to the launching of Patriot missiles. US Patriot missile crews stationed in Germany were sent to Israel to participate in the joint Juniper Cobra exercise with the Israeli military. The exercise was described as routine and “unconnected to events in the Middle East”: “As always, we are interested in implementing lessons learned from training exercises.” (UPI, 9 March 2005). April 2005: Donald Rumsfeld (right) was on an official visits to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan and Azerbaijan. His diplomatic endeavors were described by the Russian media as “literally circling Iran in an attempt to find the best bridgehead for a possible military operation against that country.” In Baku, Azerbaijan Rumsfeld was busy discussing the date for deployment of US troops in Azerbaijan on Iran’s North-Western border. US military bases described as “mobile groups” in Azerbaijan are slated to play a role in a military operation directed against Iran. Azerbaijan is a member of GUUAM, a military cooperation agreement with the US and NATO, which allows for the stationing of US troops in several of the member countries, including Georgia, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan. The stated short term objective is to “neutralize Iran”. The longer term objective under the Pentagon’s “Caspian Plan” is to exert military and economic control over the entire Caspian sea basin, with a view to ensuring US authority over oil reserves and pipeline corridors. During his visit in April, Rumsfeld was pushing the US initiative of establishing “American special task forces and military bases to secure US influence in the Caspian region: “Called Caspian Watch, the project stipulates a network of special task forces and police units in the countries of the regions to be used in emergencies including threats to objects of the oil complex and pipelines. Project Caspian Watch will be financed by the United States ($100 million). It will become an advance guard of the US European Command whose zone of responsibility includes the Caspian region. Command center of the project with a powerful radar is to be located in Baku.” ( Defense and Security Russia, April 27, 2005) Rumsfeld’s visit followed shortly after that of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami’s to Baku. April 2005: Iran signs a military cooperation with Tajikistan, which occupies a strategic position bordering Afghanistan’s Northern frontier. Tajikistan is a member of “The Shanghai Five” military cooperation group, which also includes Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia. Iran also has economic cooperation agreements with Turkmenistan. Mid April 2005: Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon meets George W Bush at his Texas Ranch. Iran is on the agenda of bilateral talks. More significantly, the visit of Ariel Sharon was used to carry out high level talks between US and Israeli military planners pertaining to Iran. Late April 2005. President Vladmir Putin is in Israel on an official visit. He announces Russia’s decision to sell short-range anti-aircraft missiles to Syria and to continue supporting Iran’s nuclear industry. Beneath the gilded surface of international diplomacy, Putin’s timely visit to Israel must be interpreted as “a signal to Israel” regarding its planned aerial attack on Iran. Late April 2005: US pressure in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been exerted with a view to blocking the re-appointment of Mohammed Al Baradei, who according to US officials “is not being tough enough on Iran…” Following US pressures, the vote on the appointment of a new IAEA chief was put off until June. These developments suggest that Washington wants to put forth their own hand-picked nominee prior to launching US-Israeli aerial attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities. (See VOA). (In February 2003, Al Baradei along with UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix challenged the (phony) intelligence on WMD presented by the US to the UN Security Council, with a view to justifying the war on Iraq.) Late April 2005. Sale of deadly military hardware to Israel. GBU-28 Buster Bunker Bombs: Coinciding with Putin’s visit to Israel, the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency (Department of Defense) announced the sale of an additional 100 bunker-buster bombs produced by Lockheed Martin to Israel. This decision was viewed by the US media as “a warning to Iran about its nuclear ambitions.” The sale pertains to the larger and more sophisticated “Guided Bomb Unit-28 (GBU-28) BLU-113 Penetrator” (including the WGU-36A/B guidance control unit and support equipment). The GBU-28 is described as “a special weapon for penetrating hardened command centers located deep underground. The fact of the matter is that the GBU-28 is among the World’s most deadly “conventional” weapons used in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, capable of causing thousands of civilian deaths through massive explosions. The Israeli Air Force are slated to use the GBU-28s on their F-15 aircraft. (See text of DSCA news release) Late April 2005- early May: Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (right) in Israel for follow-up talks with Ariel Sharon. He was accompanied by his Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul, who met with senior Israeli military officials. On the official agenda of these talks: joint defense projects, including the joint production of Arrow II Theater Missile Defense and Popeye II missiles. The latter also known as the Have Lite, are advanced small missiles, designed for deployment on fighter planes. Tel Aviv and Ankara decide to establish a hotline to share intelligence. May 2005: Syrian troops scheduled to withdraw from Lebanon, leading to a major shift in the Middle East security situation, in favor of Israel and the US. Iran Surrounded The US has troops and military bases in Turkey, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan, and of course Iraq. In other words, Iran is virtually surrounded by US military bases. (see Map below). These countries as well as Turkmenistan, are members of NATO`s partnership for Peace Program and have military cooperation agreements with NATO. Copyright Eric Waddell, Global Research, 2003 In other words, we are dealing with a potentially explosive scenario in which a number of countries, including several former Soviet republics, could be brought into a US led war with Iran. IranAtom.ru, a Russian based news and military analysis group has suggested, in this regard: “since Iranian nuclear objects are scattered all over the country, Israel will need a mass strike with different fly-in and fly-out approaches – Jordan, Iraq, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and other countries… Azerbaijan seriously fears Tehran’s reaction should Baku issue a permit to Israeli aircraft to overfly its territory.” (Defense and Security Russia, 12 April 2005). Concluding remarks The World is at an important crossroads. The Bush Administration has embarked upon a military adventure which threatens the future of humanity. Iran is the next military target. The planned military operation, which is by no means limited to punitive strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities, is part of a project of World domination, a military roadmap, launched at the end of the Cold War. Military action against Iran would directly involve Israel’s participation, which in turn is likely to trigger a broader war throughout the Middle East, not to mention an implosion in the Palestinian occupied territories. Turkey is closely associated with the proposed aerial attacks. Israel is a nuclear power with a sophisticated nuclear arsenal. (See text box below). The use of nuclear weapons by Israel or the US cannot be excluded, particularly in view of the fact that tactical nuclear weapons have now been reclassified as a variant of the conventional bunker buster bombs and are authorized by the US Senate for use in conventional war theaters. (“they are harmless to civilians because the explosion is underground”) In this regard, Israel and the US rather than Iran constitute a nuclear threat. The planned attack on Iran must be understood in relation to the existing active war theaters in the Middle East, namely Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine. The conflict could easily spread from the Middle East to the Caspian sea basin. It could also involve the participation of Azerbaijan and Georgia, where US troops are stationed. An attack on Iran would have a direct impact on the resistance movement inside Iraq. It would also put pressure on America’s overstretched military capabilities and resources in both the Iraqi and Afghan war theaters. (The 150,000 US troops in Iraq are already fully engaged and could not be redeployed in the case of a war with Iran.) In other words, the shaky geopolitics of the Central Asia- Middle East region, the three existing war theaters in which America is currently, involved, the direct participation of Israel and Turkey, the structure of US sponsored military alliances, etc. raises the specter of a broader conflict. Moreover, US military action on Iran not only threatens Russian and Chinese interests, which have geopolitical interests in the Caspian sea basin and which have bilateral agreements with Iran. It also backlashes on European oil interests in Iran and is likely to produce major divisions between Western allies, between the US and its European partners as well as within the European Union. Through its participation in NATO, Europe, despite its reluctance, would be brought into the Iran operation. The participation of NATO largely hinges on a military cooperation agreement reached between NATO and Israel. This agreement would bind NATO to defend Israel against Syria and Iran. NATO would therefore support a preemptive attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, and could take on a more active role if Iran were to retaliate following US-Israeli air strikes. Needless to say, the war against Iran is part of a longer term US military agenda which seeks to militarize the entire Caspian sea basin, eventually leading to the destabilization and conquest of the Russian Federation. The Antiwar Movement The antiwar movement must act, consistently, to prevent the next phase of this war from happening. This is no easy matter. The holding of large antiwar rallies will not in itself reverse the tide of war. High ranking officials of the Bush administration, members of the military and the US Congress have been granted the authority to uphold an illegal war agenda. What is required is a grass roots network, a mass movement at national and international levels, which challenges the legitimacy of the military and political actors, and which is ultimately instrumental in unseating those who rule in our name. War criminals occupy positions of authority. The citizenry is galvanized into supporting the rulers, who are “committed to their safety and well-being”. Through media disinformation, war is given a humanitarian mandate. To reverse the tide of war, military bases must be closed down, the war machine (namely the production of advanced weapons systems) must be stopped and the burgeoning police state must be dismantled. The corporate backers and sponsors of war and war crimes must also be targeted including the oil companies, the defense contractors, the financial institutions and the corporate media, which has become an integral part of the war propaganda machine. Antiwar sentiment does not dismantle a war agenda. The war criminals in the US, Israel and Britain must be removed from high office. What is needed is to reveal the true face of the American Empire and the underlying criminalization of US foreign policy, which uses the “war on terrorism” and the threat of Al Qaeda to galvanize public opinion in support of a global war agenda. Israel’s Nuclear Capabilities With between 200 and 500 thermonuclear weapons and a sophisticated delivery system, Israel has quietly supplanted Britain as the World’s 5th Largest nuclear power, and may currently rival France and China in the size and sophistication of its nuclear arsenal. Although dwarfed by the nuclear arsenals of the U.S. and Russia, each possessing over 10,000 nuclear weapons, Israel nonetheless is a major nuclear power, and should be publicly recognized as such. Today, estimates of the Israeli nuclear arsenal range from a minimum of 200 to a maximum of about 500. Whatever the number, there is little doubt that Israeli nukes are among the world’s most sophisticated, largely designed for “war fighting” in the Middle East. A staple of the Israeli nuclear arsenal are “neutron bombs,” miniaturized thermonuclear bombs designed to maximize deadly gamma radiation while minimizing blast effects and long term radiation- in essence designed to kill people while leaving property intact.(16) Weapons include ballistic missiles and bombers capable of reaching Moscow… The bombs themselves range in size from “city busters” larger than the Hiroshima Bomb to tactical mini nukes. The Israeli arsenal of weapons of mass destruction clearly dwarfs the actual or potential arsenals of all other Middle Eastern states combined, and is vastly greater than any conceivable need for “deterrence.” Many Middle East Peace activists have been reluctant to discuss, let alone challenge, the Israeli monopoly on nuclear weapons in the region, often leading to incomplete and uninformed analyses and flawed action strategies. Placing the issue of Israeli weapons of mass destruction directly and honestly on the table and action agenda would have several salutary effects. First, it would expose a primary destabilizing dynamic driving the Middle East arms race and compelling the region’s states to each seek their own “deterrent.” Second, it would expose the grotesque double standard which sees the U.S. and Europe on the one hand condemning Iraq, Iran and Syria for developing weapons of mass destruction, while simultaneously protecting and enabling the principal culprit. Third, exposing Israel’s nuclear strategy would focus international public attention, resulting in increased pressure to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction and negotiate a just peace in good faith. Finally, a nuclear free Israel would make a Nuclear Free Middle East and a comprehensive regional peace agreement much more likely. Unless and until the world community confronts Israel over its covert nuclear program it is unlikely that there will be any meaningful resolution of the Israeli/Arab conflict, a fact that Israel may be counting on as the Sharon era dawns. From John Steinbach, Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal, Global Research https://www.globalresearch.ca/planned-us-israeli-attack-on-iran-2/5615443
    WWW.GLOBALRESEARCH.CA
    A Planned US-Israeli Attack on Iran is Contemplated
    Introduction We stand in Solidarity with Palestine. But we must recognize that the United States Military and Intelligence apparatus is firmly behind Israel’s genocide directed against the People of Palestine. . And this must be part of the solidarity campaign, namely to Reveal the Truth regarding Washington’s insidious role, which is part of a carefully planned military agenda directed against Palestine …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 31243 Views
  • ‘Operation Al-Aqsa Flood’ Day 34: Children who survive the bombs may die of starvation, disease, and dehydration
    Leila WarahNovember 9, 2023
    A Palestinian father carries his child as he marches with a crowd of Palestinians from northern Gaza to southern Gaza amidst a relentless Israeli bombing campaign, and orders by the Israeli military for Gazans to leave the northern part of the strip.
    Palestinians flee to the southern Gaza Strip on Salah al-Din Street in Bureij, Gaza Strip, on Wednesday, November 8, 2023. Photo by STR apaimages
    Casualties

    Gaza

    10,818 Killed, 4,412 including children

    26,905 injured

    West Bank

    175 Palestinains Killed

    Key Developments

    Palestinian Ministry of Health: “nowhere in Gaza is safe”.
    UNRWA: 92 agency staff have been killed since October 7, the “highest number of United Nations aid workers killed in a conflict in the history of the United Nations.”
    UNRWA: 160 people sheltering in UNRWA school facilities share a single toilet; one shower unit for every 700 people
    Palestinian lawmaker Rashida Tlaib was censured by the House of U.S. Representatives over the phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”
    70 Democrats sign onto a statement condemning the “river to the sea” phrase “as a rallying cry for the destruction of the State of Israel and genocide of the Jewish people.”
    The Israeli parliament passes “draconian” law criminalizing ‘consumption of terrorist materials’, the latest development in Israel’s censorship war against Palestinians.
    Israeli forces arrested Palestinian politicians in Israel, including the head of the High Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel, Mohammad Barakeh, and former Knesset member Haneen Zoabi, reports Wafa.
    Two mosques were completely destroyed in the attack on Khan Younis on Wednesday: Khalid bin al-Walid and al-Ikhlas mosques, according to the Interior Ministry in Gaza.
    The U.S. carried out a strike on a facility in eastern Syria, the second U.S. attack on the country since October 7, in “response to attacks on American personnel in Iraq and Syria” over the past weeks, killing at least nine people, according to the Pentagon.
    An American drone was shot down off the coast of Yemen by the country’s pro-Iranian Houthi rebels, U.S. officials confirmed to Reuters and AFP.
    Israeli airstrikes have hit eight hospitals in the Gaza Strip in the last three days, according to Gaza’s government media office.
    Treating patients in ‘corridors, on the floor, and outdoors’

    Israel has subjected Gaza’s population to five weeks of incessant bombing while denying over two million people trapped in the besieged enclave necessities, including food, water, medical care, and fuel.

    Hospitals, in particular, have been targeted during the ongoing aggression and hard hit by the tight siege.

    Al Jazeera reported three people were killed and dozens of others injured after Israeli airstrikes hit the vicinity of Al-Nasr Hospital in western Gaza at dawn on Thursday, adding that Israel also fired several missiles around Gaza City’s Al-Shifa Medical Complex, resulting in missile fragments falling into the hospital courtyard.

    Similarly, the vicinity of Al-Quds Hospital in the north of Gaza has been subjected to daily bombardment since Sunday, according to Nebal Farsakh, a spokesperson for the Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS).

    On Wednesday, PRCS reported the Israeli bombardment near Al Quds Hospital resulted in all roads leading to the hospital being closed and medical teams being unable to leave the hospital to reach the injured.

    The organization added that the hospital was facing “an acute shortage of fuel and was expected to run out of fuel today,” so they have curtailed most operations in an attempt to ration what is left.

    “We have about 500 patients inside the hospital. We have 15 patients in the ICU. They are wounded and on respirators. We have newborns in incubators. We have 14,000 displaced people, the majority of whom are women and children,” Farsakh told Al Jazeera, adding that they have had to “stop four ambulances from working.”

    “Patients are undergoing immense and unnecessary pain as medicines and anesthetics are running out. In addition, tens of thousands of displaced people have sought shelter in the hospital’s parking lots and yards,” Farsakh said.

    The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini and the World Health Organisation (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said in a joint statement that doctors in Al-Shifa, where the conditions are “disastrous,” doctors are being forced to treat the sick and injured in “corridors, on the floor, and outdoors” as emergency rooms are overflowing.

    “Without fuel, hospitals and other essential facilities such as desalination plants and bakeries cannot operate, and more people will most certainly die as a result,” they said.

    Alexandra Saieh of Save the Children underscored that the children who are not killed by bombs may die of starvation, disease, and dehydration.

    “The situation is catastrophic. Civilians, especially children, continue to pay the heaviest price for the ongoing violence. If we don’t have a ceasefire, the numbers will continue to worsen,” she stated, according to Al Jazeera.

    On Wednesday, The Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) said 106 trucks from the Egyptian Red Crescent, loaded with aid and five ambulance vehicles from Kuwait, crossed through the Egypt Rafah border crossing; however, none contained much-needed fuel.

    The organization says 756 trucks have entered the besieged enclave since October 21, which is still far below what the besieged enclave needs. In contrast, before October 7, the besieged enclave would receive about 500 truck deliveries daily.

    A convoy with much-needed medical supplies was delivered to Gaza’s main hospital, al-Shifa, according to Ghebreyesus and Lazzarini.

    However, the supplies are “far from sufficient to respond to the immense needs” in Gaza, as the situation at al-Shifa Hospital is “disastrous,” and medical facilities across the besieged enclave are running out of supplies and fuel.

    “The ability of hospitals and medical facilities to operate is paramount, especially during conflicts,” the statement continued.

    Israeli military spokesperson Daniel Hagari presented video, photographs, and audio recordings that allegedly pointed to a Hamas building tunnel under hospitals.

    However, an investigation conducted by Al Jazeera found no grounds to support Israel’s claims of a Hamas tunnel under hospitals and, specifically, under the Sheikh Hamad Hospital in north Gaza.

    Similarly, Mohammed al-Emadi, the chairman of the Qatari Committee for the Reconstruction of Gaza, described Israel’s allegation as a “blatant attempt to justify the occupation’s targeting of civilian facilities, including hospitals, schools, gatherings of population and shelters of displaced people.”

    Fighting on the ground continues

    As civilians continue fighting for their lives across the Gaza Strip, the Israeli military has continued its advancement into northern Gaza.

    “I’d like to put to rest all kinds of false rumors we’re hearing from all kinds of directions, and reiterate one clear thing: There will be no ceasefire without the release of our hostages,” Netanyahu said on Wednesday.

    That same day, after 10 hours of battle, the Israeli army said they took control of a Hamas outpost in Jabalia, north of Gaza City, saying their soldiers confronted and killed Hamas figures, adding that they confiscated weapons and destroyed tunnel shafts.

    “Since the beginning of the fighting, 130 tunnel shafts have been destroyed,” the military said.

    “Soldiers of the Nahal Brigade conducted operational activity at a Hamas training post in northern Gaza. Tunnels were located under the post, and after they were exposed, the shafts in the post were destroyed.”

    Hamas, who has accused Israel of spreading lies in the past, has not commented on the statement.

    While Israelis call for Jews to resettle in Gaza, their government says they have “no intention” of reoccupying Gaza or controlling it for a long time, the Reuters news agency reported, quoting an unnamed senior Israeli official.

    During a televised address on Wednesday, Deputy Hamas chief Saleh al-Arouri clarified that the Hamas attack on October 7 was launched mainly to “ensure the freedom and independence of our people, which begins with the freedom of our political prisoners.”

    “All of our prisoners must be released from prisons,” Arouri said, reiterating Hamas’s readiness for a “comprehensive deal.”

    “Take everyone we have and give us all of the prisoners you have,” he proposed, referring to the captives taken from Israel on October 7 and Palestinian political prisoners being held in Israeli jails.

    “It’s best to take your hostages alive. Come forward and agree to an exchange deal now.”

    “This issue cannot be resolved except via a trade within each of these categories [of prisoners and captives] or in a comprehensive process that includes everyone,” Qassam Brigades spokesperson Abu Obeida said in a televised address on Al-Aqsa T.V.

    West Bank: ‘Enough is enough’

    The situation in the West Bank continues to worsen as Israeli soldiers and settlers continue their deadly attacks on Palestinians.

    In the last 24 hours alone, Israeli forces have killed at least 12 Palestinians.

    In Jenin, the north of the West Bank, the Palestinian Ministry of Health reported nine Palestinians were killed during an Israeli military raid on Thursday morning in the Palestinian city.

    Two Palestinian men were killed overnight on Wednesday by Israeli forces during a violent military incursion in Hebron and Bethlehem, according to Wafa.

    In Hebron, Anas Abu Atwan, 25, was killed after being shot in the chest in the village of Tabqa.

    In Bethlehem, Mohammad Thawabta, 51, from Beit Fajjar, died of wounds sustained during Israeli forces’ incursion into Bethlehem on Wednesday, injuring 19 people were wounded by live bullets and five by shrapnel.

    The 12th Palestinian died from critical wounds after being shot by Israeli forces Thursday morning in al-Amari refugee camp, Ramallah.

    Israel’s mass arrest campaign has also continued, detaining over 2,200 Palestinian men and women since October 7, according to the Palestinian Prisoners’ Club.

    Ahed Tamimi, a 22-year-old prominent Palestinian activist from the Ramallah-area village of Nabi Saleh, was beaten in custody after being reported earlier this week for alleged social media activity, reported Al Jazeera journalist Dena Takruri, citing Tamimi’s mother.

    “Her mom received a call from a lawyer who was visiting another female Palestinian prisoner. That prisoner informed her lawyer of Ahed’s status [and] to notify her family,” Takruri said.

    Human rights organizations such as the U.K.-based group Amnesty International recorded “horrifying cases of torture and degrading treatment of Palestinian detainees” amid the “spike in arbitrary arrests.”

    Israeli news outlet Haaretz has also noted an increase in Israeli soldiers openly documenting their abuse of Palestinians online.

    As tensions rise in the West Bank, Al Jazeera said an armed Palestinian fighter reportedly shot two Israeli settlers near the illegal Israeli settlement of Itamar, east of Nablus, and one of them is now in critical condition.

    Conditions in the occupied West Bank are becoming “increasingly dire,” says U.N. humanitarian chief Martin Griffiths, outlining the number of Palestinians, including dozens of children, who have been killed, injured, and displaced since October 7.

    “Enough is enough,” he said.


    U.S. representatives ignore constituents, staffers calling for ceasefire

    The Biden administration has continued to offer its unwavering support to Israel’s mass slaughter of Palestinian civilians in Gaza while repeatedly rejecting pressure to support a ceasefire. Instead, U.S. President Joe Biden is supporting a “pause” in the fighting to allow captives in Gaza a safe evacuation.

    White House Spokesman John Kirby told reporters that the pause would be localized, temporary, and short, “hours to days,” depending on the need.

    “So it would be an agreement that for a set period of time in these agreed coordinates, there would be a pause in the fighting,” Kirby said.

    “That doesn’t mean there won’t be, or couldn’t be, fighting outside that zone during that same period of time. So all of that has to get factored in, and I have no doubt that on the Israeli side, as they look at each proposal, they’ll think about the potential impact on their military operations on the ground or in the air.”

    On Tuesday, democratic lawmaker Rashida Tlaib was censured by the House of U.S. Representatives, claiming she was “promoting false narratives regarding the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.”

    According to the House, a censure is a “deep disapproval of Member misconduct that, nevertheless, does not meet the threshold for expulsion.”

    Taliba rejected the charge, which condemned her use of the phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” and described it as “widely recognized as a genocidal call to violence to destroy the state of Israel and its people to replace it with a Palestinian state extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.”

    Progressive Jewish American senator Bernie Sanders slammed the U.S. for the censure of Talib. Describing it as “Pathetic and shameful.”

    In response, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib delivered a speech on the House floor “on the attempts to silence her” while expressing her gratitude for the countless Jewish Americans across the country standing with Palestine.

    “I’m the only Palestinian American serving in Congress, Mr. Chair, and my perspective is needed here now more than ever. I will not be silenced, and I will not let you distort my words,” she said.

    Tlaib also used the opportunity to highlight Israel’s extensive list of human rights violations against Palestinians in Gaza, including collective punishment, the use of white phosphorous bombs, and the denial of food, water, electricity, and medical care to “millions of people with nowhere to go.”

    “We will continue to call for a ceasefire, Mr. Chair, for the immediate delivery of critical humanitarian aid to Gaza, for the release of all hostages and those arbitrarily detained, and for every American to come home.”

    Following her speech, more than 100 congressional staffers staged a walkout as they demanded a ceasefire in Gaza.

    “Our constituents are pleading for a ceasefire, and we are the staffers answering their calls,” the staffers said, “Most of our bosses on Capitol Hill are not listening to the people they represent. We demand our leaders speak up.”

    Hours later, Democratic Congresswoman Sara Jacobs withdrew her proposal to censure Republican Brian Mast for the racist comments he made on the House floor last week likening Palestinian civilians to Nazis, according toThe Hill.

    The comment in question: “As a whole, I would encourage the other side to not so lightly throw around the idea of innocent Palestinian civilians, as is frequently said. I don’t think we would so lightly throw around the term innocent Nazi civilians during World War II.”

    While expressing their continued support for U.S. aid to Israel, U.S. senators have asked the Biden administration to clarify Israel’s “strategy in Gaza” in a letter signed by Twenty-six lawmakers, including more than half of all democratic senators.

    The senators asked for an “assessment of the viability of Israel’s military strategy in Gaza” and an “achievable plan” to govern Gaza after the fighting ends as well as “assessment of the viability of Israel military strategy in Gaza” and an “achievable plan” to govern Gaza after the war ends.

    Meanwhile, Israel’s war cabinet minister, Benny Gantz, says Israel has not set a limit for its current Gaza ground operation in Gaza, reported Israeli media.

    “On the question of the operation’s length, there are no limitations,” Gantz said on Wednesday.

    “The war here is for our existence and for Zionism, and so I can’t provide an estimate of the length of each stage in the war and the fighting that will continue after. We can’t retreat from our strategic objective.”

    Following his war on the besieged enclave, Netanyahu told ABC News that Gaza should be governed by “those who don’t want to continue the way of Hamas” without elaborating.

    “I think Israel will, for an indefinite period, have the overall security responsibility because we’ve seen what happens when we don’t have it. When we don’t have that security responsibility, what we have is the eruption of Hamas terror on a scale that we couldn’t imagine,” he said.

    ‘It’s time for sanctions against Israel’

    Every day Israel continues their ruthless bombardment of Gaza, they experience more diplomatic fallout.

    Turkey’s President Erdogan says Israel is “crushing all humanitarian values.”

    “Israel continues to bomb schools, mosques, churches, hospitals, crushing all humanitarian values,” Erdogan said, adding that 73 percent of those killed are women and children.

    On Wednesday, Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto told reporters that Italy will send a hospital ship to the coast of Gaza with 170 staff members and 30 people trained for medical emergencies to help treat victims.

    The Prime Minister of Malaysia, which has a long history of supporting Palestine and advocating for a two-state solution, denied the U.S. proposed legislation for unilateral sanctions against Hamas, targeting the Palestinian resistance group as well as foreign supporters.

    “We only recognize decisions of the United Nations Security Council that are considered multilateral,” Al Jazeera quoted Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim as telling the parliament.

    Belgian’s Deputy Prime Minister Petra De Sutter is urging Belgium to adopt sanctions on Israel and is calling for investigations into the bombings of hospitals and refugee camps in the Gaza Strip.

    “It is time for sanctions against Israel. The rain of bombs is inhumane,” Reuters reported her saying.

    “It is clear that Israel does not care about the international demands for a ceasefire,” she continued, adding that those responsible for war crimes should be banned from the E.U.

    Before you go – we need your support

    At Mondoweiss, we understand the power of telling Palestinian stories. For 17 years, we have pushed back when the mainstream media published lies or echoed politicians’ hateful rhetoric. Now, Palestinian voices are more important than ever.

    Our traffic has increased ten times since October 7, and we need your help to cover our increased expenses.

    Support our journalists with a donation today.
    ‘Operation Al-Aqsa Flood’ Day 34: Children who survive the bombs may die of starvation, disease, and dehydration Leila WarahNovember 9, 2023 A Palestinian father carries his child as he marches with a crowd of Palestinians from northern Gaza to southern Gaza amidst a relentless Israeli bombing campaign, and orders by the Israeli military for Gazans to leave the northern part of the strip. Palestinians flee to the southern Gaza Strip on Salah al-Din Street in Bureij, Gaza Strip, on Wednesday, November 8, 2023. Photo by STR apaimages Casualties Gaza 10,818 Killed, 4,412 including children 26,905 injured West Bank 175 Palestinains Killed Key Developments Palestinian Ministry of Health: “nowhere in Gaza is safe”. UNRWA: 92 agency staff have been killed since October 7, the “highest number of United Nations aid workers killed in a conflict in the history of the United Nations.” UNRWA: 160 people sheltering in UNRWA school facilities share a single toilet; one shower unit for every 700 people Palestinian lawmaker Rashida Tlaib was censured by the House of U.S. Representatives over the phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” 70 Democrats sign onto a statement condemning the “river to the sea” phrase “as a rallying cry for the destruction of the State of Israel and genocide of the Jewish people.” The Israeli parliament passes “draconian” law criminalizing ‘consumption of terrorist materials’, the latest development in Israel’s censorship war against Palestinians. Israeli forces arrested Palestinian politicians in Israel, including the head of the High Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel, Mohammad Barakeh, and former Knesset member Haneen Zoabi, reports Wafa. Two mosques were completely destroyed in the attack on Khan Younis on Wednesday: Khalid bin al-Walid and al-Ikhlas mosques, according to the Interior Ministry in Gaza. The U.S. carried out a strike on a facility in eastern Syria, the second U.S. attack on the country since October 7, in “response to attacks on American personnel in Iraq and Syria” over the past weeks, killing at least nine people, according to the Pentagon. An American drone was shot down off the coast of Yemen by the country’s pro-Iranian Houthi rebels, U.S. officials confirmed to Reuters and AFP. Israeli airstrikes have hit eight hospitals in the Gaza Strip in the last three days, according to Gaza’s government media office. Treating patients in ‘corridors, on the floor, and outdoors’ Israel has subjected Gaza’s population to five weeks of incessant bombing while denying over two million people trapped in the besieged enclave necessities, including food, water, medical care, and fuel. Hospitals, in particular, have been targeted during the ongoing aggression and hard hit by the tight siege. Al Jazeera reported three people were killed and dozens of others injured after Israeli airstrikes hit the vicinity of Al-Nasr Hospital in western Gaza at dawn on Thursday, adding that Israel also fired several missiles around Gaza City’s Al-Shifa Medical Complex, resulting in missile fragments falling into the hospital courtyard. Similarly, the vicinity of Al-Quds Hospital in the north of Gaza has been subjected to daily bombardment since Sunday, according to Nebal Farsakh, a spokesperson for the Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS). On Wednesday, PRCS reported the Israeli bombardment near Al Quds Hospital resulted in all roads leading to the hospital being closed and medical teams being unable to leave the hospital to reach the injured. The organization added that the hospital was facing “an acute shortage of fuel and was expected to run out of fuel today,” so they have curtailed most operations in an attempt to ration what is left. “We have about 500 patients inside the hospital. We have 15 patients in the ICU. They are wounded and on respirators. We have newborns in incubators. We have 14,000 displaced people, the majority of whom are women and children,” Farsakh told Al Jazeera, adding that they have had to “stop four ambulances from working.” “Patients are undergoing immense and unnecessary pain as medicines and anesthetics are running out. In addition, tens of thousands of displaced people have sought shelter in the hospital’s parking lots and yards,” Farsakh said. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini and the World Health Organisation (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said in a joint statement that doctors in Al-Shifa, where the conditions are “disastrous,” doctors are being forced to treat the sick and injured in “corridors, on the floor, and outdoors” as emergency rooms are overflowing. “Without fuel, hospitals and other essential facilities such as desalination plants and bakeries cannot operate, and more people will most certainly die as a result,” they said. Alexandra Saieh of Save the Children underscored that the children who are not killed by bombs may die of starvation, disease, and dehydration. “The situation is catastrophic. Civilians, especially children, continue to pay the heaviest price for the ongoing violence. If we don’t have a ceasefire, the numbers will continue to worsen,” she stated, according to Al Jazeera. On Wednesday, The Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) said 106 trucks from the Egyptian Red Crescent, loaded with aid and five ambulance vehicles from Kuwait, crossed through the Egypt Rafah border crossing; however, none contained much-needed fuel. The organization says 756 trucks have entered the besieged enclave since October 21, which is still far below what the besieged enclave needs. In contrast, before October 7, the besieged enclave would receive about 500 truck deliveries daily. A convoy with much-needed medical supplies was delivered to Gaza’s main hospital, al-Shifa, according to Ghebreyesus and Lazzarini. However, the supplies are “far from sufficient to respond to the immense needs” in Gaza, as the situation at al-Shifa Hospital is “disastrous,” and medical facilities across the besieged enclave are running out of supplies and fuel. “The ability of hospitals and medical facilities to operate is paramount, especially during conflicts,” the statement continued. Israeli military spokesperson Daniel Hagari presented video, photographs, and audio recordings that allegedly pointed to a Hamas building tunnel under hospitals. However, an investigation conducted by Al Jazeera found no grounds to support Israel’s claims of a Hamas tunnel under hospitals and, specifically, under the Sheikh Hamad Hospital in north Gaza. Similarly, Mohammed al-Emadi, the chairman of the Qatari Committee for the Reconstruction of Gaza, described Israel’s allegation as a “blatant attempt to justify the occupation’s targeting of civilian facilities, including hospitals, schools, gatherings of population and shelters of displaced people.” Fighting on the ground continues As civilians continue fighting for their lives across the Gaza Strip, the Israeli military has continued its advancement into northern Gaza. “I’d like to put to rest all kinds of false rumors we’re hearing from all kinds of directions, and reiterate one clear thing: There will be no ceasefire without the release of our hostages,” Netanyahu said on Wednesday. That same day, after 10 hours of battle, the Israeli army said they took control of a Hamas outpost in Jabalia, north of Gaza City, saying their soldiers confronted and killed Hamas figures, adding that they confiscated weapons and destroyed tunnel shafts. “Since the beginning of the fighting, 130 tunnel shafts have been destroyed,” the military said. “Soldiers of the Nahal Brigade conducted operational activity at a Hamas training post in northern Gaza. Tunnels were located under the post, and after they were exposed, the shafts in the post were destroyed.” Hamas, who has accused Israel of spreading lies in the past, has not commented on the statement. While Israelis call for Jews to resettle in Gaza, their government says they have “no intention” of reoccupying Gaza or controlling it for a long time, the Reuters news agency reported, quoting an unnamed senior Israeli official. During a televised address on Wednesday, Deputy Hamas chief Saleh al-Arouri clarified that the Hamas attack on October 7 was launched mainly to “ensure the freedom and independence of our people, which begins with the freedom of our political prisoners.” “All of our prisoners must be released from prisons,” Arouri said, reiterating Hamas’s readiness for a “comprehensive deal.” “Take everyone we have and give us all of the prisoners you have,” he proposed, referring to the captives taken from Israel on October 7 and Palestinian political prisoners being held in Israeli jails. “It’s best to take your hostages alive. Come forward and agree to an exchange deal now.” “This issue cannot be resolved except via a trade within each of these categories [of prisoners and captives] or in a comprehensive process that includes everyone,” Qassam Brigades spokesperson Abu Obeida said in a televised address on Al-Aqsa T.V. West Bank: ‘Enough is enough’ The situation in the West Bank continues to worsen as Israeli soldiers and settlers continue their deadly attacks on Palestinians. In the last 24 hours alone, Israeli forces have killed at least 12 Palestinians. In Jenin, the north of the West Bank, the Palestinian Ministry of Health reported nine Palestinians were killed during an Israeli military raid on Thursday morning in the Palestinian city. Two Palestinian men were killed overnight on Wednesday by Israeli forces during a violent military incursion in Hebron and Bethlehem, according to Wafa. In Hebron, Anas Abu Atwan, 25, was killed after being shot in the chest in the village of Tabqa. In Bethlehem, Mohammad Thawabta, 51, from Beit Fajjar, died of wounds sustained during Israeli forces’ incursion into Bethlehem on Wednesday, injuring 19 people were wounded by live bullets and five by shrapnel. The 12th Palestinian died from critical wounds after being shot by Israeli forces Thursday morning in al-Amari refugee camp, Ramallah. Israel’s mass arrest campaign has also continued, detaining over 2,200 Palestinian men and women since October 7, according to the Palestinian Prisoners’ Club. Ahed Tamimi, a 22-year-old prominent Palestinian activist from the Ramallah-area village of Nabi Saleh, was beaten in custody after being reported earlier this week for alleged social media activity, reported Al Jazeera journalist Dena Takruri, citing Tamimi’s mother. “Her mom received a call from a lawyer who was visiting another female Palestinian prisoner. That prisoner informed her lawyer of Ahed’s status [and] to notify her family,” Takruri said. Human rights organizations such as the U.K.-based group Amnesty International recorded “horrifying cases of torture and degrading treatment of Palestinian detainees” amid the “spike in arbitrary arrests.” Israeli news outlet Haaretz has also noted an increase in Israeli soldiers openly documenting their abuse of Palestinians online. As tensions rise in the West Bank, Al Jazeera said an armed Palestinian fighter reportedly shot two Israeli settlers near the illegal Israeli settlement of Itamar, east of Nablus, and one of them is now in critical condition. Conditions in the occupied West Bank are becoming “increasingly dire,” says U.N. humanitarian chief Martin Griffiths, outlining the number of Palestinians, including dozens of children, who have been killed, injured, and displaced since October 7. “Enough is enough,” he said. U.S. representatives ignore constituents, staffers calling for ceasefire The Biden administration has continued to offer its unwavering support to Israel’s mass slaughter of Palestinian civilians in Gaza while repeatedly rejecting pressure to support a ceasefire. Instead, U.S. President Joe Biden is supporting a “pause” in the fighting to allow captives in Gaza a safe evacuation. White House Spokesman John Kirby told reporters that the pause would be localized, temporary, and short, “hours to days,” depending on the need. “So it would be an agreement that for a set period of time in these agreed coordinates, there would be a pause in the fighting,” Kirby said. “That doesn’t mean there won’t be, or couldn’t be, fighting outside that zone during that same period of time. So all of that has to get factored in, and I have no doubt that on the Israeli side, as they look at each proposal, they’ll think about the potential impact on their military operations on the ground or in the air.” On Tuesday, democratic lawmaker Rashida Tlaib was censured by the House of U.S. Representatives, claiming she was “promoting false narratives regarding the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel and for calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.” According to the House, a censure is a “deep disapproval of Member misconduct that, nevertheless, does not meet the threshold for expulsion.” Taliba rejected the charge, which condemned her use of the phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” and described it as “widely recognized as a genocidal call to violence to destroy the state of Israel and its people to replace it with a Palestinian state extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.” Progressive Jewish American senator Bernie Sanders slammed the U.S. for the censure of Talib. Describing it as “Pathetic and shameful.” In response, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib delivered a speech on the House floor “on the attempts to silence her” while expressing her gratitude for the countless Jewish Americans across the country standing with Palestine. “I’m the only Palestinian American serving in Congress, Mr. Chair, and my perspective is needed here now more than ever. I will not be silenced, and I will not let you distort my words,” she said. Tlaib also used the opportunity to highlight Israel’s extensive list of human rights violations against Palestinians in Gaza, including collective punishment, the use of white phosphorous bombs, and the denial of food, water, electricity, and medical care to “millions of people with nowhere to go.” “We will continue to call for a ceasefire, Mr. Chair, for the immediate delivery of critical humanitarian aid to Gaza, for the release of all hostages and those arbitrarily detained, and for every American to come home.” Following her speech, more than 100 congressional staffers staged a walkout as they demanded a ceasefire in Gaza. “Our constituents are pleading for a ceasefire, and we are the staffers answering their calls,” the staffers said, “Most of our bosses on Capitol Hill are not listening to the people they represent. We demand our leaders speak up.” Hours later, Democratic Congresswoman Sara Jacobs withdrew her proposal to censure Republican Brian Mast for the racist comments he made on the House floor last week likening Palestinian civilians to Nazis, according toThe Hill. The comment in question: “As a whole, I would encourage the other side to not so lightly throw around the idea of innocent Palestinian civilians, as is frequently said. I don’t think we would so lightly throw around the term innocent Nazi civilians during World War II.” While expressing their continued support for U.S. aid to Israel, U.S. senators have asked the Biden administration to clarify Israel’s “strategy in Gaza” in a letter signed by Twenty-six lawmakers, including more than half of all democratic senators. The senators asked for an “assessment of the viability of Israel’s military strategy in Gaza” and an “achievable plan” to govern Gaza after the fighting ends as well as “assessment of the viability of Israel military strategy in Gaza” and an “achievable plan” to govern Gaza after the war ends. Meanwhile, Israel’s war cabinet minister, Benny Gantz, says Israel has not set a limit for its current Gaza ground operation in Gaza, reported Israeli media. “On the question of the operation’s length, there are no limitations,” Gantz said on Wednesday. “The war here is for our existence and for Zionism, and so I can’t provide an estimate of the length of each stage in the war and the fighting that will continue after. We can’t retreat from our strategic objective.” Following his war on the besieged enclave, Netanyahu told ABC News that Gaza should be governed by “those who don’t want to continue the way of Hamas” without elaborating. “I think Israel will, for an indefinite period, have the overall security responsibility because we’ve seen what happens when we don’t have it. When we don’t have that security responsibility, what we have is the eruption of Hamas terror on a scale that we couldn’t imagine,” he said. ‘It’s time for sanctions against Israel’ Every day Israel continues their ruthless bombardment of Gaza, they experience more diplomatic fallout. Turkey’s President Erdogan says Israel is “crushing all humanitarian values.” “Israel continues to bomb schools, mosques, churches, hospitals, crushing all humanitarian values,” Erdogan said, adding that 73 percent of those killed are women and children. On Wednesday, Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto told reporters that Italy will send a hospital ship to the coast of Gaza with 170 staff members and 30 people trained for medical emergencies to help treat victims. The Prime Minister of Malaysia, which has a long history of supporting Palestine and advocating for a two-state solution, denied the U.S. proposed legislation for unilateral sanctions against Hamas, targeting the Palestinian resistance group as well as foreign supporters. “We only recognize decisions of the United Nations Security Council that are considered multilateral,” Al Jazeera quoted Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim as telling the parliament. Belgian’s Deputy Prime Minister Petra De Sutter is urging Belgium to adopt sanctions on Israel and is calling for investigations into the bombings of hospitals and refugee camps in the Gaza Strip. “It is time for sanctions against Israel. The rain of bombs is inhumane,” Reuters reported her saying. “It is clear that Israel does not care about the international demands for a ceasefire,” she continued, adding that those responsible for war crimes should be banned from the E.U. Before you go – we need your support At Mondoweiss, we understand the power of telling Palestinian stories. For 17 years, we have pushed back when the mainstream media published lies or echoed politicians’ hateful rhetoric. Now, Palestinian voices are more important than ever. Our traffic has increased ten times since October 7, and we need your help to cover our increased expenses. Support our journalists with a donation today.
    0 Comments 0 Shares 12346 Views
  • Alexander Dugin: My Vision For The New World Order, And Gaza War – Alexander Dugin
    Kolozeg27/10/2023
    Posted on : 09/11/2023
    Alexander Dugin: My Vision For The New World Order, And Gaza War – Alexander Dugin
    New civilisations are on the rise, including Chinese, Islamic, Indian, African, and Latin American. Russia sees them as potential allies and partners in a genuine and equitable multipolar order, says Aleksandr Dugin.

    The current global order appears to be in a state of transition. What we are witnessing is a shift away from a unipolar world, which emerged following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the disintegration of the Soviet bloc, towards a multipolar world.

    The foundations of this multipolar world are becoming increasingly evident, with key players including Russia, China, the Islamic world, India, and potentially Africa and Latin America. These entities represent distinct civilisations, many of which are united within the BRICS group.

    Notably, after the 2023 Johannesburg summit, this group expanded to include significant countries from the Islamic world, such as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Egypt, as well as Ethiopia, bolstering the African perspective, and Argentina, further solidifying the presence of South American nations.



    Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud attends a meeting during the 2023 BRICS Summit at the Sandton Convention Centre in Johannesburg Thursday, Aug. 24, 2023.

    This expansion underscores the growing influence of the multipolar world order while signalling a weakening of Western hegemony.

    The US and the West’s determination to preserve unilateral dominance

    The United States and Western powers are resolutely clinging to the concept of unilateralism. At the forefront of global leadership, the United States, in particular, is determined to maintain its dominance across military, political, economic, cultural, and ideological realms. This ongoing pursuit of unipolarity stands as the central contradiction of our era, marked by the intensifying struggle between unipolarity and multipolarity.

    Within this context, it is imperative to examine the key conflicts and developments in global politics, notably the efforts to undermine Russia as it reasserts its sovereignty and presence as an independent pole. This dynamic helps elucidate the persistent conflict in Ukraine.

    The Western world’s support for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is driven, in large part, by the desire to prevent Russia from reemerging as an autonomous global actor—an aspiration championed by President Vladimir Putin throughout his tenure.

    Putin has bolstered the political sovereignty of the Russian Federation and progressively emphasised Russia’s status as an independent civilisation that not only opposes Western hegemony but also rejects its value system.

    Russia has unambiguously affirmed its commitment to traditional values while firmly rebuffing Western liberalism, including its promotion of the gay rights agenda and other Western ideological standards, which Russia perceives as aberrations and deviations.

    In response, the West actively supported the 2014 coup in Kyiv, provided extensive military aid to Ukraine, fostered the dissemination of neo-Nazi ideology within the country, and provoked Russia into initiating an extraordinary military operation.

    Without Putin’s intervention, Kyiv would likely have taken similar actions independently, leading to the opening of the first front in the fierce struggle between multipolarity and unipolarity in Ukraine.

    Simultaneously, Russia, under Putin’s leadership, recognises that it cannot be one of just two poles in this world, as was the case during the Soviet Union era.

    New civilisations are on the rise, including Chinese, Islamic, Indian, African, and Latin American. Russia sees them as potential allies and partners in a genuine and equitable multipolar order—a perspective not yet widely acknowledged by the rest of the world.



    Burkina Faso’s Capt. Ibrahim Traore, left, and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands before an official ceremony to welcome the leaders of delegations to the Russia Africa Summit in St. Petersburg, Russia, July 27, 2023

    However, there is a gradual and strengthening awareness of the concept of multipolarity, exemplified by the situation regarding Taiwan, which has been spared from becoming the next flashpoint in the confrontation between unipolarity and multipolarity, particularly in the Pacific region.

    New civilisations are on the rise, including Chinese, Islamic, Indian, African, and Latin American. Russia sees them as potential allies and partners in a genuine and equitable multipolar order—a perspective not yet widely acknowledged by the rest of the world.

    Israel’s war on Gaza points to broader confrontation

    The events in Israel and the Gaza Strip are closely linked to this issue. Two tragic incidents occurred in rapid succession. Firstly, there was a Hamas attack on Israel, resulting in a significant number of civilian casualties and the abduction of hostages.

    Subsequently, Israel launched retaliatory strikes on the Gaza Strip, characterised by a high degree of brutality and a substantial number of civilian casualties, especially among women and children. These actions unequivocally constitute violations of human rights and crimes against humanity, and they lack any justifiable rationale.

    But at the same time, Israel’s application of the principles of “lex talionis” (a principle that developed at the beginning of Babylonian law and stipulated that a punishment inflicted should correspond in degree and kind to the offence of the wrongdoer, as an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth) resulted in what is described as a widespread genocide and brutal living conditions for Gaza residents.

    Both Hamas’s attack and Israel’s response are characterised as actions outside the framework of accepted humanitarian methods to resolve political conflicts.

    Subsequently, the geopolitical landscape comes into play, and while the magnitude of Israel’s actions is significantly larger, the evaluation of the situation in the Gaza Strip is not solely contingent on that; rather, it hinges on underlying geopolitical trends.

    The events in Israel, including the Hamas attack and Israel’s response, have led to a broader confrontation between the West and the Islamic world. This confrontation stems from what is seen as unconditional and unilateral support for Israel despite the explicit nature of the crimes committed against the civilian population in Gaza.

    The Islamic world is portrayed as a distinct pole facing Israel’s actions in Gaza and the broader Palestinian territories while considering the injustices faced by Palestinians who were displaced from their land to live in poor and isolated areas.



    People gather around a huge Palestinian flag during a protest against Israel in Istanbul on October 20, 2023.

    The unity of the Islamic world has become undeniable, with the Palestinian issue serving as a unifying force that brings together Sunnis, Shiites, Turks, and Iranians, as well as factions involved in internal conflicts in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Libya.

    This matter holds direct relevance for countries such as Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Bangladesh.

    Furthermore, Muslims residing in the United States of America, Europe, Russia, and Africa cannot remain indifferent. Notably, despite their political disparities, Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, and the Jordan River region are joined in a collective effort to safeguard their dignity.

    The unity of the Islamic world has become undeniable, with the Palestinian issue serving as a unifying force that brings together Sunnis, Shiites, Turks, and Iranians, as well as factions involved in internal conflicts in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Libya.

    The Palestinian cause and the United States

    In recent decades, the United States has been successful in preventing Muslims from uniting around the Palestinian issue and encouraging them to normalise relations with Israel.

    But such attempts are no longer successful. All these efforts have proven futile in recent weeks as the unequivocal support for Israel continues. Israel’s mass slaughter of civilians in Gaza, witnessed by the entire global community, is compelling the Islamic world to set aside internal differences and contemplate direct confrontation with the West.

    Israel, much like Ukraine, serves as nothing more than an instrument of the overbearing and ruthless Western hegemony. It does not shy away from criminal deeds or racist rhetoric and actions.

    However, the root of the problem lies not in Israel itself but rather in its role as a geopolitical tool within the framework of a unipolar world. This aligns precisely with what President Vladimir Putin recently articulated when he referred to the web of hostility and conflicts being woven by “spiders,” a metaphor for globalists employing colonialist tactics based on the “divide and rule” principle.

    To effectively counter those desperately striving to preserve the unipolar world and Western dominance, it is crucial to comprehend the essence of their strategy. Armed with this understanding, we can consciously construct an alternative model to confront this agenda, move forward confidently and unite towards establishing a multipolar world.

    The ongoing conflict in the Gaza Strip and Palestine as a whole poses a direct challenge not only to specific groups or even Arabs in general but to the entire Islamic world and Islamic civilisation. It’s increasingly evident that the West has engaged in a confrontation with Islam itself, a reality now acknowledged by many.

    Collective need to defend Muslim nations from mistreatement

    From nations such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan to regions spanning Tunisia to Bahrain, from Salafists to Sunnis and Sufis, and encompassing various political factions within Palestine, Syria, Libya, Lebanon, as well as the division between Shiites and Sunnis, there is a collective need to defend the dignity of Islamic civilisation. It asserts itself as a sovereign, independent civilisation that rejects any mistreatment.

    Erdogan’s mention of jihad as a response to the conflict serves as a reminder of the historical Crusades, yet this analogy doesn’t fully capture the essence of the present situation. Modern Western globalisation has diverged significantly from Christian civilisation, having severed many connections with Christian culture in favour of materialism, atheism, and individualism.

    Christianity has little to do with the material sciences or the socio-economic system primarily driven by profit, and it certainly doesn’t endorse the legalisation of deviations or the embrace of pathology as the norm, nor the inclination towards a post-human existence—a concept enthusiastically promoted by Israeli post-humanist philosopher Yuval Harari.

    The West, in its contemporary form, represents an anti-Christian phenomenon, lacking any connection to the values of Christianity or the embrace of the Christian cross. It’s essential to recognise that when the Islamic world clashes with the West, it is not engaging in a conflict with the civilisation of Christ but rather with an anti-Christian civilisation, which can be termed the civilisation of the Antichrist.

    Russia, as a significant global player, is actively engaged in a war with the West on the soil of Ukraine.



    Russian recruits take a train at a railway station in Prudboi, in Russia’s Volgograd region, Thursday, Sept. 29, 2022. President Vladimir Putin announced a partial mobilization, the first since World War II, amid the war in Ukraine.

    Unfortunately, due to the influence of Western propaganda, many Islamic countries have not fully grasped the underlying reasons, objectives, and nature of this conflict, often perceiving it as a mere regional dispute. However, as globalisation directly impacts Muslims worldwide, Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine takes on a vastly different significance.

    Ultimately, it signifies a clash between a multipolar world and a unipolar one, i.e., this war serves the interests not only of Russia as a global pole but indirectly, or even directly, of all such poles. China is well-equipped to comprehend this, and within the Islamic world, Iran is among those that can grasp this perspective.

    Notably, geopolitical awareness has been rapidly on the rise in other Islamic societies, including in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, and Indonesia. This has led to initiatives like the reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran and Turkey’s pursuit of a sovereign policy.

    Israel’s mass slaughter of civilians in Gaza, witnessed by the entire global community, is compelling the Islamic world to set aside internal differences and contemplate direct confrontation with the West.

    Russian motives and spectre of WWIII

    As the Islamic world increasingly recognises itself as a prominent pole and a unified civilisation, the motives behind Russian actions become more apparent and understandable.

    President Vladimir Putin has already gained international renown and enjoys significant popularity worldwide, particularly in non-Western countries. This popularity lends precise meaning and clear justification to his strategic decisions.

    In essence, Russia is vigorously combating unipolarity, which translates to a broader struggle against globalisation and the Western hegemonic influence. Today, we witness the West, often seen as operating through its proxy, Israel, targeting the Islamic world and subjecting Palestinians to genocide.



    A Palestinian carries the body of a child killed in an Israeli raid on the Jabalia Palestinian refugee camp in the Gaza Strip, on November 1.

    This means that the moment of Islam is coming amid this war between Muslims and Western hegemony that could erupt at any moment. Drawing from my knowledge of the Israelis, there is no doubt that they will not stop until they eliminate the Palestinians.

    “The war now appears to be truly comprehensive on a board scale.” In this case, first and foremost, the Islamic world has objective allies, such as Russia as well as China, which has the Taiwan problem to solve soon. Additional fronts will probably gradually emerge over time.

    The question that arises here is whether this could lead to the outbreak of a third world war. It appears highly likely, and in a sense, it is already underway.

    For the war to escalate globally, a critical mass of unresolved contradictions necessitating military resolution is imperative. This condition has been met. The Western powers exhibit no inclination to surrender their dominion voluntarily, and the new poles, emerging independent civilisations, and extensive regions no longer wish to accept this dominance and tolerate it.

    Moreover, the failure of the United States and the broader collective West to be the leaders of humanity without abandoning policies that incite and fuel new conflicts and wars has been proven.

    The inevitable war must be won.

    Today, we witness the West, often seen as operating through its proxy, Israel, targeting the Islamic world and subjecting Palestinian Arabs to genocide. This means that the moment of Islam is coming, amid this war between Muslims and Western hegemony that could erupt at any moment.

    Trump v Biden

    Ultimately, what role does former US President Donald Trump play in the escalating confrontations between Islam and the West? President Joe Biden staunchly advocates for globalisation, opposes Russia, and fervently supports unipolarity.

    This precisely explains his unwavering backing of the new Nazi regime in Kyiv and his complete exoneration of Israel from its actions, including direct genocide.

    Trump’s position, however, is different. He embodies a classic nationalist perspective, prioritising the interests of the United States as a nation over hasty plans for global dominance.

    Concerning relations with Russia, Trump displays indifference, focusing more on matters of trade and economic competition with China. Nonetheless, he is concurrently subject to and wholly influenced by the potent Zionist lobby within the United States.



    Trump and Biden

    Therefore, the imminent war between the West and Islam should not be met with complacency, not only from the Western perspective but also from Republicans at large.

    In this context, if Trump were to reassume the presidency, it could potentially diminish support for Ukraine, a crucial concern for Russia. However, he might adopt an even more stringent approach towards Muslims and Palestinians, conceivably surpassing the severity of Biden’s policies.

    Realism is imperative, and we must prepare for a challenging, serious, and protracted conflict on the horizon.

    It is important to realise that this is not a religious conflict but rather a materialistic, atheistic imposter’s war against all traditional religions. This means that the moment for the ultimate battle might be upon us.

    Biden staunchly advocates for globalisation, opposes Russia, and fervently supports unipolarity. Trump’s position, however, is different. He embodies a classic nationalist perspective, prioritising the interests of the United States as a nation over hasty plans for global dominance.

    Spectre of nuclear war and death of unipolar system

    Is the imminent conflict moving toward a nuclear war? This prospect cannot be dismissed, especially considering the potential use of tactical nuclear weapons.

    It is improbable that nations possessing strategic nuclear capabilities, such as Russia and NATO countries, would resort to their use, given the catastrophic implications for humanity.

    However, considering the possession of nuclear weapons by Israel, Pakistan, and possibly Iran, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that they could be utilised in localised contexts.

    What will the configuration of the world order during this impending confrontation be like?

    There is no ready answer to such a question. However, one thing can be definitively ruled out, and that is the establishment of a robust, stable, and unipolar global system — a concept fervently championed by proponents of globalisation.

    Regardless of the specific circumstances, a unipolar world is an impossibility. The world will either be multipolar or non-existent. The stronger the West’s resolve to uphold its dominance, the fiercer the ensuing battle is likely to be, potentially escalating into a third world war.

    Multipolarity will not transpire spontaneously. Now, there is a crucial process of reassembly underway within the Islamic world. If Muslims can unify against a shared formidable adversary, the rise of an Islamic power pole becomes viable.

    In my view, the reinstatement of Baghdad and its pivotal role in Iraq could present an ideal resolution. Iraq serves as the convergence point for various major strands of Islamic civilisation, including Arabs, Sunnis, Shiites, Sufis, Salafis, Indo-Europeans, Kurds, and Turks. Baghdad, in particular, has historically been a hub where sciences, religious education, philosophy, and spiritual movements thrived.

    Nevertheless, this proposition remains speculative. Nonetheless, it is evident that the Islamic world will require a unifying foundation or common ground.

    Baghdad could potentially serve as this platform or as the balance point. However, for this vision to materialise, Iraq must first be liberated from the presence of American forces.



    US soldiers play American football before leaving Camp Adder on the outskirts of the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriyah on December 17, 2011, marking the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.

    It appears that each power pole must affirm its right to existence through conflict. Russia, upon securing victory in Ukraine, will become a fully sovereign pole. Similarly, once the Taiwan issue is resolved, China will establish itself as a significant pole.

    The Islamic world, meanwhile, insists on a fair resolution to the Palestinian problem.

    The developments will not halt there; eventually, the roles of India, Africa, and Latin America, which are currently increasingly facing the new forces of colonisation, will also become significant.

    Consequently, all the poles in the multipolar world will have to navigate their unique challenges and trials.

    Eventually, the roles of India, Africa, and Latin America, which are currently increasingly facing the new forces of colonisation, will also become significant. Consequently, all the poles in the multipolar world will have to navigate their unique challenges and trials.

    Multipolarism is probable

    Afterwards, we may witness a partial return to the global order that prevailed before Christopher Columbus, where various empires coexisted alongside Western Europe.

    These empires included the Chinese, Indian, Russian, Ottoman, and Persian, along with robust independent states in South Asia, Africa, Latin America, and even Oceania. Each of these entities had its distinct political and social systems, which Europeans later equated with barbarism and savagery.

    Consequently, multipolarism is entirely plausible, which was the case for humanity before the emergence of Western global imperial politics in the modern era.

    This does not imply an immediate establishment of global peace; however, such a multipolar world system would inherently be more just and balanced.

    All conflicts would be approached based on a fair and collective stance, in which humanity would be protected from racial injustices akin to those witnessed in Nazi Germany, contemporary Israel, or the aggressive dominance of the global West.

    Source: https://en.majalla.com

    *Translated and coordinated by Ramia Yahia

    Read More
    Alexander Dugin: My Vision For The New World Order, And Gaza War – Alexander Dugin Kolozeg27/10/2023 Posted on : 09/11/2023 Alexander Dugin: My Vision For The New World Order, And Gaza War – Alexander Dugin New civilisations are on the rise, including Chinese, Islamic, Indian, African, and Latin American. Russia sees them as potential allies and partners in a genuine and equitable multipolar order, says Aleksandr Dugin. The current global order appears to be in a state of transition. What we are witnessing is a shift away from a unipolar world, which emerged following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the disintegration of the Soviet bloc, towards a multipolar world. The foundations of this multipolar world are becoming increasingly evident, with key players including Russia, China, the Islamic world, India, and potentially Africa and Latin America. These entities represent distinct civilisations, many of which are united within the BRICS group. Notably, after the 2023 Johannesburg summit, this group expanded to include significant countries from the Islamic world, such as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Egypt, as well as Ethiopia, bolstering the African perspective, and Argentina, further solidifying the presence of South American nations. Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud attends a meeting during the 2023 BRICS Summit at the Sandton Convention Centre in Johannesburg Thursday, Aug. 24, 2023. This expansion underscores the growing influence of the multipolar world order while signalling a weakening of Western hegemony. The US and the West’s determination to preserve unilateral dominance The United States and Western powers are resolutely clinging to the concept of unilateralism. At the forefront of global leadership, the United States, in particular, is determined to maintain its dominance across military, political, economic, cultural, and ideological realms. This ongoing pursuit of unipolarity stands as the central contradiction of our era, marked by the intensifying struggle between unipolarity and multipolarity. Within this context, it is imperative to examine the key conflicts and developments in global politics, notably the efforts to undermine Russia as it reasserts its sovereignty and presence as an independent pole. This dynamic helps elucidate the persistent conflict in Ukraine. The Western world’s support for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is driven, in large part, by the desire to prevent Russia from reemerging as an autonomous global actor—an aspiration championed by President Vladimir Putin throughout his tenure. Putin has bolstered the political sovereignty of the Russian Federation and progressively emphasised Russia’s status as an independent civilisation that not only opposes Western hegemony but also rejects its value system. Russia has unambiguously affirmed its commitment to traditional values while firmly rebuffing Western liberalism, including its promotion of the gay rights agenda and other Western ideological standards, which Russia perceives as aberrations and deviations. In response, the West actively supported the 2014 coup in Kyiv, provided extensive military aid to Ukraine, fostered the dissemination of neo-Nazi ideology within the country, and provoked Russia into initiating an extraordinary military operation. Without Putin’s intervention, Kyiv would likely have taken similar actions independently, leading to the opening of the first front in the fierce struggle between multipolarity and unipolarity in Ukraine. Simultaneously, Russia, under Putin’s leadership, recognises that it cannot be one of just two poles in this world, as was the case during the Soviet Union era. New civilisations are on the rise, including Chinese, Islamic, Indian, African, and Latin American. Russia sees them as potential allies and partners in a genuine and equitable multipolar order—a perspective not yet widely acknowledged by the rest of the world. Burkina Faso’s Capt. Ibrahim Traore, left, and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands before an official ceremony to welcome the leaders of delegations to the Russia Africa Summit in St. Petersburg, Russia, July 27, 2023 However, there is a gradual and strengthening awareness of the concept of multipolarity, exemplified by the situation regarding Taiwan, which has been spared from becoming the next flashpoint in the confrontation between unipolarity and multipolarity, particularly in the Pacific region. New civilisations are on the rise, including Chinese, Islamic, Indian, African, and Latin American. Russia sees them as potential allies and partners in a genuine and equitable multipolar order—a perspective not yet widely acknowledged by the rest of the world. Israel’s war on Gaza points to broader confrontation The events in Israel and the Gaza Strip are closely linked to this issue. Two tragic incidents occurred in rapid succession. Firstly, there was a Hamas attack on Israel, resulting in a significant number of civilian casualties and the abduction of hostages. Subsequently, Israel launched retaliatory strikes on the Gaza Strip, characterised by a high degree of brutality and a substantial number of civilian casualties, especially among women and children. These actions unequivocally constitute violations of human rights and crimes against humanity, and they lack any justifiable rationale. But at the same time, Israel’s application of the principles of “lex talionis” (a principle that developed at the beginning of Babylonian law and stipulated that a punishment inflicted should correspond in degree and kind to the offence of the wrongdoer, as an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth) resulted in what is described as a widespread genocide and brutal living conditions for Gaza residents. Both Hamas’s attack and Israel’s response are characterised as actions outside the framework of accepted humanitarian methods to resolve political conflicts. Subsequently, the geopolitical landscape comes into play, and while the magnitude of Israel’s actions is significantly larger, the evaluation of the situation in the Gaza Strip is not solely contingent on that; rather, it hinges on underlying geopolitical trends. The events in Israel, including the Hamas attack and Israel’s response, have led to a broader confrontation between the West and the Islamic world. This confrontation stems from what is seen as unconditional and unilateral support for Israel despite the explicit nature of the crimes committed against the civilian population in Gaza. The Islamic world is portrayed as a distinct pole facing Israel’s actions in Gaza and the broader Palestinian territories while considering the injustices faced by Palestinians who were displaced from their land to live in poor and isolated areas. People gather around a huge Palestinian flag during a protest against Israel in Istanbul on October 20, 2023. The unity of the Islamic world has become undeniable, with the Palestinian issue serving as a unifying force that brings together Sunnis, Shiites, Turks, and Iranians, as well as factions involved in internal conflicts in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Libya. This matter holds direct relevance for countries such as Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Bangladesh. Furthermore, Muslims residing in the United States of America, Europe, Russia, and Africa cannot remain indifferent. Notably, despite their political disparities, Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, and the Jordan River region are joined in a collective effort to safeguard their dignity. The unity of the Islamic world has become undeniable, with the Palestinian issue serving as a unifying force that brings together Sunnis, Shiites, Turks, and Iranians, as well as factions involved in internal conflicts in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Libya. The Palestinian cause and the United States In recent decades, the United States has been successful in preventing Muslims from uniting around the Palestinian issue and encouraging them to normalise relations with Israel. But such attempts are no longer successful. All these efforts have proven futile in recent weeks as the unequivocal support for Israel continues. Israel’s mass slaughter of civilians in Gaza, witnessed by the entire global community, is compelling the Islamic world to set aside internal differences and contemplate direct confrontation with the West. Israel, much like Ukraine, serves as nothing more than an instrument of the overbearing and ruthless Western hegemony. It does not shy away from criminal deeds or racist rhetoric and actions. However, the root of the problem lies not in Israel itself but rather in its role as a geopolitical tool within the framework of a unipolar world. This aligns precisely with what President Vladimir Putin recently articulated when he referred to the web of hostility and conflicts being woven by “spiders,” a metaphor for globalists employing colonialist tactics based on the “divide and rule” principle. To effectively counter those desperately striving to preserve the unipolar world and Western dominance, it is crucial to comprehend the essence of their strategy. Armed with this understanding, we can consciously construct an alternative model to confront this agenda, move forward confidently and unite towards establishing a multipolar world. The ongoing conflict in the Gaza Strip and Palestine as a whole poses a direct challenge not only to specific groups or even Arabs in general but to the entire Islamic world and Islamic civilisation. It’s increasingly evident that the West has engaged in a confrontation with Islam itself, a reality now acknowledged by many. Collective need to defend Muslim nations from mistreatement From nations such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan to regions spanning Tunisia to Bahrain, from Salafists to Sunnis and Sufis, and encompassing various political factions within Palestine, Syria, Libya, Lebanon, as well as the division between Shiites and Sunnis, there is a collective need to defend the dignity of Islamic civilisation. It asserts itself as a sovereign, independent civilisation that rejects any mistreatment. Erdogan’s mention of jihad as a response to the conflict serves as a reminder of the historical Crusades, yet this analogy doesn’t fully capture the essence of the present situation. Modern Western globalisation has diverged significantly from Christian civilisation, having severed many connections with Christian culture in favour of materialism, atheism, and individualism. Christianity has little to do with the material sciences or the socio-economic system primarily driven by profit, and it certainly doesn’t endorse the legalisation of deviations or the embrace of pathology as the norm, nor the inclination towards a post-human existence—a concept enthusiastically promoted by Israeli post-humanist philosopher Yuval Harari. The West, in its contemporary form, represents an anti-Christian phenomenon, lacking any connection to the values of Christianity or the embrace of the Christian cross. It’s essential to recognise that when the Islamic world clashes with the West, it is not engaging in a conflict with the civilisation of Christ but rather with an anti-Christian civilisation, which can be termed the civilisation of the Antichrist. Russia, as a significant global player, is actively engaged in a war with the West on the soil of Ukraine. Russian recruits take a train at a railway station in Prudboi, in Russia’s Volgograd region, Thursday, Sept. 29, 2022. President Vladimir Putin announced a partial mobilization, the first since World War II, amid the war in Ukraine. Unfortunately, due to the influence of Western propaganda, many Islamic countries have not fully grasped the underlying reasons, objectives, and nature of this conflict, often perceiving it as a mere regional dispute. However, as globalisation directly impacts Muslims worldwide, Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine takes on a vastly different significance. Ultimately, it signifies a clash between a multipolar world and a unipolar one, i.e., this war serves the interests not only of Russia as a global pole but indirectly, or even directly, of all such poles. China is well-equipped to comprehend this, and within the Islamic world, Iran is among those that can grasp this perspective. Notably, geopolitical awareness has been rapidly on the rise in other Islamic societies, including in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, and Indonesia. This has led to initiatives like the reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran and Turkey’s pursuit of a sovereign policy. Israel’s mass slaughter of civilians in Gaza, witnessed by the entire global community, is compelling the Islamic world to set aside internal differences and contemplate direct confrontation with the West. Russian motives and spectre of WWIII As the Islamic world increasingly recognises itself as a prominent pole and a unified civilisation, the motives behind Russian actions become more apparent and understandable. President Vladimir Putin has already gained international renown and enjoys significant popularity worldwide, particularly in non-Western countries. This popularity lends precise meaning and clear justification to his strategic decisions. In essence, Russia is vigorously combating unipolarity, which translates to a broader struggle against globalisation and the Western hegemonic influence. Today, we witness the West, often seen as operating through its proxy, Israel, targeting the Islamic world and subjecting Palestinians to genocide. A Palestinian carries the body of a child killed in an Israeli raid on the Jabalia Palestinian refugee camp in the Gaza Strip, on November 1. This means that the moment of Islam is coming amid this war between Muslims and Western hegemony that could erupt at any moment. Drawing from my knowledge of the Israelis, there is no doubt that they will not stop until they eliminate the Palestinians. “The war now appears to be truly comprehensive on a board scale.” In this case, first and foremost, the Islamic world has objective allies, such as Russia as well as China, which has the Taiwan problem to solve soon. Additional fronts will probably gradually emerge over time. The question that arises here is whether this could lead to the outbreak of a third world war. It appears highly likely, and in a sense, it is already underway. For the war to escalate globally, a critical mass of unresolved contradictions necessitating military resolution is imperative. This condition has been met. The Western powers exhibit no inclination to surrender their dominion voluntarily, and the new poles, emerging independent civilisations, and extensive regions no longer wish to accept this dominance and tolerate it. Moreover, the failure of the United States and the broader collective West to be the leaders of humanity without abandoning policies that incite and fuel new conflicts and wars has been proven. The inevitable war must be won. Today, we witness the West, often seen as operating through its proxy, Israel, targeting the Islamic world and subjecting Palestinian Arabs to genocide. This means that the moment of Islam is coming, amid this war between Muslims and Western hegemony that could erupt at any moment. Trump v Biden Ultimately, what role does former US President Donald Trump play in the escalating confrontations between Islam and the West? President Joe Biden staunchly advocates for globalisation, opposes Russia, and fervently supports unipolarity. This precisely explains his unwavering backing of the new Nazi regime in Kyiv and his complete exoneration of Israel from its actions, including direct genocide. Trump’s position, however, is different. He embodies a classic nationalist perspective, prioritising the interests of the United States as a nation over hasty plans for global dominance. Concerning relations with Russia, Trump displays indifference, focusing more on matters of trade and economic competition with China. Nonetheless, he is concurrently subject to and wholly influenced by the potent Zionist lobby within the United States. Trump and Biden Therefore, the imminent war between the West and Islam should not be met with complacency, not only from the Western perspective but also from Republicans at large. In this context, if Trump were to reassume the presidency, it could potentially diminish support for Ukraine, a crucial concern for Russia. However, he might adopt an even more stringent approach towards Muslims and Palestinians, conceivably surpassing the severity of Biden’s policies. Realism is imperative, and we must prepare for a challenging, serious, and protracted conflict on the horizon. It is important to realise that this is not a religious conflict but rather a materialistic, atheistic imposter’s war against all traditional religions. This means that the moment for the ultimate battle might be upon us. Biden staunchly advocates for globalisation, opposes Russia, and fervently supports unipolarity. Trump’s position, however, is different. He embodies a classic nationalist perspective, prioritising the interests of the United States as a nation over hasty plans for global dominance. Spectre of nuclear war and death of unipolar system Is the imminent conflict moving toward a nuclear war? This prospect cannot be dismissed, especially considering the potential use of tactical nuclear weapons. It is improbable that nations possessing strategic nuclear capabilities, such as Russia and NATO countries, would resort to their use, given the catastrophic implications for humanity. However, considering the possession of nuclear weapons by Israel, Pakistan, and possibly Iran, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that they could be utilised in localised contexts. What will the configuration of the world order during this impending confrontation be like? There is no ready answer to such a question. However, one thing can be definitively ruled out, and that is the establishment of a robust, stable, and unipolar global system — a concept fervently championed by proponents of globalisation. Regardless of the specific circumstances, a unipolar world is an impossibility. The world will either be multipolar or non-existent. The stronger the West’s resolve to uphold its dominance, the fiercer the ensuing battle is likely to be, potentially escalating into a third world war. Multipolarity will not transpire spontaneously. Now, there is a crucial process of reassembly underway within the Islamic world. If Muslims can unify against a shared formidable adversary, the rise of an Islamic power pole becomes viable. In my view, the reinstatement of Baghdad and its pivotal role in Iraq could present an ideal resolution. Iraq serves as the convergence point for various major strands of Islamic civilisation, including Arabs, Sunnis, Shiites, Sufis, Salafis, Indo-Europeans, Kurds, and Turks. Baghdad, in particular, has historically been a hub where sciences, religious education, philosophy, and spiritual movements thrived. Nevertheless, this proposition remains speculative. Nonetheless, it is evident that the Islamic world will require a unifying foundation or common ground. Baghdad could potentially serve as this platform or as the balance point. However, for this vision to materialise, Iraq must first be liberated from the presence of American forces. US soldiers play American football before leaving Camp Adder on the outskirts of the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriyah on December 17, 2011, marking the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. It appears that each power pole must affirm its right to existence through conflict. Russia, upon securing victory in Ukraine, will become a fully sovereign pole. Similarly, once the Taiwan issue is resolved, China will establish itself as a significant pole. The Islamic world, meanwhile, insists on a fair resolution to the Palestinian problem. The developments will not halt there; eventually, the roles of India, Africa, and Latin America, which are currently increasingly facing the new forces of colonisation, will also become significant. Consequently, all the poles in the multipolar world will have to navigate their unique challenges and trials. Eventually, the roles of India, Africa, and Latin America, which are currently increasingly facing the new forces of colonisation, will also become significant. Consequently, all the poles in the multipolar world will have to navigate their unique challenges and trials. Multipolarism is probable Afterwards, we may witness a partial return to the global order that prevailed before Christopher Columbus, where various empires coexisted alongside Western Europe. These empires included the Chinese, Indian, Russian, Ottoman, and Persian, along with robust independent states in South Asia, Africa, Latin America, and even Oceania. Each of these entities had its distinct political and social systems, which Europeans later equated with barbarism and savagery. Consequently, multipolarism is entirely plausible, which was the case for humanity before the emergence of Western global imperial politics in the modern era. This does not imply an immediate establishment of global peace; however, such a multipolar world system would inherently be more just and balanced. All conflicts would be approached based on a fair and collective stance, in which humanity would be protected from racial injustices akin to those witnessed in Nazi Germany, contemporary Israel, or the aggressive dominance of the global West. Source: https://en.majalla.com *Translated and coordinated by Ramia Yahia Read More
    0 Comments 0 Shares 16784 Views
  • The Palestinian Islamic Jihad is often viewed in the west as an "extremist" group, mostly a misunderstanding based on their oh-so "scary" name.

    Last Monday I was speaking to a Palestinian with considerable knowledge on the Palestinian resistance factions, and he told me something very interesting about the PIJ.

    The PIJ is a fighting organization, not a political organization in the traditional sense. Unlike Hamas, Fatah or even the PFLP, the PIJ do not have any set-in-stone vision for a future Palestinian state.

    The PIJ does not envision political leadership in a liberated Palestine. Their political program makes it abundantly clear that they will leave political decision-making be up to the Palestinian people to decide.

    Their refusal to engage in bureaucratic politics also makes them the only resistance group none of their other groups dare to criticize. By solely focusing on the armed struggle, the PIJ would never be involved in murky corruption scandals like other groups have been in the past.

    The PIJ is a moderately religious organization, and perhaps one could argue even more moderate than Hamas. Their political program calls for the total unification of the Islamic nation between both Sunnis and Shias, and envisions the fostering of a democratic culture in which all internal disputes can be resolved in a respectful and grounded manner without the interference of foreign powers.

    Palestinian hunger striker Khader Adnan who passed away in May this year due to starvation from his hunger strike, was affiliated with the PIJ, and served as their spokesman in the early 2000s. He was a respected figure by all Palestinians across the political spectrum, and would often be seen mingling with student groups from all factions. Khader Adnan was, in many ways, the physical embodiment of the political catch-all nature of the PIJ.



    Aldan Marki X

    https://t.me/VanessaBeeley/20477
    The Palestinian Islamic Jihad is often viewed in the west as an "extremist" group, mostly a misunderstanding based on their oh-so "scary" name. Last Monday I was speaking to a Palestinian with considerable knowledge on the Palestinian resistance factions, and he told me something very interesting about the PIJ. The PIJ is a fighting organization, not a political organization in the traditional sense. Unlike Hamas, Fatah or even the PFLP, the PIJ do not have any set-in-stone vision for a future Palestinian state. The PIJ does not envision political leadership in a liberated Palestine. Their political program makes it abundantly clear that they will leave political decision-making be up to the Palestinian people to decide. Their refusal to engage in bureaucratic politics also makes them the only resistance group none of their other groups dare to criticize. By solely focusing on the armed struggle, the PIJ would never be involved in murky corruption scandals like other groups have been in the past. The PIJ is a moderately religious organization, and perhaps one could argue even more moderate than Hamas. Their political program calls for the total unification of the Islamic nation between both Sunnis and Shias, and envisions the fostering of a democratic culture in which all internal disputes can be resolved in a respectful and grounded manner without the interference of foreign powers. Palestinian hunger striker Khader Adnan who passed away in May this year due to starvation from his hunger strike, was affiliated with the PIJ, and served as their spokesman in the early 2000s. He was a respected figure by all Palestinians across the political spectrum, and would often be seen mingling with student groups from all factions. Khader Adnan was, in many ways, the physical embodiment of the political catch-all nature of the PIJ. Aldan Marki X https://t.me/VanessaBeeley/20477
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2106 Views
  • Endless “glitches” are plaguing our banking system. For example, the glitch that caused paychecks not to be deposited at many banks on Friday still has not been fully resolved. Then there is online banking...
    Endless “glitches” are plaguing our banking system. For example, the glitch that caused paychecks not to be deposited at many banks on Friday still has not been fully resolved. Then there is online banking...
    Like
    3
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1293 Views
  • 🚨 OUTAGE ALERT 🚨
    We're sorry to inform you that we experienced an unexpected outage due to an upgrade of a core system service. The upgrade did not go as planned, resulting in an outage that affected some of our services.

    We're happy to report that we have successfully recovered from the outage and fixed the issue. Our team worked to resolve the problem as quickly as possible.

    We appreciate your patience and understanding during this time. If you encounter any other issues, please don't hesitate to reach out to us. We're here to help! 😊 #outage #upgrade #systemissue #resolved
    🚨 OUTAGE ALERT 🚨 We're sorry to inform you that we experienced an unexpected outage due to an upgrade of a core system service. The upgrade did not go as planned, resulting in an outage that affected some of our services. We're happy to report that we have successfully recovered from the outage and fixed the issue. Our team worked to resolve the problem as quickly as possible. We appreciate your patience and understanding during this time. If you encounter any other issues, please don't hesitate to reach out to us. We're here to help! 😊 #outage #upgrade #systemissue #resolved
    Like
    Love
    6
    2 Comments 1 Shares 5289 Views
More Results