NEOM - THE LINE - THE RISE AND FALL OF SAUDI ARABIA'S LINEAR CITY. https://www.bitchute.com/video/FuCzeb5wHUIy/

Pre-emptive Nuclear War: The Role of Israel in Triggering an Attack on Iran Chapter III of "The Globalization of War" by Michel Chossudovsky Firmly 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. Author’s Introduction and Update In a recent article entitled “A Planned US-Israeli Attack on Iran is Contemplated” I focussed on how Israel’s criminal attack on the People of Palestine could evolve towards an extended Middle East War. At the time of writing, US-NATO war ships –including two aircraft carriers, combat planes, not to mention a nuclear submarine– are deployed in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Red Sea, all of which are intended to confront what both Western politicians and the media casually describe as “Palestine’s Aggression against the Jewish State”. “Israel ranks” as “the 4th strongest military” after Russia, the U.S and China. Ask yourself: Why on earth would Israel need the support of U.S. aircraft carriers to lead a genocide against the Palestinians who are fighting for their lives with limited military capabilities. Is the U.S. intent upon triggering a broader war? “U.S. Warns Hezbollah, Iran. It Will intervene if they Escalate” Who is “Escalating”? The Pentagon has already intimated that it will attack Iran and Lebanon, “If they Escalate”. Is the Pentagon Seeking to Trigger one or more “False Flags”? Times of Israel, November 9, 2023 Also of significance (less than 4 months prior to October 7, 2023) is the adoption on June 27, 2023 of the US Congress Resolution (H. RES. 559) which Accuses Iran of Possessing Nuclear Weapons. H.RES 559 allows the use of force against Iran, intimating that Iran has Nuclear Weapons. Whereas Iran is tagged (without a shred of evidence) as a Nuclear Power by the U.S. Congress, Washington fails to acknowledge that Israel is an undeclared nuclear power. The article below was first published in my book entitled “The Globalization of War. America’s Long War against Humanity” (2015). I remain indebted to the former Prime Minister of Malaysia Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad who took the initiative of launching my book in Kuala Lumpur. (image right). Firmly committed to “the criminalization of war”, Tun Mahathir is a powerful voice in support of Palestine. The article below (Chapter III of “Globalization of War”) provides analysis in a historical perspective of U.S. war plans directed against Iran. Numerous “war theater scenarios” for an all-out attack on Iran have been contemplated. Dangerous Crossroads in our History The current and ongoing US-NATO military deployment in The Middle East — casually presented by the media as a means to coming to the rescue of Israel– is the pinnacle of U.S. war preparations extending over a period of more than 20 years. Contemplated by the Pentagon in 2005 was a scenario whereby an attack by Israel would be conducted on behalf of Washington: “An attack by Israel could, however, be used as “the trigger mechanism” which would unleash an all-out war against Iran, as well as retaliation by Iran directed against Israel.” (quoted from text below) At the outset of Bush’s second term “Vice President Dick Cheney had 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” (Ibid) The article also focusses on the dangers of a US-Israel nuclear attack against Iran which has been contemplated by the Pentagon since 2004. The US Israel “Partnership”: “Signed” Military Agreement Amply documented, the U.S. Military and Intelligence apparatus is firmly behind Israel’s genocide. In the words of Lt General Richard Clark: Americans Troops are “prepared to die for the Jewish State”. What should be understood by this statement is that the US and Israel have a longstanding Military “Partnership” as well as (Jerusalem Post) a “Signed” Military Agreement (classified) regarding Israel’s attack on Gaza. Lt. General Richard Clark is U.S. Third Air Force Commander, among the highest-ranking military officers in the U.S. Armed Forces. While he refers to Juniper Cobra, “a joint military exercise that has been conducted for almost a decade”, his statement points to a much broader “signed” military-intelligence agreement (classified) with Israel which no doubt includes the extension of the Israeli-US bombing of Gaza to the broader Middle East. While this so-called “signed” military agreement remains classified (not in the public domain), it would appear that Biden is obeying the orders of the perpetrators of this diabolical military agenda. Does President Biden have the authority (under this “Signed” Agreement with Israel) to save the lives of innocent civilians including the children of Palestine: Q (Inaudible) Gaza ceasefire, Mr. President? THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me? Q What are the chances of a Gaza ceasefire? THE PRESIDENT: None. No possibility. White House Press Conference, November 9, 2023 Lt. General Clark confirms that: “U.S. troops could be put under Israeli commanders in the battlefield”, which suggests that the genocide is implemented by Netanyahu on behalf of the United States. Everything indicates that the US military and intelligence apparatus are behind Israel’s criminal bombing and invasion of Gaza. We stand firmly in Solidarity with Palestine and the People of the Middle East. It is my intent and sincere hope that my writings (including the text below) will contribute to “Revealing the Truth” as well “Reversing the Tide of Global Warfare”. Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, November 17, 2023, March 10, 2024 Pre-emptive Nuclear War: The Role of Israel in Triggering an Attack on Iran by Michel Chossudovsky Introduction While one can conceptualize the loss of life and destruction resulting from present-day wars including Iraq and Afghanistan, it is impossible to fully comprehend the devastation which might result from a Third World War, using “new technologies” and advanced weapons, until it occurs and becomes a reality. The international community has endorsed nuclear war in the name of world peace. “Making the world safer” is the justification for launching a military operation which could potentially result in a nuclear holocaust.” The stockpiling and deployment of advanced weapons systems directed against Iran started in the immediate wake of the 2003 bombing and invasion of Iraq. From the outset, these war plans were led by the U.S. in liaison with NATO and Israel. Following the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration identified Iran and Syria as the next stage of “the road map to war”. U.S. military sources intimated at the time that an aerial attack on Iran could involve a large scale deployment comparable to the U.S. “shock and awe” bombing raids on Iraq in March 2003: American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq.1 “Theater Iran Near Term” (TIRANNT) Code named by U.S. military planners as TIRANNT, “Theater Iran Near Term”, simulations of an attack on Iran were initiated in May 2003 “when modelers and intelligence specialists pulled together the data needed for theater-level (meaning large-scale) scenario analysis for Iran.”2 The scenarios identified several thousand targets inside Iran as part of a “Shock and Awe” Blitzkrieg: The analysis, called TIRANNT, for “Theater Iran Near Term,” was coupled with a mock scenario for a Marine Corps invasion and a simulation of the Iranian missile force. U.S. and British planners conducted a Caspian Sea war game around the same time. And Bush directed the U.S. Strategic Command to draw up a global strike war plan for an attack against Iranian weapons of mass destruction. All of this will ultimately feed into a new war plan for “major combat operations” against Iran that military sources confirm now [April 2006] exists in draft form. … Under TIRANNT, Army and U.S. Central Command planners have been examining both near-term and out-year scenarios for war with Iran, including all aspects of a major combat operation, from mobilization and deployment of forces through postwar stability operations after regime change.3 Different “theater scenarios” for an all-out attack on Iran had been contemplated: The U.S. army, navy, air force and marines have all prepared battle plans and spent four years building bases and training for “Operation Iranian Freedom”. Admiral Fallon, the new head of U.S. Central Command, has inherited computerized plans under the name TIRANNT (Theatre Iran Near Term).4 In 2004, drawing upon the initial war scenarios under TIRANNT, Vice President Dick Cheney instructed U.S. Strategic Command (U.S.STRATCOM) to draw up a “contingency plan” of a large scale military operation directed against Iran “to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States” on the presumption that the government in Tehran would be behind the terrorist plot. The plan included the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state: The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than four hundred fifty major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program develop- ment sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of ter- rorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing –that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack– but no one is prepared to dam- age his career by posing any objections.5 The Military Road Map: “First Iraq, then Iran” The decision to target Iran under TIRANNT was part of the broader process of military planning and sequencing of military operations. Already under the Clinton administration (1995), U.S. Central Command (U.S.CENTCOM) had formulated “in war theater plans” to invade first Iraq and then Iran. Access to Middle East oil was the stated strategic objective: 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. U.S.CENTCOM’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.6 The war on Iran was viewed as part of a succession of military operations. According to (former) NATO Commander General Wesley Clark, the Pentagon’s military road-map consisted of a sequence of countries: [The] Five-year campaign plan [includes]… a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.6 (For further details, see Chapter I) The Role of Israel There has been much debate regarding the role of Israel in initiating an attack against Iran. Israel is part of a military alliance. Tel Aviv is not a prime mover. It does not have a separate and distinct military agenda. Israel is integrated into the “war plan for major combat operations” against Iran formulated in 2006 by U.S. Strategic Command (U.S.STRATCOM). In the context of large scale military operations, an uncoordinated unilateral military action by one coalition partner, namely Israel, is from a military and strategic point almost an impossibility. Israel is a de facto member of NATO. Any action by Israel would require a “green light” from Washington. An attack by Israel could, however, be used as “the trigger mechanism” which would unleash an all-out war against Iran, as well as retaliation by Iran directed against Israel. In this regard, there are indications going back to the Bush administration that Washington had indeed contemplated the option of an initial (U.S. backed) attack by Israel rather than an outright U.S.-led military operation directed against Iran. The Israeli attack –although led in close liaison with the Pentagon and NATO– would have been presented to public opinion as a unilateral decision by Tel Aviv. It would then have been used by Washington to justify, in the eyes of World opinion, a military intervention of the U.S. and NATO with a view to “defending Israel”, rather than attacking Iran. Under existing military cooperation agreements, both the U.S. and NATO would be “obligated” to “defend Israel” against Iran and Syria. It is worth noting, in this regard, that at the outset of Bush’s second term, (former) Vice President Dick Cheney had 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 U.S. military involvement and without us putting pressure on them “to do it.”8 According to Cheney: 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.9 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.10 What we are dealing with is a process of joint U.S.-NATO-Israel military planning. An operation to bomb Iran has been in the active planning stage since 2004. Officials in the Defense Department, under Bush and Obama, have been working assiduously with their Israeli military and intelligence counterparts, carefully identifying targets inside Iran. In practical military terms, any action by Israel would have to be planned and coordinated at the highest levels of the U.S. led coalition. Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Vice President Dick Cheney discuss a vision of peace for Israel and Palestine as they conduct a press briefing in Jerusalem, Israel, March 19, 2002. Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Vice President Dick Cheney discuss a vision of peace for Israel and Palestine as they conduct a press briefing in Jerusalem, Israel, March 19, 2002. “It is our hope that the current violence and terrorism will be replaced by reconciliation and the rebuilding of mutual trust,” said the Vice President. (Source) An attack by Israel against Iran would also require coordinated U.S.-NATO logistical support, particularly with regard to Israel’s air defense system, which since January 2009 is fully integrated into that of the U.S. and NATO.11 Israel’s X band radar system established in early 2009 with U.S. technical support has “integrate[d] Israel’s missile defenses with the U.S. global missile [Space-based] detection network, which includes satellites, Aegis ships on the Mediterranean, Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and land-based Patriot radars and interceptors.”12 What this means is that Washington ultimately calls the shots. The U.S. rather than Israel controls the air defense system: 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.13 The U.S. military oversees Israel’s Air Defense system, which is integrated into the Pentagon’s global system. In other words, Israel cannot launch a war against Iran without Washington’s consent. Hence the importance of the so-called “Green Light” legislation in the U.S. Congress sponsored by the Republican party under House Resolution 1553, which explicitly supported an Israeli attack on Iran: The measure, introduced by Texas Republican Louie Gohmert and 46 of his colleagues, endorses Israel’s use of “all means necessary” against Iran “including the use of military force.” … “We’ve got to get this done. We need to show our support for Israel. We need to quit playing games with this critical ally in such a difficult area”.14 In practice, the proposed legislation serves as a “Green Light” to the White House and the Pentagon rather than to Israel. It constitutes a rubber stamp to a U.S. sponsored war on Iran which uses Israel as a convenient military launch pad. It also serves as a justification to wage war with a view to defending Israel. In this context, Israel could indeed provide the pretext to wage war, in response to alleged Hamas or Hezbollah attacks and/or the triggering of hostilities on the border of Israel with Lebanon. What is crucial to understand is that a minor “incident” could be used as a pretext to spark off a major military operation against Iran. Known to U.S. military planners, Israel (rather than the U.S.A) would be the first target of military retaliation by Iran. Broadly speaking, Israelis would be the victims of the machinations of both Washington and their own government. It is, in this regard, absolutely crucial that Israelis forcefully oppose any action by the Netanyahu government to attack Iran. Global Warfare: The Role of U.S. Strategic Command (U.S.STRATCOM) In January 2005, at the outset of the military deployment and build-up directed against Iran, U.S.STRATCOM was identified as “the lead Combatant Command for integration and synchronization of DoD-wide efforts in combating weapons of mass destruction.”15 What this means is that the coordination of a large scale attack on Iran, including the various scenarios of escalation in and beyond the broader Middle East Central Asian region would be coordinated by U.S.STRATCOM. (See Chapter I). Confirmed by military documents as well as official statements, both the U.S. and Israel contemplate the use of nuclear weapons directed against Iran. In 2006, U.S. Strategic Command (U.S.STRATCOM) announced it had achieved an operational capability for rapidly striking targets around the globe using nuclear or conventional weapons. This announcement was made after the conduct of military simulations pertaining to a U.S. led nuclear attack against a fictional country.16 Continuity in Relation to the Bush-Cheney Era President Obama has largely endorsed the doctrine of pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons formulated by the previous administration. Under the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review, the Obama administration confirmed “that it is reserving the right to use nuclear weapons against Iran” for its non-compliance with U.S. demands regarding its alleged (nonexistent) nuclear weapons program.17 The Obama administration has also intimated that it would use nukes in the case of an Iranian response to an Israeli attack on Iran. Israel has also drawn up its own “secret plans” to bomb Iran with tactical nuclear weapons: Israeli military commanders believe conventional strikes may no longer be enough to annihilate increasingly well-defended enrichment facilities. Several have been built beneath at least 70ft of concrete and rock. However, the nuclear-tipped bunker-busters would be used only if a conventional attack was ruled out and if the United States declined to intervene, senior sources said.18 Obama’s statements on the use of nuclear weapons against Iran and North Korea are consistent with post-9/11 U.S. nuclear weapons doctrine, which allows for the use of tactical nuclear weapons in the conventional war theater. Through a propaganda campaign which has enlisted the support of “authoritative” nuclear scientists, mini-nukes are upheld as an instrument of peace, namely a means to combating “Islamic terrorism” and instating Western style “democracy” in Iran. The low-yield nukes have been cleared for “battlefield use”. They are slated to be used against Iran and Syria in the next stage of America’s “War on Terrorism” alongside conventional weapons: Administration officials argue that low-yield nuclear weapons are needed as a credible deterrent against rogue states. [Iran, Syria, North Korea] Their logic is that existing nuclear weapons are too destructive to be used except in a full-scale nuclear war. Potential enemies realize this, thus they do not consider the threat of nuclear retaliation to be credible. However, low-yield nuclear weapons are less destructive, thus might conceivably be used. That would make them more effective as a deterrent.19 The preferred nuclear weapon to be used against Iran are tactical nuclear weapons (Made in America), namely bunker buster bombs with nuclear warheads (for example, B61-11), with an explosive capacity between one third to six times a Hiroshima bomb. The B61-11 is the “nuclear version” of the “conventional” BLU 113. or Guided Bomb Unit GBU-28. It can be delivered in much same way as the conventional bunker buster bomb.20 While the U.S. does not contemplate the use of strategic thermonuclear weapons against Iran, Israel’s nuclear arsenal is largely composed of thermonuclear bombs which are deployed and could be used in a war with Iran. Under Israel’s Jericho III missile system with a range between 4,800 km to 6,500 km, all Iran would be within reach. Radioactive Fallout The issue of radioactive fallout and contamination, while casually dismissed by U.S.-NATO military analysts, would be devastating, potentially affecting a large area of the broader Middle East (including Israel) and Central Asian region. In an utterly twisted logic, nuclear weapons are presented as a means to building peace and preventing “collateral damage”. Iran’s nonexistent nuclear weapons are a threat to global security, whereas those of the U.S. and Israel are instruments of peace “harmless to the surrounding civilian population.” “The Mother of All Bombs” (MOAB) Slated to be Used against Iran? Of military significance within the U.S. conventional weapons arsenal is the 21,500-pound “monster weapon” nicknamed the “mother of all bombs” The GBU-43/B or Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb (MOAB) was categorized “as the most powerful non-nuclear weapon ever designed” with the the largest yield in the U.S. conventional arsenal. The MOAB was tested in early March 2003 before being deployed to the Iraq war theater. According to U.S. military sources, the Joint Chiefs of Staff had advised the government of Saddam Hussein prior to launching the 2003 that the “mother of all bombs” was to be used against Iraq. (There were unconfirmed reports that it had been used in Iraq). The U.S. Department of Defense already confirmed in 2009 that it intends to use the “Mother of All Bombs” (MOAB) against Iran. The MOAB is said to be ”ideally suited to hit deeply buried nuclear facilities such as Natanz or Qom in Iran”21. The truth of the matter is that the MOAB, given its explosive capacity, would result in significant civilian casualties. It is a conventional “killing machine” with a nuclear type mushroom cloud. The procurement of four MOABs was commissioned in October 2009 at the hefty cost of $58.4 million, ($14.6 million for each bomb). This amount includes the costs of development and testing as well as integration of the MOAB bombs onto B-2 stealth bombers. This procurement is directly linked to war preparations in relation to Iran. The notification was contained in a ninety-three-page “reprograming memo” which included the following instructions: “The Department has an Urgent Operational Need (UON) for the capability to strike hard and deeply buried targets in high threat environments. The MOAB [Mother of All Bombs] is the weapon of choice to meet the requirements of the UON [Urgent Operational Need].” It further states that the request is endorsed by Pacific Command (which has responsibility over North Korea) and Central Command (which has responsibility over Iran).23 The Pentagon is planning on a process of extensive destruction of Iran’s infrastructure and mass civilian casualties through the combined use of tactical nukes and monster conventional mushroom cloud bombs, including the MOAB and the larger GBU-57A/B or Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), which surpasses the MOAB in terms of explosive capacity. The MOP is described as “a powerful new bomb aimed squarely at the underground nuclear facilities of Iran and North Korea. The gargantuan bomb–longer than eleven persons standing shoulder-to-shoulder or more than twenty feet base to nose”.24 These are WMDs in the true sense of the word. The not so hidden objective of the MOAB and MOP, including the American nickname used to casually describe the MOAB (“Mother of all Bombs”), is “mass destruction” and mass civilian casualties with a view to instilling fear and despair. State of the Art Weaponry: “War Made Possible Through New Technologies” The process of U.S. military decision making in relation to Iran is supported by Star Wars, the militarization of outer space and the revolution in communications and information systems. Given the advances in military technology and the development of new weapons systems, an attack on Iran could be significantly different in terms of the mix of weapons systems, when compared to the March 2003 Blitzkrieg launched against Iraq. The Iran operation is slated to use the most advanced weapons systems in support of its aerial attacks. In all likelihood, new weapons systems will be tested. The 2000 Project for the New American Century (PNAC) document entitled Rebuilding American Defenses, outlined the mandate of the U.S. military in terms of large scale theater wars, to be waged simultaneously in different regions of the World: “Fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars”. (See Chapter I) This formulation is tantamount to a global war of conquest by a single imperial superpower. The PNAC document also called for the transformation of U.S. forces to exploit the “revolution in military affairs”, namely the implementation of “war made possible through new technologies”.25 The latter consists in developing and perfecting a state of the art global killing machine based on an arsenal of sophisticated new weaponry, which would eventually replace the existing paradigms. Thus, it can be foreseen that the process of transformation will in fact be a two-stage process: first of transition, then of more thoroughgoing transformation. The breakpoint will come when a preponderance of new weapons systems begins to enter service, perhaps when, for example, unmanned aerial vehicles begin to be as numerous as manned aircraft. In this regard, the Pentagon should be very wary of making large investments in new programs –tanks, planes, aircraft carriers, for example– that would commit U.S. forces to current paradigms of warfare for many decades to come.26 The war on Iran could indeed mark this crucial break-point, with new space-based weapons systems being applied with a view to disabling an enemy which has significant conventional military capabilities including more than half a million ground forces. Electromagnetic Weapons Electromagnetic weapons could be used to destabilize Iran’s communications systems, disable electric power generation, undermine and destabilize command and control, government infrastructure, transportation, energy, etc. Within the same family of weapons, environmental modifications techniques (ENMOD) (weather warfare) developed under the HAARP program could also be applied.27 These weapons systems are fully operational. In this context, the U.S. Air Force document AF 2025 explicitly acknowledged the military applications of weather modification technologies: Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally. … It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog, and storms on earth or to modify space weather, improve communications through ionospheric modification (the use of ionospheric mirrors), and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of technologies which can provide substantial increase in U.S., or degraded capability in an adversary, to achieve global awareness, reach, and power.28 Electromagnetic radiation enabling “remote health impairment” might also be envisaged in the war theater.29 In turn, new uses of biological weapons by the U.S. military might also be envisaged as suggested by the PNAC: “[A]dvanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.”30 Iran’s Military Capabilities: Medium and Long-range Missiles Iran has advanced military capabilities, including medium and long-range missiles capable of reaching targets in Israel and the Gulf States. Hence the emphasis by the U.S.-NATO Israel alliance on the use of nuclear weapons, which are slated to be used either pre-emptively or in response to an Iranian retaliatory missile attack. In November 2006, Iran tests of surface missiles two were marked by precise planning in a carefully staged operation. According to a senior American missile expert, “the Iranians demonstrated up-to-date missile-launching technology which the West had not known them to possess.”31 Israel acknowledged that “the Shehab-3, whose 2,000-km range brings Israel, the Middle East and Europe within reach”.32 According to Uzi Rubin, former head of Israel’s anti-ballistic missile program, “the intensity of the military exercise was unprecedented… It was meant to make an impression – and it made an impression.”33 The 2006 exercises, while creating a political stir in the U.S. and Israel, did not in any way modify U.S.-NATO-Israeli resolve to wage war on Iran. Tehran has confirmed in several statements that it will respond if it is attacked. Israel would be the immediate object of Iranian missile attacks as confirmed by the Iranian government. The issue of Israel’s air defense system is therefore crucial. U.S. and allied military facilities in the Gulf states, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iraq could also be targeted by Iran. Iran’s Ground Forces While Iran is encircled by U.S. and allied military bases, the Islamic Republic has significant military capabilities. What is important to acknowledge is the sheer size of Iranian forces in terms of personnel (army, navy, air force) when compared to U.S. and NATO forces serving in Afghanistan and Iraq. Confronted with a well-organized insurgency, coalition forces are already overstretched in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Would these forces be able to cope if Iranian ground forces were to enter the existing battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan? The potential of the Resistance movement to U.S. and allied occupation would inevitably be affected. Iranian ground forces are of the order of 700,000 of which 130,000 are professional soldiers, 220,000 are conscripts and 350,000 are reservists.34 There are 18,000 personnel in Iran’s Navy and 52,000 in the Air Force. According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, “the Revolutionary Guards has an estimated 125,000 personnel in five branches: Its own Navy, Air Force, and Ground Forces; and the Quds Force (Special Forces).” According to the CISS, Iran’s Basij paramilitary volunteer force controlled by the Revolu- tionary Guards “has an estimated 90,000 active-duty full-time uniformed members, 300,000 reservists, and a total of 11 million men that can be mobilized if need be”35, In other words, Iran can mobilize up to half a million regular troops and several million militia. Its Quds special forces are already operating inside Iraq. U.S. Military and Allied Facilities Surrounding Iran For several years now, Iran has been conducting its own war drills and exercises. While its Air Force has weaknesses, its intermediate and long-range missiles are fully operational. Iran’s military is in a state of readiness. Iranian troop concentrations are currently within a few kilometers of the Iraqi and Afghan borders, and within proximity of Kuwait. The Iranian Navy is deployed in the Persian Gulf within proximity of U.S. and allied military facilities in the United Arab Emirates. It is worth noting that in response to Iran’s military build-up, the U.S. has been transferring large amounts of weapons to its non-NATO allies in the Persian Gulf including Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. While Iran’s advanced weapons do not measure up to those of the U.S. and NATO, Iranian forces would be in a position to inflict substantial losses to coalition forces in a conventional war theater, on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan. Iranian ground troops and tanks in December 2009 crossed the border into Iraq without being confronted or challenged by allied forces and occupied a disputed territory in the East Maysan oil field. Even in the event of an effective Blitzkrieg, which targets Iran’s military facilities, its communications systems etc., through massive aerial bombing, using cruise missiles, conventional bunker buster bombs and tactical nuclear weapons, a war with Iran, once initiated, could eventually lead into a ground war. This is something which U.S. military planners have no doubt contemplated in their simulated war scenarios. An operation of this nature would result in significant military and civilian casualties, particularly if nuclear weapons are used. Within a scenario of escalation, Iranian troops could cross the border into Iraq and Afghanistan. In turn, military escalation using nuclear weapons could lead us into a World War III scenario, extending beyond the Middle-East – Central Asian region. In a very real sense, this military project, which has been on the Pentagon’s drawing board for more than ten years, threatens the future of humanity. Our focus in this chapter has been on war preparations. The fact that war preparations are in an advanced state of readiness does not imply that these war plans will be carried out. The U.S.-NATO-Israel alliance realizes that the enemy has significant capabilities to respond and retaliate. This factor in itself has been crucial in the decision by the U.S. and its allies to postpone an attack on Iran. Another crucial factor is the structure of military alliances. Whereas NATO has become a formidable force, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which constitutes an alliance between Russia and China and a number of former Soviet Republics has been significantly weakened. The ongoing U.S. military threats directed against China and Russia are intended to weaken the SCO and discourage any form of military action on the part of Iran’s allies in the case of a U.S. NATO Israeli attack. Video Interview: Michel Chossudovsky and Caroline Mailloux November 2023 Interview Notes 1. See Target Iran – Air Strikes, Globalsecurity.org, undated. 2. William Arkin, Washington Post, April 16, 2006. 3. Ibid. 4. New Statesman, February 19, 2007. 5. Philip Giraldi, Deep Background,The American Conservative August 2005. 6. U.S.CENTCOM, http://www.milnet.com/milnet/pentagon/centcom/chap1/stratgic.htm#U.S.Policy, link no longer active, archived at http://tinyurl.com/37gafu9. 7. General Wesley Clark, for further details see Chapter I. 8. See Michel Chossudovsky, Planned U.S.-Israeli Attack on Iran, Global Research, May 1, 2005. 9. Dick Cheney, quoted from an MSNBC Interview, January 2005. 10. According to Zbigniew Brzezinski. 11. Michel Chossudovsky, Unusually Large U.S. Weapons Shipment to Israel: Are the U.S. and Israel Planning a Broader Middle East War? Global Research, January 11, 2009. 12. Defense Talk.com, January 6, 2009. 13. Quoted in Israel National News, January 9, 2009. 14. Webster Tarpley, Fidel Castro Warns of Imminent Nuclear War; Admiral Mullen Threatens Iran; U.S.-Israel versus Iran-Hezbollah Confrontation Builds On, Global Research, August 10, 2010. 15. Michel Chossudovsky, Nuclear War against Iran, Global Research, January 3, 2006. 16. David Ruppe, Pre-emptive Nuclear War in a State of Readiness: U.S. Command Declares Global Strike Ca- pability, Global Security Newswire, December 2, 2005. 17. U.S. Nuclear Option on Iran Linked to Israeli Attack Threat – IPS ipsnews.net, April 23, 2010. 18. Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran – Times Online, January 7, 2007. 19. Opponents Surprised By Elimination of Nuke Research Funds, Defense News, November 29, 2004. 20. See Michel Chossudovsky, “Tactical Nuclear Weapons” against Afghanistan?, Global Research, December 5, 2001. See also http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=jf03norris. 21. Jonathan Karl, Is the U.S. Preparing to Bomb Iran? ABC News, October 9, 2009. 22. Ibid. 23. ABC News, op cit, emphasis added. To consult the reprogramming request (pdf) click here. 24. See Edwin Black, “Super Bunker-Buster Bombs Fast-Tracked for Possible Use Against Iran and North Korea Nuclear Programs”, Cutting Edge, September 21, 2009. 25. See Project for a New American Century, Rebuilding America’s Defenses Washington DC, September 2000, pdf. 26. Ibid, emphasis added. 27. See Michel Chossudovsky, “Owning the Weather” for Military Use, Global Research, September 27, 2004. 28. Air Force 2025 Final Report, See also U.S. Air Force: Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025, AF2025 v3c15-1. 29. See Mojmir Babacek, Electromagnetic and Informational Weapons:, Global Research, August 6, 2004. 30. Project for a New American Century, op cit., p. 60. 31. See Michel Chossudovsky, Iran’s “Power of Deterrence” Global Research, November 5, 2006. 32. Debka, November 5, 2006. 33. www.cnsnews.com November 3, 2006. 34. See Islamic Republic of Iran Army – Wikipedia. Featured image is from The Libertarian Institute The Globalization of War: America’s “Long War” against Humanity Michel Chossudovsky The “globalization of war” is a hegemonic project. Major military and covert intelligence operations are being undertaken simultaneously in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia and the Far East. The U.S. military agenda combines both major theater operations as well as covert actions geared towards destabilizing sovereign states. ISBN Number: 978-0-9879389-0-9 Year: 2015 Pages: 240 Pages Price: $9.40 Click here to order. Related Articles from our Archives https://www.globalresearch.ca/pre-emptive-nuclear-war-the-role-of-israel-in-triggering-an-attack-on-iran/5840256 https://telegra.ph/Nuclear-war-03-10

ISIS claims responsibility for attack at Moscow-area concert venue that left at least 60 dead CNN — normal ISIS has claimed responsibility for an attack at a popular concert hall complex near Moscow Friday after assailants stormed the venue with guns and incendiary devices, killing at least 60 people and injuring 145. The terror group took responsibility for the attack in a short statement published by ISIS-affiliated news agency Amaq on Telegram on Friday. It did not provide evidence to support the claim. Video footage from the Crocus City Hall shows the vast complex, which is home to both the music hall and a shopping center, on fire with smoke billowing into the air. State-run RIA Novosti reported the armed individuals “opened fire with automatic weapons” and “threw a grenade or an incendiary bomb, which started a fire.” They then “allegedly fled in a white Renault car,” the news agency said. State media Russia 24 reported the roof of the venue has partially collapsed. The fire had been brought largely under control more than six hours later. “There are still some pockets of fire, but the fire has been mostly eliminated,” Moscow governor Andrey Vorobyov said on Telegram. The deadliest terror attack on Moscow in decades, Friday’s assault came less than a week after President Vladimir Putin won a stage-managed election by an overwhelming majority to secure another term in office, tightening his grip on the country he has ruled since the turn of the century. With attention focused on the country’s war with neighboring Ukraine, Putin had trumpeted a message of national security before Russians went to the polls. The carnage broke out before a concert by the band Picnic, according to Russia 24. “Unidentified people in camouflage broke into Crocus City Hall and started shooting before the start of the concert,” the Prosecutor General’s Office said, cited by TASS. This screen grab from video shows armed men inside the Crocus City Hall concert venue in Moscow region, Russia. CNN can not verify whether these are the armed attackers or Russian authorities moving in. Video footage showed panic as the attack unfolded, with crowds of people huddling together, screaming and ducking behind cushioned seats as gunshots started echoing in the vast hall. One group sheltering next to a large wall of windows outside the concert venue were forced to break them to escape the gunfire, video obtained by CNN shows. Footage geolocated by CNN shows an armed individual starting at least one fire inside the venue. The individual is seen carrying something in their hand and, as they walk off-screen, a bright flash of light from a large flame is seen in the video. A SWAT team was called to the area and more than 70 ambulance teams and doctors assisted victims. One hundred and forty-five people have been hospitalized, TASS reported. Sixty people are in a “serious condition.” According to the Kremlin, Putin was informed about the attack and is being kept updated on measures on the ground. The president on Saturday wished those injured in the attack a speedy recovery, the state-run RIA-Novosti news agency said. He also “conveyed his gratitude to the doctors,” RIA added. Around 100 people were evacuated from the building by firefighters, TASS reported. Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin called the attack a “terrible tragedy.” “My condolences to the loved ones of the victims. I gave orders to provide all necessary assistance to everyone who suffered during the incident,” Sobyanin said in a statement. Sobyanin said on Telegram that he was canceling all sports, cultural and other public events in Moscow this weekend. Picnic’s manager told state media that the performers were unharmed. Shaman, the band’s singer, said he would pay for the funerals of the victims and treatment for those injured. “We are all one big family. And in a family there is no such thing as somebody else’s grief,” the singer, known for his nationalistic views, said in a video posted on the Russian social media network Vkontakte to his more than 600,000 followers. “My people, any troubles and misfortunes have always united our country. They have made Russia tougher and stronger. It will not be possible to frighten and break us this time either.” ISIS claims responsibility for Moscow attack that killed 40 02:51 - Source: CNN US had warned of potential attack Earlier this month, the US embassy in Russia said it was “monitoring reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow,” including concerts. The embassy warned US citizens to avoid large gatherings. On Friday, following reports of the Crocus City Hall attack, it advised US citizens not to travel to Russia. Starting in November, there has been a steady stream of intelligence that ISIS-K was determined to attack in Russia, according to two sources familiar with the information. ISIS-K stands for ISIS-Khorasan, the terror organization’s affiliate that is active in Afghanistan and the surrounding region. US National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson said the US government had had information about a planned terrorist attack in Moscow – potentially targeting large gatherings, to include concerts – and that this is what prompted the State Department to issue the public advisory. “The US government also shared this information with Russian authorities in accordance with its longstanding ‘duty to warn’ policy,” Watson said. In a speech Tuesday, Putin had blasted the American warnings as “provocative,” saying “these actions resemble outright blackmail and the intention to intimidate and destabilize our society.” In March alone, Russian authorities had thwarted several ISIS-related incidents, according to RIA. On March 3, RIA reported that six ISIS members were killed in a counter-terrorist operation in the Ingush Karabulak; on March 7, it said security services had uncovered and “neutralized” a cell of the banned organization Vilayat Khorasan in the Kaluga region, whose members were planning an attack on a synagogue in Moscow; and on March 20, it said the commander of an ISIS combat group had been detained. A US official said Friday that Washington had no reason to doubt ISIS’ claim that it was responsible for the latest attack. International response Ukraine, which has been embroiled in a war with Russia for more than two years, denied any involvement in the attack. “Ukraine has never resorted to the use of terrorist methods,” Ukrainian presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak wrote, in part, in a post on X. He said he believed Russia would use the attack to justify the ongoing conflict and scale up operations as part of “military propaganda” in Ukraine. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres late Friday condemned “in the strongest possible terms today’s terrorist attack” according to a statement released by his deputy spokesperson, Farhan Haq. “The secretary-general conveys his deep condolences to the bereaved families and the people and the government of the Russian Federation. He wishes those injured a speedy recovery,” the statement said. In a separate statement, the UN Security Council called the attack “heinous and cowardly.” Chinese leader Xi Jinping offered his condolences to Putin on Saturday “over the serious terrorist attack that caused heavy casualties,” according to a report from Chinese state media. French President Emmanuel Macron also condemned the attack. “France expresses its solidarity with the victims, their loved ones and all the Russian people,” the Elysee Palace said, AFP and Reuters reported. India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman both also denounced the attack. CNN’s Eva Rothenberg, Paul Murphy and Hannah Strange contributed to this reporting. https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/22/europe/crocus-moscow-shooting/index.html

Israel’s Trojan Horse The “temporary pier” being built on the Mediterranean coast of Gaza is not there to alleviate the famine, but to herd Palestinians onto ships and into permanent exile. Chris Hedges Israel’s Trojan Horse - by Mr. Fish Piers allow things to come in. They allow things to go out. And Israel, which has no intention of halting its murderous siege of Gaza, including its policy of enforced starvation, appears to have found a solution to its problem of where to expel the 2.3 million Palestinians. If the Arab world will not take them, as Secretary of State Antony Blinken proposed during his first round of visits after Oct. 7, the Palestinians will be cast adrift on ships. It worked in Beirut in 1982 when some eight and a half thousand Palestine Liberation Organization members were sent by sea to Tunisia and another two and a half thousand ended up in other Arab states. Israel expects that the same forced deportation by sea will work in Gaza. Israel, for this reason, supports the “temporary pier” the Biden administration is building, to ostensibly deliver food and aid to Gaza – food and aid whose “distribution” will be overseen by the Israeli military. “You need drivers that don’t exist, trucks that don’t exist feeding into a distribution system that doesn’t exist,” Jeremy Konyndyk, a former senior aid official in the Biden administration, and now president of the Refugees International aid advocacy group told The Guardian. This “maritime corridor” is Israel’s Trojan Horse, a subterfuge to expel Palestinians. The small shipments of seaborne aid, like the food packets that have been air dropped, will not alleviate the looming famine. They are not meant to. Five Palestinians were killed and several others injured when a parachute carrying aid failed and crashed onto a crowd of people near Gaza City’s Shati refugee camp. “Dropping aid in this way is flashy propaganda rather than a humanitarian service,” the media office of the local government in Gaza said. “We previously warned it poses a threat to the lives of citizens in the Gaza Strip, and this is what happened today when the parcels fell on the citizens’ heads.” If the U.S. or Israel were serious about alleviating the humanitarian crisis, the thousands of trucks with food and aid currently at the southern border of Gaza would be allowed to enter any of its multiple crossings. They are not. The “temporary pier,” like the air drops, is ghoulish theater, a way to mask Washington’s complicity in the genocide. Israeli media reported the building of the pier was due to pressure by the United Arab Emirates, which threatened Israel with ending a land corridor trade route it administers in collusion with Saudi Arabia and Jordan, to bypass Yemen’s naval blockade. The Jerusalem Post reported it was Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who proposed the construction of the “temporary pier” to the Biden administration. Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who has called Palestinians “human animals” and advocated a total siege of Gaza, including cutting off electricity, food, water and fuel, lauded the plan, saying “it is designed to bring aid directly to the residents and thus continue the collapse of Hamas’s rule in Gaza.” “Why would Israel, the engineer of the Gaza famine, endorse the idea of establishing a maritime corridor for aid to address a crisis it initiated and is now worsening?” writes Tamara Nassar in an article titled “What’s the Real Purpose of Biden’s Gaza Port?” in The Electronic Intifada. “This might appear paradoxical if one were to assume that the primary aim of the maritime corridor is to deliver aid.” When Israel offers a gift to the Palestinians you can be sure it is a poison apple. That Israel got the Biden administration to construct the pier is one more example of the inverted relationship between Washington and Jerusalem, where the Israel lobby has bought off elected officials in the two ruling parties. Oxfam in a March 15 report accuses Israel of actively hindering aid operations in Gaza in defiance of the orders by the International Court of Justice. It notes that 1.7 million Palestinians, some 75 percent of the Gaza population, are facing famine and two-thirds of the hospitals and over 80 percent of all health clinics in Gaza are no longer operable. The majority of people, the report reads, “have no access to clean drinking water” and “sanitation services are not functioning.” The report reads: The conditions we have observed in Gaza are beyond catastrophic, and we have not only seen failure by Israeli authorities to meet their responsibility to facilitate and support international aid efforts, but in fact seen active steps being taken to hinder and undermine such aid efforts. Israel’s control of Gaza continues to be characterized by deliberate restrictive actions that have led to a severe and systemic dysfunctionality in the delivery of aid. Humanitarian organizations operational in Gaza are reporting a worsening situation since the International Court of Justice imposed provisional measures in light of the plausible risk of genocide, with intensified Israeli barriers, restrictions and attacks against humanitarian personnel. Israel has maintained a ‘convenient illusion of a response’ in Gaza to serve its claim that it is allowing aid in and conducting the war in line with international laws. Oxfam says Israel employs “a dysfunctional and undersized inspection system that keeps aid snarled up, subjected to onerous, repetitive and unpredictable bureaucratic procedures that are contributing to trucks being stranded in giant queues for 20 days on average.” Israel, Oxfam explains, rejects “items of aid as having ‘dual (military) use,’ banning vital fuel and generators entirely along with other items essential for a meaningful humanitarian response such as protective gear and communications kit.” Rejected aid, “must go through a complex ‘pre-approval’ system or end up being held in limbo at the Al Arish warehouse in Egypt.” Israel has also “cracked down on humanitarian missions, largely sealing off northern Gaza, and restricting international humanitarian workers’ access not only into Gaza, but Israel and the West Bank including East Jerusalem too.” Israel has allowed 15,413 trucks into Gaza during the past 157 days of war. Oxfam estimates that the population of Gaza needs five times that number. Israel allowed 2,874 trucks in February, a 44 percent reduction from the previous month. Before Oct. 7, 500 aid trucks entered Gaza daily. Israeli soldiers have also killed scores of Palestinians attempting to receive aid from trucks in more than two dozen incidents. These attacks include the killing of at least 21 Palestinians, and the wounding of 150, on March 14, when Israeli forces fired on thousands of people in Gaza City. The same area had been targeted by Israeli soldiers hours earlier. “Israel’s assault has caught Gaza’s own aid workers and international agencies’ partners inside a ‘practically uninhabitable’ environment of mass displacement and deprivation, where 75 percent of solid waste is now being dumped in random sites, 97 percent of groundwater made unfit for human use, and the Israeli state using starvation as a weapon of war,” Oxfam says. There is no place in Gaza, Oxfam notes, that is safe “amid the forcible and often multiple displacements of almost the entire population, which makes the principled distribution of aid unviable, including agencies' ability to help repair vital public services at scale.” Oxfam blasts Israel for its “disproportionate” and “indiscriminate” attacks on “civilian and humanitarian assets” as well as “solar, water, power and sanitation plants, UN premises, hospitals, roads, and aid convoys and warehouses, even when these assets are supposedly ‘deconflicted’ after their coordinates have been shared for protection.” The health ministry in Gaza said Monday that at least 31,726 people have been killed since the Israeli assault began five months ago. The death toll includes at least 81 deaths in the previous 24 hours, a ministry statement said, adding that 73,792 people have been wounded in Gaza since Oct. 7. Thousands more are missing, many buried under the rubble. None of these Israeli tactics will be altered with the building of a “temporary pier.” In fact, given the pending ground assault on Rafah, where 1.2 million displaced Palestinians are crowded in tent cities or camped out in the open air, Israel’s tactics will only get worse. Israel, by design, is creating a humanitarian crisis of such catastrophic proportions, with thousands of Palestinians killed by bombs, shells, missiles, bullets, starvation and infectious diseases, that the only option will be death or deportation. The pier is where the last act in this gruesome genocidal campaign will be played out as Palestinians are herded by Israeli soldiers onto ships. How appropriate that the Biden administration, without whom this genocide could not be carried out, will facilitate it. Share https://open.substack.com/pub/chrishedges/p/israels-trojan-horse

Why Are Arab Regimes So Impotent in the Face of Zionist Barbarism? Kevin Barrett, Senior EditorMarch 9, 2024 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. By Kevin Barrett, for Crescent international As I write this in late February 2024 CE (mid-Sha‘ban 1445 Hijri) the official number of Palestinians murdered by zionist aggression in the al-Aqsa Storm war has risen to nearly 30,000. The real number is considerably higher, since many victims are still buried beneath layers of rubble. Nearly 70,000 have been injured. Most of those killed and maimed have been women and children. The martyrs dispatched quickly to paradise are luckier than the survivors, who are forced to endure almost unimaginable horrors. The zionists have blockaded food in a deliberate attempt to slowly starve Gazans to death. Social media videos abound showing crying mothers unable to find so much as a crumb for their famished children. Surviving families, many of whom have lost loved ones, lack housing, heat, and warm clothing in the midst of the cold, rainy winter. The demonic zionists have deliberately bombed water, sewage, electrical, fuel, and health care infrastructure. They have destroyed the majority of Gaza’s housing, in an effort to mass-murder Gazans and expel the survivors. The destruction of Palestinian homes and life support has forced 1.4 million people to take shelter in Rafah on the Egyptian border. Now the zionists are intensifying their bombing of Rafah in the latest episode of their “final solution to the Palestinian problem.” On January 26, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) agreed with South Africa’s contention that there is probable cause to believe that Israel is committing genocide (see also here). Any nation on earth could invoke the made-in-USA “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) doctrine and use military force in an effort to stop the #GazaHolocaust. The very first nations that might be expected to act are those that share Palestine’s Arabic language and culture. And yet only two relatively small and weak Arab nations have tried: Lebanon and Yemen. The larger, richer, and more powerful states, beginning with Saudi Arabia and Egypt, have been missing in action. What explains this bizarre situation, in which the weak show courage while the strong reek of abject cowardice? Let’s begin with the cowardice. Egypt has basically been a zionist colony ever since the traitor Anwar Sadat “abnormalized” with Israel in 1979. Since then, the Egyptian military has been awash in American funding, with nearly $100 billion in bribes convincing junta leaders to continue betraying their Palestinian brothers and sisters. Today, Egyptian dictator Abdel Fattah el-Sisi finds himself in a tight spot, as Israel pushes him to endorse genocide and open the border to Palestinian refugees, which would enable the complete erasure of the people of Gaza. To his credit, el-Sisi has thus far refused, saying that any expulsion of Palestinians to Egypt would cause Cairo to break off relations and return to an anti-Israel war footing. But ominously, Egypt is building a gigantic human cattle pen on the Gaza border, “just in case” or so el-Sisi says. Saudi Arabia, historically a source of both lip service and a degree of real support for Palestine, has gradually followed Egypt’s path of abject surrender. The current de facto ruler, Mohammad Bin Salman, implicitly endorsed zionist claims to al-Quds (Jerusalem) by acquiescing to Donald Trump’s “Abraham Accords” fiasco, setting the stage for the current catastrophe. Today, the Saudis are trying to make amends for that mistake by insisting on “no normalization without a Palestinian state with pre-1967 borders” and strengthening the Kingdom’s peace deal with Yemen’s Ansarullah movement, even in the face of US pressure to join Washington’s anti-Yemen “Operation Prosperity Guardian,” better known as “Operation Genocide Guardian.” It is ironic that Saudi Arabia is tacitly (though not actively) supporting Ansarullah’s blockade of Israeli-bound shipping. After all, it was the Saudis themselves who originally dragged the US into their war on Ansarullah in 2015. Now the tables are turned, and the Americans are trying to drag the Saudis into an anti-Yemen war, so far without success. Saudi Arabia has a nearly two-trillion-dollar adjusted GDP, while Yemen’s is a mere $0.2 trillion. By that measure, Yemen’s economy is one-hundredth the size of the Saudi economy. But despite its apparent weakness, Yemen was not only able to defeat the Saudis and their western backers in a nine-year war, but is now taking military action to try to stop the genocide of Gaza. Lebanon, too, boasts a mere $0.2 trillion GDP, one percent of Saudi Arabia’s and one-twentieth the size of Egypt’s. But like Yemen, Lebanon has distinguished itself by taking military action in support of Palestine. Throughout Israel’s genocide of Gaza, the Lebanese resistance group Hizbullah, the de facto main branch of the Lebanese military, has been pounding the zionists nonstop, puncturing Israel’s “Iron dome,” forcing 200,000 zionist settlers to flee the northern strip of Occupied Palestine, and diverting Israel’s forces from the Gaza genocide campaign. So why are mice like Yemen and Lebanon roaring, while lions like Saudi Arabia and Egypt whimper? There are two categorically different kinds of answers: political (dunyawi) and theological-spiritual (rouhani). Politically, most leaders feel constrained by circumstance; their choices are dictated by the limits of the possible. Caught between a proverbial rock (zionist power) and a hard place (their own people’s support for Palestine) they try to walk a fine line, careful not to anger the zionists too much lest they become targets, while offering sufficient lip service to the Palestinian cause to at least minimally placate their subjects. That balancing act has become more difficult since October 7. Any Arab leader who takes active steps to support Palestine will be painting a target on his back—and the stronger the steps, the bigger the target. Yet any Arab leader who is seen as complicit in the genocide risks being overthrown by his own people. The leaders of Hizbullah and Ansarullah already have zio-American targets painted on their backs. They have less to lose, are principled rather than merely pragmatic, and therefore are free to seek Allah’s good pleasure doing the right thing: actively resisting the zionist genocide of Gaza. Whereas leaders like Bin Salman and el-Sisi, presiding over states whose economies and militaries are intertwined with American and hence zionist money and power, would have to take huge risks in order to return their countries to forthrightly anti-zionist positions. And even if they did, and survived, there is no guarantee that, given the current balance of power, they would have much of a chance of succeeding in saving Gazans, much less fully defeating the zionist genocidaires. So, from a worldly political viewpoint, the situation is bleak. Arab leaders are simply acting within constraints imposed by the power of circumstance. But how did they, and their regimes, arrive in such circumstances? By way of a long process of cultural decline. Whole peoples, led by their elites, have repeatedly chosen expediency over ethics, laziness over diligence, egotism over islam (submission of the self to God). According to well-known ahadith, one of the signs of Yawm al-Qiyyama is that “the lowest and the worst man in the nation will become its leader.” The world may not quite have reached that point yet, but it isn’t far off. Today, leaders who represent the best of their nation, like those of Hizbullah and Ansarullah, are the exceptions. Most leaders are neither pious nor courageous nor brilliant. When an uncommonly good leader arises, like Imran Khan in Pakistan, he risks being assassinated or imprisoned. So, the deeper reason the Arab nation is so helpless today is that it, like much of the rest of the world, has declined in spiritual quality, allowing itself to be divided and conquered by the forces of evil. The mediocre-at-best leaders that predominate in today’s Arab lands, like the shattered and corrupted societies they preside over, are simply not a match for demonic energy of the zionist shayateen. But the seeds of better leadership, planted in places like Yemen and Lebanon and Iran and (insha’Allah) Pakistan, are beginning to sprout. As the secular-materialist west declines, and Zio-American power with it, the circumstances constraining Arab leadership will change, and the possibility of good leadership reviving united Arab and Islamic lands (rather like Putin’s leadership reviving Russia) will become manifest. Whatever worldly conquests the zionist dajjal acquires will be only temporary, and will bring the Occupation demons no real happiness nor any respite from their self-inflicted torment of hatred, greed, and cruelty. In the end, it will be seen that they were only digging their own graves—all the way to hell. For as the Qur’an tells us, “They plot and Allah plans; and Allah is the best of planners.” (Surat al-Anfal, 30). Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror. He is the host of TRUTH JIHAD RADIO; a hard-driving weekly radio show funded by listener subscriptions at Substack and the weekly news roundup FALSE FLAG WEEKLY NEWS (FFWN). He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS, and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications. Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin; where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host. Archived Articles (2004-2016) www.truthjihad.com 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/why-are-arab-regimes-so-impotent-in-the-face-of-zionist-barbarism/ https://telegra.ph/Why-Are-Arab-Regimes-So-Impotent-in-the-Face-of-Zionist-Barbarism-03-09

https://allnewsadvertisment-website.blogspot.com/2024/03/ramadan-moon-located-in-saudi-arabia.html

BIDEN ADMIN DEPLOYED AIR FORCE TEAM TO ISRAEL TO ASSIST WITH TARGETS, DOCUMENT SUGGESTS Biden Admin Deployed Air Force Team to Israel to Assist With Targets, Document Suggests Ken Klippenstein, Matthew Petti January 11 2024, 3:33 p.m. A picture taken from Rafah shows smoke billowing over Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip during Israeli bombardment on January 11, 2024, amid ongoing battles between Israel and Palestinian Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip. (Photo by AFP) (Photo by -/AFP via Getty Images) Targeting intelligence — the information used to conduct airstrikes and fire long-range artillery weapons — has played a central role in Israel’s siege of Gaza. A document obtained through the Freedom of Information Act suggests that the U.S. Air Force sent officers specializing in this exact form of intelligence to Israel in late November. Since the start of Israel’s bombardment in retaliation for Hamas’s strike on October 7, Israel has dropped more than 29,000 bombs on the tiny Gaza Strip, according to a U.S. intelligence report last month. And for the first time in U.S. history, the Biden administration has been flying surveillance drone missions over Gaza since at least early November, ostensibly for hostage recovery by special forces. At the time the drones were revealed, U.S. Gen. Pat Ryder insisted that the special operations forces deployed to Israel to advise on hostage rescue were “not participating in [Israel Defense Forces] target development.” “I’ve directed my team to share intelligence and deploy additional experts from across the United States government to consult with and advise the Israeli counterparts on hostage recovery efforts,” said President Joe Biden three days after the Hamas attack. But several weeks later, on November 21, the U.S. Air Force issued deployment guidelines for officers, including intelligence engagement officers, headed to Israel. Experts say that a team of targeting officers like this would be used to provide satellite intelligence to the Israelis for the purpose of offensive targeting. “They’re probably targeting people, targeting officers,” Lawrence Cline, who served as an intelligence engagement officer in Iraq before retirement, told The Intercept. Targeting intelligence refers to the identification and characterization of enemy activities including missile and artillery launches, location of leadership and command and control centers, and key facilities. “What I can see is we’ve got a lot of global assets in terms of satellites and the like and the Israelis have a lot in terms of more localized radar coverage.” The deployment guidelines were issued by the Pentagon’s Air Force component command for the Middle East, Air Forces Central, on November 21. The document provides deployment instructions to air personnel sent to the country, including an “Air Defense Liaison Team” as well as “airmen assigned as the Intelligence Engagement Officer (IEO).” Intelligence engagement officers, Cline explained, coordinate intelligence between the U.S. and partner militaries. When deployed in Iraq, Cline, who now works as an instructor for the Defense Department Counterterrorism Fellowship Program, recalled that he and other IEOs comprised a small team who spent “probably three quarters of our time working with the Iraqis, the other quarter checking in with headquarters,” adding that “it was sort of half and half a liaison and advising.” Asked about the airmen’s mission, the Defense Intelligence Agency referred questions to the Air Forces Central, which did not respond to a request for comment. Neither the Office of the Secretary of Defense nor Central Command responded to requests for comment. Most Read The intelligence engagement process provides a low-profile mechanism through which the U.S. can coordinate with the Israeli military, a valuable tool amid the political sensitivity of the conflict. A U.S. Army primer defines intelligence engagement as a “powerful” tool that is useful “especially when U.S. policy might restrict our interaction,” as it “often does not require large budgets or footprints.” Experts say that may be the case here. Tyler McBrien, managing editor of Lawfare, a website specializing in national security law, said that there seems to be an “Israel exception” to the U.S. rules around military assistance. Past presidents have issued several executive orders banning the U.S. government from carrying out or sponsoring assassinations abroad. This ban has been interpreted to include wartime targeting of civilians, according to a recent Foreign Affairs article by Brian Finucane, a former legal adviser for the State Department who now works for Crisis Group. And the so-called Leahy law, a set of budget amendments named for Sen. Patrick Leahy, requires the U.S. government to vet foreign military units for “gross violations of human rights” when providing training or aid to those units. Several progressive members of Congress have raised concerns that U.S. aid to Israel — both before and during the present war — violates that requirement. “For air advisory missions, which I imagine involve intelligence sharing and training, specific domestic legal restrictions such as the Leahy law and the assassination ban would likely come into play,” McBrien said. But the Leahy vetting process is “reversed” for Israel; rather than vetting Israeli military units beforehand, the U.S. State Department sends aid and then waits for reports of violations, according to a recent article by Josh Paul, who resigned from his post as a State Department political-military officer over his concerns with U.S. support for Israel. “As a general matter, U.S. officials who are providing support to another country during armed conflict would want to make sure they are not aiding and abetting war crimes,” Finucane told The Intercept. He emphasized that the same principle applies to weapons transfers and intelligence sharing. The Israeli military intentionally strikes Palestinian civilian infrastructure, known as “power targets,” in order to “create a shock,” according to an investigation by the Israeli news website +972 Magazine. Targets are generated using an artificial intelligence system known as “Habsora,” Hebrew for “gospel.” “Nothing happens by accident,” an Israeli military intelligence source told +972 Magazine. “When a 3-year-old girl is killed in a home in Gaza, it’s because someone in the army decided it wasn’t a big deal for her to be killed — that it was a price worth paying in order to hit [another] target. We are not Hamas. These are not random rockets. Everything is intentional. We know exactly how much collateral damage there is in every home.” The Biden administration has gone to great lengths to conceal the nature of its support for the Israeli military. The Pentagon quietly tapped a so-called Tiger Team to facilitate weapons assistance to Israel, as The Intercept has previously reported. The administration has also declined to reveal which weapons systems it’s providing Israel and at which quantities, insisting that the secrecy is necessary for security reasons. “We’re being careful not to quantify or get into too much detail about what they’re getting — for their own operational security purposes, of course,” White House spokesperson John Kirby told reporters during a press briefing in October. This contrasts with its support for Ukraine, about which it has been far more transparent. The administration has provided an itemized list of its weapons assistance to Ukraine, a country facing at least as much of a threat amid the invasion of Russia. The White House has never addressed the incongruity. Past administrations have also provided detailed public information about U.S. targeting support for the Saudi and Emirati military campaigns in Yemen, which U.S. officials claim was meant to reduce civilian casualties. The secrecy “may reflect the fact that the U.S. has interests that are in tension, the Biden administration has interests that are in tension,” Finucane said. “On the one hand, they want to publicly embrace Israel and support Israel, providing what seems to be unconditional support. On the other hand, they don’t want to be perceived as taking the country into another war in the Middle East.” https://theintercept.com/2024/01/11/israel-air-force-targeting-intelligence/

America's Jews Are Driving America's Wars, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz Review UPDATE: On the morning of September 21st Phil Giraldi was fired over the phone by The American Conservative, where he had been a regular contributor for fourteen years. He was told that “America’s Jews Are Driving America’s Wars” was unacceptable. The TAC management and board appear to have forgotten that the magazine was launched with an article by founder Pat Buchanan entitled “Whose War?” which largely made the same claims that Giraldi made about the Jewish push for another war, in that case with Iraq. Buchanan was vilified and denounced as an anti-Semite by many of the same people who are now similarly attacking Giraldi. I spoke recently at a conference on America’s war party where afterwards an elderly gentleman came up to me and asked, “Why doesn’t anyone ever speak honestly about the six-hundred-pound gorilla in the room? Nobody has mentioned Israel in this conference and we all know it’s American Jews with all their money and power who are supporting every war in the Middle East for Netanyahu? Shouldn’t we start calling them out and not letting them get away with it?” It was a question combined with a comment that I have heard many times before and my answer is always the same: any organization that aspires to be heard on foreign policy knows that to touch the live wire of Israel and American Jews guarantees a quick trip to obscurity. Jewish groups and deep pocket individual donors not only control the politicians, they own and run the media and entertainment industries, meaning that no one will hear about or from the offending party ever again. They are particularly sensitive on the issue of so-called “dual loyalty,” particularly as the expression itself is a bit of a sham since it is pretty clear that some of them only have real loyalty to Israel. Most recently, some pundits, including myself, have been warning of an impending war with Iran. To be sure, the urging to strike Iran comes from many quarters, to include generals in the Administration who always think first in terms of settling problems through force, from a Saudi government obsessed with fear over Iranian hegemony, and, of course, from Israel itself. But what makes the war engine run is provided by American Jews who have taken upon themselves the onerous task of starting a war with a country that does not conceivably threaten the United States. They have been very successful at faking the Iranian threat, so much so that nearly all Republican and most Democratic congressmen as well as much of the media seem to be convinced that Iran needs to be dealt with firmly, most definitely by using the U.S. military, and the sooner the better. And while they are doing it, the issue that nearly all the Iran haters are Jewish has somehow fallen out of sight, as if it does not matter. But it should matter. A recent article in the New Yorker on stopping the impending war with Iran strangely suggests that the current generation “Iran hawks” might be a force of moderation regarding policy options given the lessons learned from Iraq. The article cites as hardliners on Iran David Frum, Max Boot, Bill Kristol and Bret Stephens. Daniel Larison over at The American Conservative has a good review of the New Yorker piece entitled “Yes, Iran Hawks Want Conflict with Iran,” which identifies the four above cited hawks by name before describing them as “…a Who’s Who of consistently lousy foreign policy thinking. If they have been right about any major foreign policy issue in the last twenty years, it would be news to the entire world. Every single one of them hates the nuclear deal with Iran with a passion, and they have argued in favor of military action against Iran at one point or another. There is zero evidence that any of them would oppose attacking Iran.” And I would add a few more names, Mark Dubowitz, Michael Ledeen and Reuel Marc Gerecht of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum; John Podhoretz of Commentary magazine; Elliot Abrams of the Council on Foreign Relations; Meyrav Wurmser of the Middle East Media Research Institute; Kimberly Kagan of the Institute for the Study of War; and Frederick Kagan, Danielle Pletka and David Wurmser of the American Enterprise Institute. And you can also throw into the hopper entire organizations like The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) and the Hudson Institute. And yep, they’re all Jewish, plus most of them would self-describe as neo-conservatives. And I might add that only one of the named individuals has ever served in any branch of the American military – David Wurmser was once in the Navy reserve. These individuals largely constitute a cabal of sanctimonious chairborne warriors who prefer to do the heavy thinking while they let others do the fighting and dying. So it is safe to say that much of the agitation to do something about Iran comes from Israel and from American Jews. Indeed, I would opine that most of the fury from Congress re Iran comes from the same source, with AIPAC showering our Solons on the Potomac with “fact sheets” explaining how Iran is worthy of annihilation because it has pledged to “destroy Israel,” which is both a lie and an impossibility as Tehran does not have the resources to carry out such a task. The AIPAC lies are then picked up and replayed by an obliging media, where nearly every “expert” who speaks about the Middle East on television and radio or who is interviewed for newspaper stories is Jewish. One might also add that neocons as a group were founded by Jews and are largely Jewish, hence their universal attachment to the state of Israel. They first rose into prominence when they obtained a number of national security positions during the Reagan Administration and their ascendancy was completed when they staffed senior positions in the Pentagon and White House under George W. Bush. Recall for a moment Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith, and Scooter Libby. Yes, all Jewish and all conduits for the false information that led to a war that has spread and effectively destroyed much of the Middle East. Except for Israel, of course. Philip Zelikow, also Jewish, in a moment of candor, admitted that the Iraq War, in his opinion, was fought for Israel. Add to the folly a Jewish U.S. Ambassador to Israel who identifies with the most right-wing Israeli settler elements, a White House appointed chief negotiator who is Jewish and a Jewish son-in-law who is also involved in formulating Middle East policy. Is anyone providing an alternative viewpoint to eternal and uncritical support for Benjamin Netanyahu and his kleptocratic regime of racist thugs? I think not. There are a couple of simple fixes for the dominant involvement of American Jews in foreign policy issues where they have a personal interest due to their ethnicity or family ties. First of all, don’t put them into national security positions involving the Middle East, where they will potentially be conflicted. Let them worry instead about North Korea, which does not have a Jewish minority and which was not involved in the holocaust. This type of solution was, in fact, somewhat of a policy regarding the U.S. Ambassador position in Israel. No Jew was appointed to avoid any conflict of interest prior to 1995, an understanding that was violated by Bill Clinton (wouldn’t you know it!) who named Martin Indyk to the post. Indyk was not even an American citizen at the time and had to be naturalized quickly prior to being approved by congress. Those American Jews who are strongly attached to Israel and somehow find themselves in senior policy making positions involving the Middle East and who actually possess any integrity on the issue should recuse themselves, just as any judge would do if he were presiding over a case in which he had a personal interest. Any American should be free to exercise first amendment rights to debate possible options regarding policy, up to and including embracing positions that damage the United States and benefit a foreign nation. But if he or she is in a position to actually create those policies, he or she should butt out and leave the policy generation to those who have no personal baggage. For those American Jews who lack any shred of integrity, the media should be required to label them at the bottom of the television screen whenever they pop up, e.g. Bill Kristol is “Jewish and an outspoken supporter of the state of Israel.” That would be kind-of-like a warning label on a bottle of rat poison – translating roughly as “ingest even the tiniest little dosage of the nonsense spewed by Bill Kristol at your own peril.” As none of the above is likely to happen, the only alternative is for American citizens who are tired of having their country’s national security interests hijacked by a group that is in thrall to a foreign government to become more assertive about what is happening. Shine a little light into the darkness and recognize who is being diddled and by whom. Call it like it is. And if someone’s feelings are hurt, too bad. We don’t need a war with Iran because Israel wants one and some rich and powerful American Jews are happy to deliver. Seriously, we don’t need it. https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/americas-jews-are-driving-americas-wars/ https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/americas-jews-are-driving-americas-wars.html

How Arab States Are Helping Israel Commit Genocide February 16th, 2024 Palestine’s Arab neighbors seem to have taken a bold stance on Israel’s genocide of Gaza in a public show of solidarity with Palestinians. But behind those strong words, states like Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE are quietly assisting Israel. These four nations are working together to circumvent the actions of one of the few regional actors who are challenging Israel concretely: Yemen’s Ansar Allah. In a bid to alleviate pressure on Israel from the Ansar Allah (a.k.a the Houthi) blockade of the Red Sea, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan have established land corridors, ensuring cargo destined for the apartheid state arrives safely in Israeli hands. According to Hebrew Channel 13, Israeli-linked cargo ships arrive in the UAE to unload goods. Trucks then transport these goods through UAE and Saudi highways to Jordan. They eventually reach Israel via the Jordan River Crossing. German shipping company Hapag-Lloyd announced that it was working with Saudi Arabia and the UAE to create a land route “bypassing the Houthis,” which connects ports in the UAE and the Saudi port of Jeddah facilitating cargo movement to Israel through the Suez Canal. https://www.mintpressnews.com/how-arab-states-are-helping-israel-commit-genocide/286825/

The Pulitzer Winner Hersh Unveils Mystery on Death of Navy SEALS in Gulf of Aden | VT Foreign Policy February 16, 2024 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. In the cover image the USS Lewis B. Puller departs Naval Station Norfolk in July 2017. / US Navy photo by Bill Mesta. The Seals and the Dhow Originally published by Seymour Hersh on his Substack All links to Gospa News articles (and headlines) have been added aftermath, in relation to the topics highlighted Subscribe to the Gospa News Newsletter to read the news as soon as it is published This is a painful story for the families of three Navy SEALs. Two of the SEALs were lost at sea and a third was critically injured on a mission on January 11 in the Gulf of Aden between Yemen and Somalia. It was a mission that never should have been ordered, and when everything went wrong, it was covered up with a series of lies. Why report a story about two deaths and an injury when there is a president who has put America indirectly into wars in Ukraine, Israel, Yemen, and elsewhere in the Middle East? I have learned in six decades of chasing down hidden stories that it is delving into the little lies that reveals much about the bigger lies. So it has been in the past month with the story of the dead and injured SEALs. Middle East Dashing to WWIII! Kremlin Condemns Illegal US, UK Strikes on Houthis in Yemen. Germany to Join Mission Their target was a wooden smuggling vessel, operated by Somalis, that was suspected of delivering modern ballistic missiles or missile parts to America’s new enemy: the Houthis of Yemen. Somalis have been smuggling goods through the Red Sea and Indian Ocean in their wooden sailing vessels, known as dhows, since biblical times. Few have motors or any means of electronic communication, and the larger dhows, like the one targeted by the SEALs, often serve as living quarters for the smugglers’ families. (dhow is a a sailing boat with a long, thin hull – ed). The SEALs were assigned to a ship named the Lewis B. Puller, after a fabled combat general, the most decorated marine of all time, who fought in World War II against the Japanese, as well as in Haiti, in Central America, and in the Korean War. The ship, modeled on an oil tanker, is what the Navy calls an Expeditionary Mobile Base, which means that it is capable, with its landing decks, of supporting a vast number of air and sea military activities from all the services, including those of the Navy SEALs. The Puller was commissioned in 2017 in a port in Bahrain and was not much in the news until it became known that the failed SEAL mission took place. IRGC Missiles hit anti-Iran terrorists’ and Mossad Espionage Base (video). Houthis Struck US Ship On January 13, the New York Times, citing two current and two former Pentagon officials, published the first account of the two deaths, which were said to have taken place while the SEALs were attempting to board a dhow at night. The Quoting of a Former SEAL Senior Chief The sea was rough, and one SEAL slipped off the boarding ladder. The initial report claimed that a second SEAL jumped into the water in an effort to save his colleague and both drowned. It was not clear whether he was also on the ladder or jumped from the inflatable speedboat known as a RHIB, for rigid hulled inflatable boat, that the SEALs used to approach the ship. A January 22 Times article about the incident, by Dave Philipps, known for his excellent sources in the special operations community, revealed that a third SEAL attempted to climb the ladder to board the dhow. He fell during the attempted boarding and struck the speedboat. He was rescued and today remains in critical condition. Philipps quoted a former SEAL senior chief explaining that he and his retired colleagues were convinced the story, as told by administration officials, “doesn’t make sense. Something else must have gone wrong.” Navy Seal Who Went AWOL Killed While Fighting Russians In Bakhmut There were questions at the time about President’s Biden decision in early January to expand the American war portfolio. He has taken on the Houthis, who had survived a seven-year war with the Saudi air force, supported by American bombs and targeting intelligence. That war ended with what amounted to a Saudi surrender. The American attacks, still being supported by British air power, are in their second month, and the world’s major shipping companies are still choosing not to chance a ten-day shortcut by sailing from Europe via the Suez Canal into the Red Sea. The Houthi threat is still there, pending an Israeli decision to cease its onslaught in the Gaza Strip. Ironically, or tragically, Biden is now said to be telling the Israelis that a ceasefire is needed. The world is coming to its own judgment about Biden, who is now seeking a second term. Refer a friend The Somali dhow offered the White House a chance to justify its new offensive. It had been tracked by American intelligence since leaving Somalia because it was believed to be carrying ballistic missile parts needed by the Houthis in their ongoing campaign against Western shipping; The basis for that intelligence, which proved to be wrong, has not been made known. Worse than Ukraine! In Yemen “Catastrophic” Hunger due to Saudi War: 400,000 Toddlers at “Risk of Death” Back to the Lewis B. Puller. The more than a dozen senior officers from all services assigned to the ship’s command center were gung-ho to send the hot-shot SEAL team to intercept the dhow, compel the boat to stand to, and board it to find ballistic missiles or parts of weapons that were coming to the Houthis from Iran, known to American intelligence as a longtime supporter and supplier of weaponry to Yemen. But there was a serious problem. The issue is what is known in the Navy as the Sea State Code, which is based on terminology used in oceanography to describe the general conditions of the ocean’s surface, as determined by three key factors: wind, waves, and swell. The Serious Problem of Sea State There are ten categories of sea state, and SEALs can operate with ease and safety up to sea state 3. One experienced retired senior American Navy officer told me that even four- and five-foot waves can sometimes create difficulties for a Navy tanker attempting to refuel an aircraft carrier, but it can be done with skilled maneuvering. No ship loaded with high-octane fighter fuel wants to crash into the side of a carrier. When the seas get higher, to level 4 or 5, the waves and stronger current make boarding a targeted vessel, even a wooden dhow, an extremely dangerous prospect, in part because of the difficulty in handling steel ladders, known as caving ladders, that are standard SEAL boarding gear. The steps are lightweight aluminum tubes linked by equally lightweight steel cables. US judge rules in favor of Navy SEALs Refusing Vaccination on Religious Grounds What is hard to do at sea state 3 is deadly dangerous at sea state 4 or 5, a retired Navy officer, with years of experience in special operations, told me. “The waves are going up and down eight feet and more and you do not board a ship in heavy sea,” he said. He added that Navy captains of combat ships finishing a long deployment understand that crews due for shore leave are not permitted to leave the ship in such churning waters. The retired officer said that when the officer on the Puller who was in charge of all special operation missions, an Army colonel, told “the SEAL team leader to ‘saddle up,’ the team leader told him to look outside the window.” His message was that “it was dark, and the sea was too rough. And it was beyond the capabilities of his team.” The retired officer added: “It was an argument between the on the scene commander and a guy in charge of the SEALs.” The SEAL team leader said no. But he was ordered to carry out the mission, despite the obvious weather issues, and he did so. The Mystery on a Ballistic Missile The questions that were not asked, the retired officer said, were these: “Do we know if the dhow is carrying a ballistic missile or a box full of missile parts?” No. “Can you get a key to a launch site?” No. “Or a map of all the Houthi launch sites?” No. “Do Somali smugglers know the difference between a case of Johnny Walker Red and one of Johnny Walter Black?” Yes. CIA-GATE – 1. Bulgarian Network to Weaponize Ukraine Intelligence and Middle-East’s Terrorists The decision to ignore the concerns of the SEAL commander has been seen by the angered SEAL community in America as “beyond rational planning” and “a disaster waiting to happen.” I learned that one high-ranking member of the community, now retired, wrote a private letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, asking that the officer who overruled the SEAL commander be court-martialed for dereliction of duty as the buck-stops-here boss of the operation. “It will never happen,” the former officer told me. “Dead SEALs will go down in Navy annals as heroes, not victims.” His point was that the Navy would never acknowledge that the SEAL team had no business being sent on a search-and-destroy mission in such weather. US launches ‘Retaliatory AirStrikes’ in the Middle East. Targeted 85 sites in Iraq and Syria. At least 18 People Died As many as nine SEALs may have been aboard the SEALs’ inflatable speedboat—there was a second boat with no SEALs aboard as backup—as it dashed to the dhow that, as ordered, came to a stop and acknowledged that it was to be boarded. Three SEALs began the treacherous climb aboard the vessel. It is not known just what happened—did one fall off the special ladder, made up of steel tubes and chain links? Or did the ladder, swaying to and from in the heavy sea with two SEALs making the climb and a third waiting to do so, suddenly get rocked by a huge wave that flung the men against the side of the dhow, leaving both unconscious or worse, with only to drop into the sea? The badly injured third SEAL survived only because he fell into one of the speedboats. Only Obsolete Rocket Motors and Pieces of Old Missiles on the Dhow The SEALs who made the climb into the dhow “did find the treasure,” the retired officer sardonically told me. “There were some obsolete rocket motors, all Iran-made, and some pieces of Styx missiles from the 1950s and ’60s, but no significant missile components among the cargo, other than ancient engines and some random tubes that had been used in missile attacks. There was the usual cargo of liquor, cigarettes, random knock-off clothing, porn cassettes.” The Somali smugglers were taken prisoner and placed on Navy vessels that came to the scene, and the dhow sent to the bottom. The two deaths were reported, but over the next few days, the retired officer said, all involved “were playing the game,” keeping as many details as possible under wraps. The Lewis B. Puller was locked down in extreme secrecy. The names of the dead were made public, but not that of the survivor, if he does survive. His is a story that no one in the Navy wants told. I learned that the commanding officer of the Lewis B. Puller, who graduated from the Naval Academy in 2000 and spent his career in Navy aviation—not as a pilot but as a backseat radar intercept officer—may be quietly retired, if the system works as it usually does. Gaza, Donbass, Syria: GENOCIDES of the Zionist, Nazi, Jihadist Regimes is US-NATO’s “New” Geopolitical WEAPON There is a Navy history for such arrogance and deception that dates to the end of the Second World War. The chief of Naval Operations was crusty Admiral Ernest King, a brilliant officer who played a key role in advising President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on military matters. When asked at one point by an aide what to tell the press about the progress of the war against the Japanese fleet, King famously said: “Don’t tell them anything. When it’s over, tell them who won.” Originally published by Seymour Hersh on his Substack All links to Gospa News articles (and headlines) have been added aftermath, in relation to the topics highlighted Subscribe to the Gospa News Newsletter to read the news as soon as it is published Seymour Myron “Sy” Hersh (born April 8, 1937) is an American investigative journalist and political writer. He gained recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai massacre and its cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the 1970 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting. During the 1970s, Hersh covered the Watergate scandalfor The New York Times, also reporting on the secret U.S. bombing of Cambodia and the CIA’s program of domestic spying. In 2004, he detailed the U.S. military’s torture and abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq for The New Yorker. Hersh has won a record five George Polk Awards, and two National Magazine Awards. He is the author of 11 books, including The Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House (1983), an account of the career of Henry Kissinger which won the National Book Critics Circle Award. “Soros” French Judges want to Arrest Assad for Douma Chemical Attack despite it was White Helmets False-Flag In 2013, Hersh’s reporting alleged that Syrian rebel forces, rather than the government, had attacked civilians with sarin gas at Ghouta during the Syrian Civil War, and in 2015, he presented an alternative account of the U.S. special forces raid in Pakistan which killed Osama bin Laden. In 2023, Hersh highlighted that the U.S. and Norway had sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines. Nord Stream Sabotage: UN Security Council Rejected Investigation on Terroristic Act. Russia: “Dangerous Precedent” GOSPA NEWS – WARZONE GOSPA NEWS – WEAPONS LOBBY DOSSIER Thanks to Ukrainian Weapons Hamas resists vs Israel’s Massacre in Gaza which goes on due to US Veto at UN Western Weapons sent to Kiev found in Possession of Mexican Drug Cartels Pentagon’s Weaponry Shady Traffic. Missiles for Ukraine Disappeared. New US Supplies to Kosovo Separatists Fabio G. C. Carisio Fabio is investigative journalist since 1991. Now geopolitics, intelligence, military, SARS-Cov-2 manmade, NWO expert and Director-founder of Gospa News: a Christian Information Journal. His articles were published on many international media and website as SouthFront, Reseau International, Sputnik Italia, United Nation Association Westminster, Global Research, Kolozeg and more… Most popolar investigation on VT is: Rumsfeld Shady Heritage in Pandemic: GILEAD’s Intrigues with WHO & Wuhan Lab. Bio-Weapons’ Tests with CIA & Pentagon Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio, born on 24/2/1967 in Borgosesia, started working as a reporter when he was only 19 years old in the alpine area of Valsesia, Piedmont, his birth region in Italy. After studying literature and history at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan, he became director of the local newspaper Notizia Oggi Vercelli and specialized in judicial reporting. For about 15 years he is a correspondent from Northern Italy for the Italian newspapers Libero and Il Giornale, also writing important revelations on the Ustica massacre, a report on Freemasonry and organized crime. With independent investigations, he collaborates with Carabinieri and Guardia di Finanza in important investigations that conclude with the arrest of Camorra entrepreneurs or corrupt politicians. In July 2018 he found the counter-information web media Gospa News focused on geopolitics, terrorism, Middle East, and military intelligence. In 2020 published the book, in Italian only, WUHAN-GATES – The New World Order Plot on SARS-Cov-2 manmade focused on the cycle of investigations Wuhan-Gates His investigations was quoted also by The Gateway Pundit, Tasnim and others He worked for many years for the magazine Art & Wine as an art critic and curator. VETERANS TODAY OLD POSTS www.gospanews.net/ 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/2024/02/the-pulitzer-winner-hersh-unveils-mystery-on-death-of-navy-seals-in-gulf-of-aden/ https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/the-pulitzer-winner-hersh-unveils.html

https://allnewsadvertisment-website.blogspot.com/2024/02/saudi-arabia-has-signed-agreement-to.html

Gaza Versus The Hague: The ICJ Failed Again – A Case of “Political Correctness”? All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version). 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. New Year Donation Drive: Global Research Is Committed to the “Unspoken Truth” *** The 17-judge panel of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) today (26 January 2024) found South Africa’s assertion that Israel is committing genocide “plausible.” This would indicate that South Africa won the case. Unfortunately, a closer look is much less optimistic. It shows again a hesitant judgment the ICJ, despite all indications for massive and brutal genocide. The judgment is weak and close to meaningless, when it comes to safe future Palestinian lives. First, the ICJ accepted that South Africa had jurisdiction in this case, because “some things that South Africa has alleged are certainly taking place and fall within the definition of the UN Genocide Convention of 1948.” See this. Al Jazeera summarized the ICJ’s ruling as follows: The court says it has jurisdiction to rule in the case. The court orders Israel to take measures to prevent acts of genocide in the Gaza Strip, must report back in one month. The court says Israel must prevent and punish incitement to genocide. The court says Israel must allow humanitarian aid into the Strip. The court obliges Israel to take more measures to protect Palestinians but does not order it to end military operations in the Strip. The Court evidently did not go far enough. What good does it do to “allow humanitarian aid and prevent the deaths of innocent citizens”, if Israel is permitted to continue killing hundreds if not thousands of innocent and defenseless Palestinians. The Court did not rule an immediate ceasefire or a ceasefire at all – nor did it issue a request for Peace negotiations. Of course, Israel would not have obeyed such a ruling, nor would the staunch supporters of Israel have stopped encouraging Israels “self-defense” killing, but it would have sent a message to the world, namely that ICJ is not afraid to fall “politically unpopular” judgments, and that Israel and genocide would be enshrined in Israels short 75-year history. PM Netanyahu’s and Co’s argument of “self-defense”, justified by “We are genocide victims” are the arguments of psychopaths. The extent of the Israeli atrocious and merciless killing of Palestinians, shows the truth to the world. * Ahead of the judgment the South African Foreign Minister, Naledi Pandor, had this to say: “The three letters ‘ICJ’ were not known to many people in South Africa until the case was filed”. And “Our aim was and is to highlight the plight of the innocent in Palestine” and “draw attention to the lack of justice and freedom.” She added that regardless of success or failure, “the real analysis and judgment is going to be on the court itself.” See this from RT 26 January 2024. The Israeli government does not accept the ICJ ruling, ordering preventing the genocide of the Palestinian people. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the very claim that Israeli is committing genocide is “not only false, it’s outrageous.” Where does this judgment leave the war? Unless the western support will falter rapidly, both morally and by monetary and weapon deliveries – perhaps because of some ethics that the Court’s decision may have awoken – Israel’s brutal genocide is likely going to continue. PM Netanyahu, practically from day one, anticipated that this would be a long war, intimidating that it was not just a war of retaliation for an [Israeli / Western planned] Hamas attack on Israel on 7 October 2023, but it was a war to conquer over the coming years much of the Middles East and its riches, by gradually establishing “The Greater Israel”, which would include 100% of Palestine, 100% Jordan, 100% of Lebanon, 70% of Syria, 50% of Iraq, 33% of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Nile. Netanyahu would, of course, not say tis, but it was implicit. To top it off, since about 1984, Israel has a ten Agorot coin, said to depict on its backside a map of Greater Israel. The sign on the coin could also resemble the ancient kingdom of Babylon in 539 BCE. The 10 Agorot coin is one of the New Israeli Sheqel (NIS) coin series, also known as simply the Israeli shekel (sign: ₪, code: ILS). Israeli agorot and shekel are the currency of Israel. undefined The depiction on the coin is full of controversy. Some Israeli say that the picture of this new coins was taken over form the original sheqel – and that, indeed, it represented Israel’s aspiration of expansion towards a Greater Israel. Israelis are proud of carrying “Greater Israel” in their pockets. See this. Without speaking much about it, most Israelis support the war against Gaza / Palestine, as it is supposed to pave the way towards Greater Israel. No time horizon is given to achieve this goal. However, a Greater Israel would be one of the resources richest nations in the world, especially in terms of hydrocarbons. It would also include the trillion-plus cubic feet of gas discovered in the 1990s off shore of Gaza, belonging today to Palestine. Back to the 26th of January 2024 weak ICJ judgment. It leaves room for Israel to pursue her course towards the Greater Israel, which is no doubt in the interest of the west. Having an almost endless supply of oil and gas from a secure source, Israel, would allow the west breaking any ties with Russia and the Arab world for energy supply. It also shows clearly the symbiotic relationship between Israel – an artificial western (UK) Zionist invented country, an interdependence that serves primarily those who created Israel in the first place and, on the other hand, gives Zionist Israel the grandeur of the Chosen People, plainly anchored in their bible, the Torah. To get there, much bloodshed would be the course of the conquest. This MUST be avoided by sensible people, and here is where an International Court of Justice – one that is neutral, not responding to any commands from globalist leaders, might and would have significant influence, by appealing to the conscience of those supporting the genocide. * 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. Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020). Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing. Featured image: Judge Joan Donoghue of the U.S., president of the ICJ, reading the Court’s ruling on Friday. (U.N. TV Screenshot) Related Articles from our Archives https://www.globalresearch.ca/gaza-versus-hague-icj-failed-again-case-political-correctness/5847838 https://telegra.ph/Gaza-Versus-The-Hague-The-ICJ-Failed-Again--A-Case-of-Political-Correctness-01-30 https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/01/gaza-versus-hague-icj-failed-again-case.html

It May be Genocide, But it Won’t Be Stopped - Read by Eunice Wong Chris Hedges19 hrs ago Text Originally posted Jan. 26, 2024 Red Ink - by Mr. Fish The International Court of Justice (ICJ) refused to implement the most crucial demand made by South African jurists: “the State of Israel shall immediately suspend its military operations in and against Gaza.” But at the same time, it delivered a devastating blow to the foundational myth of Israel. Israel, which paints itself as eternally persecuted, has been credibly accused of committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Palestinians are the victims, not the perpetrators, of the “crime of crimes.” A people, once in need of protection from genocide, are now potentially committing it. The court’s ruling questions the very raison d'être of the “Jewish State” and challenges the impunity Israel has enjoyed since its founding 75 years ago. The ICJ ordered Israel to take six provisional measures to prevent acts of genocide, measures that will be very difficult if not impossible to fulfill if Israel continues its saturation bombing of Gaza and wholesale targeting of vital infrastructure. The court called on Israel “to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide.” It demanded Israel “take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance.” It ordered Israel to protect Palestinian civilians. It called on Israel to protect the some 50,000 women giving birth in Gaza. It ordered Israel to 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.” The court ordered Israel to “take all measures within its power” to prevent the crimes which amount to genocide such as “killing, causing serious bodily and mental harm, inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, and imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.” Israel was ordered to report back in one month to explain what it had done to implement the provisional measures. Gaza was pounded with bombs, missiles and artillery shells as the ruling was read in The Hague — at least 183 Palestinians have been killed in the last 24 hours. Since Oct. 7, more than 26,000 Palestinians have been killed. Almost 65,000 have been wounded, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health. Thousands more are missing. The carnage continues. This is the cold reality. Translated into the vernacular, the court is saying Israel must feed and provide medical care for the victims, cease public statements advocating genocide, preserve evidence of genocide and stop killing Palestinian civilians. Come back and report in a month. It is hard to see how these provisional measures can be achieved if the carnage in Gaza continues. “Without a ceasefire, the order doesn’t actually work,” Naledi Pandor, South Africa’s minister of international relations, stated bluntly after the ruling. Time is not on the side of the Palestinians. Thousands of Palestinians will die within a month. Palestinians in Gaza make up 80 percent of all the people facing famine or catastrophic hunger worldwide, according to the United Nations. The entire population of Gaza by early February is projected to lack sufficient food, with half a million people suffering from starvation, according to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, drawing on data from U.N. agencies and NGOs. The famine is engineered by Israel. At best, the court — while it will not rule for a few years on whether Israel is committing genocide — has given legal license to use the word “genocide” to describe what Israel is doing in Gaza. This is very significant, but it is not enough, given the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. Israel has dropped almost 30,000 bombs and shells on Gaza — eight times more bombs than the U.S. dropped on Iraq during six years of war. It has used hundreds of 2,000-pound bombs to obliterate densely populated areas, including refugee camps. These “bunker buster” bombs have a kill radius of a thousand feet. The Israeli aerial assault is unlike anything seen since Vietnam. Gaza, only 20 miles long and five miles wide, is rapidly becoming, by design, uninhabitable. Israel will no doubt continue its assault arguing that it is not in violation of the court’s directives. In addition, the Biden administration will undoubtedly veto the resolution at the Security Council demanding Israel implement the provisional measures. The General Assembly, if the Security Council does not endorse the measures, can vote again calling for a ceasefire, but has no power to enforce it. Defense for Children International - Palestine v. Biden was filed in November by the Center for Constitutional Rights against President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. The case challenges the U.S. government’s failure to prevent complicity in Israel’s unfolding genocide of the Palestinian people. It asks the court to order the Biden administration to cease diplomatic and military support and comply with its legal obligations under international and federal law. The only active resistance to halt the Gaza genocide is provided by Yemen’s Red Sea blockade. Yemen, which was under siege for eight years by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, France, Britain and the U.S., experienced over 400,000 deaths from starvation, lack of health care, infectious diseases and the deliberate bombing of schools, hospitals, infrastructure, residential areas, markets, funerals and weddings. Yemenis know too well — since at least 2017 multiple U.N. agencies have described Yemen as experiencing “the largest humanitarian crisis in the world” — what the Palestinians are enduring. Yemen’s resistance — when the history of this genocide is written — will set it apart from nearly every other nation. The rest of the world, including the Arab world, retreats into toothless rhetorical condemnations or actively supports Israel’s obliteration of Gaza and its 2.3 million inhabitants. The Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth reported that the U.S. has sent 230 cargo planes and 20 ships filled with artillery shells, armored vehicles and combat equipment to Israel since the attacks of Oct. 7, in which some 1,200 Israelis were killed. U.S. weapons and military equipment are being shipped to Israel — which is running out of munitions — from the British base RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, according to the U.K. investigative website Declassified UK. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that more than 40 U.S. and 20 British transport aircraft, along with seven heavy-lift helicopters, have flown into RAF Akrotiri, a 40-minute flight from Tel Aviv. Germany reportedly plans to provide 10,000 rounds of 120mm precision ammunition to Israel. If the court rules against Israel, these countries will be recognized by the world’s most important international court as accomplices to genocide. The ruling was dismissed by Israeli leaders. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, seeking to paint the decision not to demand a ceasefire as a victory for Israel, said “Like every country, Israel has an inherent right to defend itself. The vile attempt to deny Israel this fundamental right is blatant discrimination against the Jewish state, and it was justly rejected. The charge of genocide leveled against Israel is not only false, it’s outrageous, and decent people everywhere should reject it.” “The decision of the antisemitic court in The Hague proves what was already known: This court does not seek justice, but rather the persecution of Jewish people,” National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said. “They were silent during the Holocaust and today they continue the hypocrisy and take it another step further.” The ICJ was founded in 1945 following the Nazi Holocaust. The first case it heard was submitted to the court in 1947. “Decisions that endanger the continued existence of the State of Israel must not be listened to,” Ben-Gvir added. “We must continue defeating the enemy until complete victory.” The court, which rejected Israel’s arguments to dismiss the case, acknowledged “that the military operation being conducted by Israel following the attack of 7 October 2023 has resulted, inter alia, in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries and the destruction of homes, schools, medical facilities and other vital infrastructure, as well as displacement on a massive scale.” The ruling included a statement made by the U.N. Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, Martin Griffiths, who on Jan. 5, called Gaza “a place of death and despair.” The court document went on: . . . Families are sleeping in the open as temperatures plummet. Areas where civilians were told to relocate for their safety have come under bombardment. Medical facilities are under relentless attack. The few hospitals that are partially functional are overwhelmed with trauma cases, critically short of all supplies, and inundated by desperate people seeking safety. A public health disaster is unfolding. Infectious diseases are spreading in overcrowded shelters as sewers spill over. Some 180 Palestinian women are giving birth daily amidst this chaos. People are facing the highest levels of food insecurity ever recorded. Famine is around the corner. For children in particular, the past 12 weeks have been traumatic: No food. No water. No school. Nothing but the terrifying sounds of war, day in and day out. Gaza has simply become uninhabitable. Its people are witnessing daily threats to their very existence — while the world watches on. The court acknowledged that “an unprecedented 93% of the population in Gaza is facing crisis levels of hunger, with insufficient food and high levels of malnutrition. At least 1 in 4 households are facing ‘catastrophic conditions’: experiencing an extreme lack of food and starvation and having resorted to selling off their possessions and other extreme measures to afford a simple meal. Starvation, destitution and death are evident.” The ruling, quoting Philippe Lazzarini, the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), continued: Overcrowded and unsanitary UNRWA shelters have now become ‘home’ to more than 1.4 million people,” the ruling read. “They lack everything, from food to hygiene to privacy. People live in inhumane conditions, where diseases are spreading, including among children. They live through the unlivable, with the clock ticking fast towards famine. The plight of children in Gaza is especially heartbreaking. An entire generation of children is traumatized and will take years to heal. Thousands have been killed, maimed, and orphaned. Hundreds of thousands are deprived of education. Their future is in jeopardy, with far-reaching and long-lasting consequences. The court also referred pointedly to comments made by multiple senior Israeli government officials advocating genocide, including the president and minister of defense. Statements made by government and other officials form a crucial element of the “intent” component when seeking to establish the crime of genocide. It quoted Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant who declared — two days after the Hamas-led attack of Oct. 7 — that he ordered a “complete siege” of Gaza City with “no electricity, no food, no fuel” being permitted. “I have released all restraints . . . You saw what we are fighting against. We are fighting human animals. This is the ISIS of Gaza,” Gallant told Israeli troops massing around Gaza the following day. “This is what we are fighting against…Gaza won’t return to what it was before. There will be no Hamas. We will eliminate everything. If it doesn’t take one day, it will take a week, it will take weeks or even months, we will reach all places.” The ICJ quoted Israel’s President Isaac Herzog as saying, “It is not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved. It is absolutely not true. They could have risen up. They could have fought against that evil regime which took over Gaza in a coup d’état. But we are at war. We are at war. We are defending our homes.” Herzog continued “We are protecting our homes. That’s the truth. And when a nation protects its home, it fights. And we will fight until we’ll break their backbone.” Today’s decision was read out by the ICJ’s current president, Judge Joan Donoghue, an American lawyer who used to work at the U.S. State Department and the Department of the Treasury before she joined the World Court in 2010. “In the Court’s view, the facts and circumstances mentioned above are sufficient to conclude that at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible,” it read. “This is the case with respect to the right of the Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts identified in Article III, and the right of South Africa to seek Israel’s compliance with the latter’s obligations under the Convention.” It is clear from the ruling that the court is fully aware of the magnitude of Israel’s crimes. This makes the decision not to call for the immediate suspension of Israeli military activity in and against Gaza all the more distressing. But the court did deliver a devastating blow to the mystique Israel has used since its founding to carry out its settler colonial project against the indigenous inhabitants of historic Palestine. It made the word genocide, when applied to Israel, credible. Share

The crimes of Winston Churchill Crimes of Britain Churchill was a genocidal maniac. He is fawned over in Britain and held up as a hero of the nation — voted ‘Greatest Briton’ of all time. Below is the real history of Churchill. The history of a white supremacist whose hatred for Indians led to four million starving to death. The man who loathed Irish people so much he conceived different ways to terrorise them. A racist thug who waged war on black people across Africa and in Britain. This is the trial of Winston Churchill, the enemy of all humanity. Afghanistan: Churchill found his love for war during the time he spent in Afghanistan. While there he said “all who resist will be killed without quarter” because the Pashtuns need “recognise the superiority of race”. He believed the Pashtuns needed to be dealt with, he would reminisce in his writings about how he partook in the burning villages and peoples homes. “We proceeded systematically, village by village, and we destroyed the houses, filled up the wells, blew down the towers, cut down the great shady trees, burned the crops and broke the reservoirs in punitive devastation.” — Churchill on how the British carried on in Afghanistan, and he was only too happy to be part of it. Churchill would also write of how “every tribesman caught was speared or cut down at once”. Proud of the terror he helped inflict on the people of Afghanistan Churchill was well on the road to becoming a genocidal maniac. Cuba: Churchill wrote that he was concerned Cuba would turn in to “another black republic” in 1896. By “another” he was referring to Haiti which was the first nation in modern times to abolish slavery. Haiti has been punished for doing so ever since. Egypt: “Tell them that if we have any more of their cheek we will set the Jews on them and drive them into the gutter, from which they should never have emerged” — Winston Churchill on how to deal with Egypt in 1951. Greece: The British Army under the guidance of Churchill perpetrated a massacre on the streets of Athens in the month of December 1944. 28 protesters were shot dead, a further 128 injured. Who were they? Were they supporters of Nazism? No, they were in fact anti-Nazis. The British demanded that all guerrilla groups should disarm on the 2nd December 1944. The following day 200,000 people took to the streets, and this is when the British Army on Churchill’s orders turned their guns on the people. Churchill regarded ELAS (Greek People’s Liberation Army) and EAM (National Liberation Front) as “miserable banditti” (these were the very people who ran the Nazis out). His actions in the month of December were purely out of his hatred and paranoia for communism. The British backed the right-wing government in Greece returned from exile after the very same partisans of the resistance that Churchill ordered the murder of had driven out the Nazi occupiers. Soviet forces were well received in Greece. This deeply worried Churchill. He planned to restore the monarchy in Greece to combat any possible communist influence. The events in December were part of that strategy. In 1945, Churchill sent Charles Wickham to Athens where he was put in charge of training the Greek security police. Wickham learned his tricks of the trade in British occupied Ireland between 1922–1945 where he was a commander of the colonial RUC which was responsible for countless terror. In April 1945 Churchill said “the [Nazi] collaborators in Greece in many cases did the best they could to shelter the Greek population from German oppression” and went on to say “the Communists are the main foe”. Guyana: Churchill ordered the overthrowing of the democratically elected leader of ‘British Guiana’. He dispatched troops and warships and suspended their constitution all to put a stop to the governments nationalisation plan. India: “I’d rather see them have a good civil war”. — Churchill wishing partition on India Very few in Britain know about the genocide in Bengal let alone how Churchill engineered it. Churchill’s hatred for Indians led to four million starving to death during the Bengal ‘famine’ of 1943. “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion” he would say. Bengal had a better than normal harvest during the British enforced famine. The British Army took millions of tons of rice from starving people to ship to the Middle East — where it wasn’t even needed. When the starving people of Bengal asked for food, Churchill said the ‘famine’ was their own fault “for breeding like rabbits”. The Viceroy of India said “Churchill’s attitude towards India and the famine is negligent, hostile and contemptuous”. Even the right wing imperialist Leo Amery who was the British Secretary of State in India said he “didn’t see much difference between his [Churchill] outlook and Hitler’s”. Churchill refused all of the offers to send aid to Bengal, Canada offered 10,000 tons of rice, the U.S 100,000. Churchill was still swilling champaign while he caused four million men, women and children to starve to death in Bengal. Throughout WW2 India was forced to ‘lend’ Britain money. Churchill moaned about “Indian money lenders” the whole time. The truth is Churchill never waged war against fascism. He went to war with Germany to defend the British Empire. He moaned “are we to incur hundreds of millions of debt for defending India only to be kicked out by the Indians afterwards”. In 1945 Churchill said “the Hindus were race protected by their mere pullulation from the doom that is due”. The Bengal famine wasn’t enough for Churchill’s blood lust, he wished his favourite war criminal Arthur Harris could have bombed them. When India was partitioned in 1947 millions of people died and millions more were displaced. Churchill said that the creation of Pakistan, which has been an imperialist outpost for the British and Americans since its inception, was Britain’s “bit of India”. Iran: “A prize from fairyland beyond our wildest dreams” — Churchill on Iran’s oil When Britain seized Iran’s oil industry Churchill proclaimed it was “a prize from fairyland beyond our wildest dreams”. He meddled in Iranian affairs for decades doing his utmost to exclude Iranians from their natural resources. Encouraging the looting of the nation when most lived in severe poverty. In June 1914 Churchill proposed a bill in the House of Commons that would see the British government become become the major shareholder of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. The company would go on to refrain from paying Iran its share of the dividends before paying tax to the British exchequer. Essentially the British were illegally taxing the Iranian government. When the nationalist government of Mohammad Mosaddegh threatened British ‘interests’ in Iran, Churchill was there, ready to protect them at any cost. Even if that meant desecrating democracy. He helped organise a coup against Mosaddegh in August 1953. He told the CIA operations officer that helped carry out the plan “if i had been but a few years younger, I would have loved nothing better than to have served under your command in this great venture”. Churchill arranged for the BBC to send coded messages to let the Shah of Iran know that they were overthrowing the democratically elected government. Instead of the BBC ending their Persian language news broadcast with “it is now midnight in London” they under Churchill’s orders said “it is now exactly midnight”. Churchill went on to privately describe the coup as “the finest operation since the end of the war [WW2]”. Being a proud product of imperialism he had no issue ousting Mosaddegh so Britain could get back to sapping the riches of Iran. Iraq: “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against the uncivilized tribes… it would spread a lively terror.” — Churchill on the use of gas in the Middle East and India Churchill was appointed ‘Secretary of State for the Colonies’ in 1921. He formed the ‘Middle East Department’ which was responsible for Iraq. Determined to have his beloved empire on the cheap he decided air power could replace ground troops. A strategy of bombing any resistance to British rule was now employed. Several times in the 1920s various groups in the region now known as Iraq rose up against the British. The air force was then put into action, indiscriminately bombing civilian areas so to subdue the population. Churchill was also an advocate for the use of mustard and poison gases. Whilst ‘Secretary for War and Air’ he advised that “the provision of some kind of asphyxiating bombs” should be used “for use in preliminary operations against turbulent tribes” in order to take control of Iraq. When Iraqi tribes stood up for themselves, under the direction of Churchill the British unleashed terror on mud, stone and reed villages. Churchill’s bombing of civilians in ‘Mesopotamia’ (Kurdistan and Iraq) was summed up by war criminal ‘Bomber Harris’: “The Arab and Kurd now know what real bombing means within 45 minutes a full-sized village can be practically wiped out, and a third of its inhabitants killed or injured, by four or five machines which offer them no real target, no opportunity for glory as warriors, no effective means of escape”. — Arthur ‘Bomber’ Harris. Ireland: “We have always found the Irish a bit odd. They refuse to be English” — Churchill In 1904 Churchill said “I remain of the opinion that a separate parliament for Ireland would be dangerous and impractical”. Churchill’s ancestry is linked to loyalism to Britain. He is a direct descendent of the ‘Marquis of Londonderry’ who helped put down the 1798 United Irishmen rising. He would live up to his families reputation when it came to suppressing revolutionary forces in Ireland. The Black and Tans were the brainchild of Churchill, he sent the thugs to Ireland to terrorise at will. Attacking civilians and civilian property they done Churchill proud. Rampaging across the country carrying out reprisals. He went on to describe them as “gallant and honourable officers”. It was also Churchill who conceived the idea of forming the Auxiliaries who carried out the Croke Park massacre. They fired into the crowd at a Gaelic football match, killing 14. Of course this didn’t fulfill Churchill’s bloodlust to repress a people who he described as “odd” for their refusal “to be English”. He went on to advocate the use of air power in Ireland against Sinn Fein members in 1920. He suggested to his war advisers that aeroplanes should be dispatched with orders to use “machine-gun fire or bombs” to “scatter and stampede them”. Churchill was an early advocate for the partitioning of Ireland. During the treaty negotiations he insisted on retaining navy bases in Ireland. In 1938 those bases were handed back to Ireland. However in 1939 Churchill proposed capturing Berehaven base by force. In 1941 Churchill supported a plan to introduce conscription in the North of Ireland. Churchill went on to remark”the bloody Irish, what have they ever done for our wars”, reducing Ireland’s merit to what it might provide by way of resources (people) for their imperialist land grabs. Kenya: Britain declared a state of emergency in Kenya in 1952 to protect its system of institutionalised racism that they established throughout their colonies so to exploit the indigenous population. Churchill being your archetypical British supremacist believed that Kenya’s fertile highlands should be only for white colonial settlers. He approved the forcible removal of the local population, which he termed “blackamoors”. At least 150,000 men, women and children were forced into concentration camps. Children’s schools were shut by the British who branded them “training grounds for rebellion”. Rape, castration, cigarettes, electric shocks and fire all used by the British to torture the Kenyan people on Churchill’s watch. In 1954 during a British cabinet meeting Churchill and his men discussed the forced labour of Kenyan POWs and how to circumvent the constraints of two treaties they were breaching: “This course [detention without trial and forced labour] had been recommended despite the fact that it was thought to involve a technical breach of the Forced Labour Convention of 1930 and the Convention on Human Rights adopted by the Council of Europe” The Cowan Plan advocated the use of force and sometimes death against Kenyan POWs who refused to work. Churchill schemed to allow this to continue. Caroline Elkins book gives a glimpse into the extent that the crimes in Kenya were known in both official and unofficial circles in Britain and how Churchill brushed off the terror the colonial British forces inflicted on the native population. He even ‘punished’ Edwina Mountbatten for mentioning it, “Edwina Mountbatten was conversing about the emergency with India’s prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, and the then colonial secretary, Oliver Lyttleton. When Lyttleton commented on the “terrible savagery” of Mau Mau… Churchill retaliated, refusing to allow Lord Mountbatten to take his wife with him on an official visit to Turkey”. Palestine: “I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger.” In 2012 Churchill was honoured with a statue in Jerusalem for his assistance to Zionism. He regarded the Arab population Palestine to be a “lower manifestation”. And that the “dog in a manger has the final right to the manger”, by this he meant the Arabs of Palestine. In 1920 Churchill declared “if, as may well happen, there should be created in our own lifetime by the banks of the Jordan a Jewish State under the protection of the British Crown which might comprise three or four millions of Jews, an event will have occurred in the history of the world which would from every point of view be beneficial”. A year later in Jerusalem he told Palestinian leaders that “it is manifestly right that the Jews, who are scattered all over the world, should have a national centre and a National Home where some of them may be reunited. And where else could that be but in this land of Palestine, with which for more than 3,000 years they have been intimately and profoundly associated?”. At the Palestine Royal Commission (Peel) of 1937, Churchill stated that he believed in intention of the Balfour Declaration was to make Palestine an “overwhelmingly Jewish state”. He went on to also express to the Peel Commission that he does “not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place”. Four years later he wrote of his desire for a ‘Jewish state’to be established after the second war world. The establishment of the colonial settler state however was done by the British Labour Party under Attlee, who were always there to back their Tory counterparts when it came to British foreign policy. Russia: Churchill’s hatred and paranoia about communism saw him suggest that an atomic bomb should be dropped on the Kremlin. He believed this would “handle the balance of power”. Saudi Arabia: “My admiration for him [Ibn Saud] was deep, because of his unfailing loyalty to us.” — Churchill Prior to 1922 the British were paying Ibn Saud a subsidy of £60,000 a year. Churchill, then Colonial Secretary, raised it to £100,000. Churchill knew full well of the dangers of wahhabism. He gave a speech to the House of Commons in 1921 where he stated that Ibn Saud’s followers “hold it as an article of duty, as well as of faith, to kill all who do not share their opinions and to make slaves of their wives and children. Women have been put to death in Wahhabi villages for simply appearing in the streets… [they are] austere, intolerant, well-armed and bloodthirsty”. He was however content to use the House of Saud’s twisted ideology for the benefit of British imperialism. Churchill went on to write that his “admiration for him [Ibn Saud] was deep, because of his unfailing loyalty to us”. He showered Ibn Saud with money and presents — gifting Ibn Saud a special Rolls-Royce in the mid 1940s. South Africa: Thousands were sent to British run concentration camps during the Boer wars. Churchill summed up his time in South Africa by saying “it was great fun galloping about”. Churchill wrote that his only “irritation” during the Boer war was “that Kaffirs should be allowed to fire on white men”. It was Churchill who planted the seed to strip voting rights from black people in South Africa. In June 1906, Churchill argued that Afrikaners should be allowed a self-rule which would mean black people would be excluded from voting. He went on to state to Parliament that “we must be bound by the interpretation which the other party places on it and it is undoubted that the Boers would regard it as a breach of that treaty if the franchise were in the first instance extended to any persons who are not white”. In conclusion: There have been a number of attempts to rehabailtate the image of the British Empire in Britain in recent years. Particularly via the medium of cinema. The film Darkest Hour didn’t show you anything about Churchill’s crimes. On the contrary it presented him as a hero. Gary Oldham won an Oscar for his portrayal of one of the most evil, imperialists ever. British Nationalist groups in Britain hold Churchill up as their posterboy. And so they should. He was a racist to the core. In response to migration from the Caribbean to Britain he said England should “be kept white”. Throughout worl war two his cabinet obsessed over British people viewing American Black GI’s favourably. They were concerned that they would fraternised with white English women. A true believer in white supremacy, Churchill blamed the Native American and Aboriginal Australian people for their genocides. He said he did “not admit that a great wrong has been done to the red Indians and the black people of Australia.” Winner of the Noble Prize in Literature, Churchill actually plagiarised his most well known speech from an Irish Republican called Robert Emmet who was hanged and then beheaded by the British in 1803. Winston’s famous “we shall fight them on beaches” line was lifted from Emmet’s speech from the dock. When it came to his own fellow Brits he was less than complimentary and displayed a deep hatred for the working classes. He suggested “100,000 degenerate Britons should be forcibly sterilised”. And that for “tramps and wastrels there ought to be proper labour colonies where they could be sent”. It needs to be put once and for all that Churchill was despicable, racist, war criminal. Some will argue his “sins” are expiated for his actions during the second world war. It is nothing but nonsense to suggest Churchill went out to fight fascism. He lauded Mussolini as a “roman genius”, donated to Nazi war criminal Erich Von Manstien’s criminal defence and sought to desperatly cling on to the British Empire from which Hitler himself took inspiration for his Reich. What we have to remember is Churchill was not a uniquely villianous British Prime Minister. He was not out of ordinary but in fact a true representation of Britain. https://medium.com/@write_12958/the-crimes-of-winston-churchill-c5e3ecb229b3

SEJARAH RASULULLAH SAW : Nabi Muhammad SAW Pemimpin politik Arab dan Pengasas Islam Nabi Muhammad bin Abdullah (570 M - 8 Jun 632 M) Baginda juga adalah pemimpin yang menyatukan Semenanjung Arab kepada satu tatanegara di bawah pemerintahan Islam. Nabi Muhammad SAW dianggap oleh umat Islam sebagai pemulih keimanan monoteistik ajaran nabi-nabi terdahulu yang dibawa oleh Nabi Adam, Nabi Nuh, Nabi Ibrahim, Nabi Musa, Nabi Isa dan nabi-nabi yang terdahulu. Nabi Muhammad Bin Abdullāh KELAHIRAN : 12 Rabiulawal Tahun Gajah (20 April 571) Mekkah, Semenanjung Arab (kini Arab Saudi) WAFATNYA RASULULLAH SAW : 8 Jun 632 Madinah, Semenanjung Arab (kini Arab Saudi) SEBAB KEWAFATAN : Sakit (demam panas) RASULULLAH SAW DIKEBUMIKAN : Makam di Masjid Nabawi, Madinah. NAMA-NAMA LAIN RASULULLAH SAW : 1. Al-Amin, 2. As-Saadiq, 3. RASUL Allāh 4. Abu al-Qasim dan ada banyak lagi sebenarnya 201. UMUR PASANGAN RASULULLAH SAW KETIKA BERNIKAH : 1. Khadijah binti Khuwailid 40 Tahun (555-619). 2. Saudah binti Zam'ah 50 Tahun (619-632). 3. Aisyah binti Abu Bakar Al-Siddiq 9 tahun (619-632). 4. Hafsah binti Umar Al-Khattab 19 Tahun (624-632). 5. Zainab binti Khuzaimah 29 Tahun (625-627). 6. Zainab binti Jansyin 35 Tahun (627-632). 7. Juwairiah binti Al-Harith 19 Tahun (628-632). 8. Ramlah binti Abu Sufian 32 Tahun (628-632). 9. Hindun binti Abi Umaiyah 28 Tahun (629-632). 10. Raihanah binti Zaid (629-631) 11. Safiyah binti Huyay 16 Tahun (629-632). 12. Maimunah binti Al-Harith 25 Tahun (630-632). 13. Mariyah al-Qibthiyah (630-632). IBU BAPA RASULULLAH SAW : AYAH : Abdullah bin Abdul Muttalib IBU : Āminah bt Wahab SEJARAH RINGKAS : DILAHIRKAN DI MAKKAH DAN DIJAGA : Semenanjung Arab, Baginda adalah anak yatim piatu sejak kecil lagi dimana baginda dijaga oleh 1. datuknya, Abdul Muttalib bin Hasyim dan 2. seterusnya bapa saudara baginda, Abu Talib bin Abdul Muttalib. Baginda juga pernah bekerja sebagai pengembala kambing dan saudagar serta perkahwinan pertamanya adalah ketika berusia 25 tahun dimana baginda telah bernikah dengan Khadijah binti Khuwailid (40 tahun). Keluarga baginda mengamalkan ajaran Tauhid yang dibawa oleh Nabi Isa AS daripada Allah SWT. WAHYU PERTAMA : Ketika Nabi Muhammad berumur 40 tahun, baginda telah menerima wahyu yang pertama daripada Tuhan melalui malaikat Jibril (malaikat yang sama menyampaikan wahyu Allah SWT kepada 5 orang Rasul Ulul Azmi) ketika sedang berada di Gua Hira. BERDAKWAH : Tiga tahun setelah kejadian itu, baginda mula berdakwah secara terbuka kepada penduduk Makkah dengan mengatakan "Tuhan itu Esa" dan hendaklah menyerahkan diri sepenuhnya kepada Allah SWT (secara harfiahnya membawa maksud Islam) dan ia adalah satu cara hidup (الدين ad-Din) yang diterima Allah SWT sahaja. Nabi Muhammad SAW menerima beberapa orang pengikut pada awalnya yang terdiri daripada pelbagai golongan. Ajaran yang dibawa oleh baginda mendapat tentangan yang hebat dalam kalangan penduduk Makkah malahan mereka dilayan dengan teruk dan zalim. Oleh itu, Nabi Muhammad SAW telah menghantar beberapa orang pengikutnya ke Habsyah pada 614 M HIJRAH : sebelum baginda dan pengikutnya lain di Makkah Hijrah ke Madinah (dahulu dikenali sebagai Yathrib) pada tahun 622 M. Peristiwa penghijrahan Baginda itu menandakan permulaan bagi kalendar Islam atau takwim Hijrah. Di Madinah, Baginda telah menyatukan semua suku kaum dibawah Piagam Madinah. KEMBALI KE MEKKAH SEMULA : Setelah bersengketa dengan penduduk Makkah selama 8 tahun, Baginda membawa 10,000 pengikutnya ke Makkah serta membukanya. Nabi Muhammad SAW dan para pengikutnya telah memusnahkan patung berhala yang terdapat di Makkah. KEWAFATAN RASULULLAH SAW : Pada tahun 632 M, beberapa bulan selepas Haji Wida atau Haji Perpisahan, Nabi Muhammad SAW telah jatuh sakit lalu wafat. Ketika kematian Baginda, hampir seluruh Semenanjung Arab berada di bawah naungan Islam dan bersatu dengan utuhnya (6 Mei 570M atau pun 20 April/26 April 571M). KETURUNAN IBU DAN AYAH RASULULLAH SAW : Ibu Baginda, iaitu Aminah binti Wahab, adalah anak perempuan kepada Wahab bin Abdul Manaf dari keluarga Zahrah. Ayah Baginda, iaitu Abdullah, ialah anak kepada Abdul Muthalib. Keturunannya dikatakan bersusur galur dari Nabi Ismail, anak kepada Nabi Ibrahim kira-kira dalam keturunan keempat puluh. Ayah Baginda telah meninggal sebelum kelahiran Baginda. Sementara ibu Baginda meninggal ketika Baginda berusia kira-kira enam tahun, menjadikannya seorang anak yatim piatu. IBU SUSUAN RASULULLAH SAW : Menurut tradisi keluarga atasan Mekkah, Baginda telah dipelihara oleh seorang ibu angkat IBU SUSU : wanita yang menyusukan baginda yang bernama Halimahtus Sa'adiah di kampung halamannya di pergunungan selama beberapa tahun. RASULULLAH SAW DI JAGA : Dalam tahun-tahun itu, baginda telah dibawa ke Makkah untuk mengunjungi ibu Baginda Aminah binti Wahab. Setelah ibu Baginda wafat, Baginda dijaga oleh datuknya, Abdul Muthalib. Apabila datuknya meninggal, Baginda dijaga oleh bapa saudara Baginda, Abu Talib. Ketika inilah Baginda sering kali membantu mengembala kambing-kambing bapa saudara Baginda di sekitar Mekkah dan kerap menemani bapa saudara Baginda dalam urusan perdagangan ke Syam (Syria). MASA REMAJA RASULULLAH SAW : Dalam masa remaja Baginda, Nabi Muhammad SAW percaya sepenuhnya dengan keesaan Allah SWT. Baginda hidup dengan cara amat sederhana dan membenci sifat-sifat angkuh dan bongkak. Baginda mengamalkan ajaran-ajaran Nabi-Nabi terdahulu terutamanya Nabi Isa Al-Masih. YANG RASULULLAH SAW SAYANG : Baginda menyayangi 1. orang-orang miskin, 2. para janda dan 3. anak-anak yatim serta berkongsi penderitaan mereka dengan berusaha menolong mereka. Baginda juga menghindari semua kejahatan yang menjadi amalan biasa di kalangan para belia pada masa itu seperti berjudi, meminum minuman keras, berkelakuan kasar dan lain-lain, sehingga Baginda dikenali sebagai As Saadiq (yang benar) dan Al Amin (yang amanah). Baginda sentiasa dipercayai sebagai orang tengah kepada dua pihak yang bertelingkah di kampung halamannya di Mekkah. BAGINDA BERUMAHTANGGA : Ketika berusia kira-kira 25 tahun, ayah saudara Baginda menyarankan Baginda untuk bekerja dengan kafilah (rombongan perniagaan) yang dimiliki oleh seorang janda yang bernama Khadijah. Baginda diterima bekerja dan bertanggungjawab terhadap pelayaran ke Syam (Syria). Baginda mengelolakan urusniaga itu dengan penuh bijaksana dan pulang dengan keuntungan luar biasa. ISTERI DAN ANAK RASULULLAH SAW PERTAMA: Khadijah begitu tertarik dengan kejujuran dan watak peribadinya yang mendorong beliau untuk menawarkan diri untuk mengahwini Baginda. Baginda menerima lamarannya dan perkahwinan mereka adalah bahagia. Mereka dikurniakan 6 orang anak (2 lelaki dan 4 perempuan) tetapi kedua-dua anak lelaki mereka, Qasim dan Abdullah meninggal semasa kecil. Manakala anak perempuan baginda ialah Ruqayyah, Zainab, Ummu Kalsum dan Fatimah az-Zahra. Khadijah merupakan satu-satunya isterinya sehinggalah Khadijah meninggal pada usia 64 tahun. ANAK RASULULLAH SAW DENGAN MARIA AL-QIBTIYYAH : Seorang lagi anak Baginda adalah hasil perkahwinan Baginda dengan Maria al-Qibtiyyah. Putera Baginda bersama Maria bernama Ibrahim itu juga meninggal semasa kecil. Isteri-isteri baginda dikenali sebagai "Ummul Mukminin" yang bermaksud "ibu orang-orang beriman". BAPA DAN IBU SAUDARA NABI MUHAMMAD SAW : Al-Harith bin Abdul Muttalib Muqaddam bin Abdul Muttalib Zubair bin Abdul Muttalib Hamzah bin Abdul Muttalib Al-Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib Abu Thalib bin Abdul Muttalib Abu Lahab bin Abdul Muttalib Abdul Kaabah bin Abdul Muttalib Hijin bin Abdul Muttalib Dhirar bin Abdul Muttalib Ghaidaq bin Abdul Muttalib Safiyah binti Abdul Muttalib 'Atikah binti Abdul Muttalib Arwa binti Abdul Muttalib Umaimah binti Abdul Muttalib Barrah binti Abdul Muttalib Ummi Hakim al-Bidha binti Abdul Muttalib Hashim bin Abdu'Manan KERASULAN : Nabi Muhammad SAW telah dilahirkan di tengah-tengah masyarakat jahiliyah. Ia sungguh menyedihkan hati Baginda sehingga Baginda kerapkali ke Gua Hira, sebuah gua bukit dekat Makkah, yang kemudian dikenali sebagai Jabal al-Nour, untuk memikirkan cara untuk mengatasi gejala yang dihadapi masyarakatnya. Di sinilah Baginda sering bertapa serta berfikir dengan mendalam, memohon kepada Allah SWT supaya memusnahkan kedurjanaan yang kian berleluasa. WAHYU PERTAMA : Pada suatu malam hari Isnin 21 Ramadan (bersamaan 10 Ogos 610), ketika Baginda sedang bertafakur di Gua Hira, Malaikat Jibril mendatangi Baginda. Jibril membangkitkan Baginda dan menyampaikan wahyu Allah SWT di telinganya. Baginda diminta membaca. Baginda menjawab, "Saya tidak tahu membaca". Jibril mengulangi tiga kali meminta Nabi Muhammad SAW untuk membaca tetapi jawapan Baginda tetap sama. Baginda menjawab, "Saya tidak tahu membaca". Akhirnya, Jibril berkata : "Bacalah dengan menyebut nama Tuhanmu yang menciptakan manusia dari segumpal darah. Bacalah, dengan nama Tuhanmu yang Amat Pemurah yang mengajar manusia dengan perantaraan (menulis, membaca). Dia mengajarkan kepada manusia apa yang tidak diketahuinya." Ini merupakan wahyu pertama yang diterima oleh Nabi Muhammad SAW. Ketika itu baginda berusia 40 tahun setengah. WAHYU TURUN SELAMA 23 TAHUN : Wahyu itu turun kepada Baginda dari semasa ke semasa dalam jangka masa 23 tahun. Siri wahyu ini telah diturunkan menurut panduan yang diberikan kepada Nabi Muhammad SAW dan dikumpulkan dalam buku bernama Al Mushaf yang juga dinamakan Al-Quran (bacaan). AL-QURAN DAN AL SUNNAH : Kebanyakkan ayat-ayatnya mempunyai erti yang jelas. Sebahagiannya diterjemah dan dihubungkan dengan ayat-ayat yang lain. Sebahagiannya pula diterjemah oleh Nabi Muhammad SAW sendiri melalui percakapan Baginda, tindakan dan persetujuan yang terkenal, dengan nama Sunnah. Al-Quran dan al Sunnah digabungkan bersama untuk menjadi panduan dan cara hidup mereka yang menyerahkan diri kepada Allah SWT. BERDAKWAH : Marhalah dakwah baginda boleh dibahagikan mengikut fasa: Fasa di Makkah: hampir 13 tahun Dakwah rahsia: 3 tahun Dakwah terbuka di Makkah: hampir 7 tahun Dakwah kepada semua: 3 tahun Fasa Madinah: 10 tahun Perjuangan dakwah Nabi Muhammad SAW juga boleh diringkaskan sebagai berikut : Pertama: Marhalah Tasqif - tahap pembinaan dan pengkaderan untuk melahirkan individu-individu yang menyakini pemikiran (fikrah) dan metod (thariqah) parti politik guna membentuk kerangka gerakan. Kedua: Marhalah Tafa’ul ma’al Ummah - tahap berinteraksi dengan umat agar umat turut sama memikul kewajiban dakwah Islam, sehingga umat akan menjadikan Islam sebagai panduan utama dalam hidupnya serta berusaha untuk menerapkannya dalam kehidupan bernegara dan bermasyarakat. Ketiga: Marhalah Istilamil Hukmi - tahap pengambilalihan kekuasaan, dan penerapan Islam secara utuh serta menyeluruh, lalu mengembangkannya sebagai risalah Islam ke seluruh penjuru dunia. didalam kitab sirah dan merupakan satu aktiviti penting dalam marhalah kedua perjuangan Nabi Muhammad SAW Lestari atau tidaknya dakwah ditentukan oleh Baginda kerana keberlangsungan dakwah memerlukan dua aspek penting : Pertama : untuk mendapatkan perlindungan (himayah) sehingga tetap dapat melakukan aktiviti dakwah dalam keadaan aman dan terlindung. Kedua : untuk mencapai tampuk pemerintahan dalam rangka menegakkan Daulah Islamiyah (Negara Islam) dan menerapkan hukum-hukum berdasarkan apa yang telah diturunkan Allah SWT dalam kehidupan bernegara dan bermasyarakat. CABARAN BERDAKWAH : Apabila Nabi Muhammad SAW menyeru manusia ke jalan Allah SWT, tidak ramai yang mendengar seruannya. Kebanyakkan pengikut Baginda adalah dari anggota keluarga Baginda dan dari golongan masyarakat bawahan, Antara mereka ialah Khadijah, Ali, Zaid dan Bilal. Apabila Baginda memperhebatkan kegiatan dakwah Baginda dengan mengumumkan secara terbuka Agama Islam yang disebarkan Baginda, dengan itu ramai yang mengikut Baginda. Tetapi pada masa, Baginda menghadapi berbagai cabaran dari kalangan bangsawan dan para pemimpin yang merasakan kedudukan mereka terancam. Mereka bangkit bersama untuk mempertahankan agama datuk nenek mereka. Semangat penganut Islam meningkat apabila sekumpulan kecil masyarakat yang dihormati di Makkah menganut Agama Islam. Antara mereka ialah Abu Bakar, Uthman bin Affan, Zubair bin Al Awwam, Abdul Rahman bin Auf, Ubaidillah bin Harith, Amr bin Nufail dan ramai lagi. Akibat cabaran dari masyarakat jahiliyah di Mekkah, sebahagian orang Islam disiksa, dianiaya, disingkir dan dipulaukan. Baginda terpaksa bersabar dan mencari perlindungan untuk pengikutnya. Baginda meminta Negus Raja Habsyah, untuk membenarkan orang-orang Islam berhijrah ke negaranya. Negus mengalu-alukan ketibaan mereka dan tidak membenarkan mereka diserah kepada penguasa di Makkah. HIJRAH : Di Makkah terdapat Kaabah yang telah dibina oleh Nabi Ibrahim a.s. beberapa abad lalu sebagai pusat penyatuan umat untuk beribadat kepada Allah SWT. Sebelumnya ia dijadikan oleh masyarakat jahiliyah sebagai tempat sembahyang selain dari Allah SWT. Mereka datang dari berbagai daerah Arab, mewakili berbagai suku ternama. Ziarah ke Kaabah dijadikan mereka sebagai sebuah pesta tahunan. Orang ramai bertemu dan berhibur dengan kegiatan-kegiatan tradisi mereka dalam kunjungan ini. Baginda mengambil peluang ini untuk menyebarkan Islam. Antara mereka yang tertarik dengan seruan Baginda ialah sekumpulan orang dari Yathrib (Madinah). Mereka menemui Baginda dan beberapa orang Islam dari Mekah di desa bernama Aqabah secara sembunyi-sembunyi. Setelah menganut Islam, mereka bersumpah untuk melindungi Islam, Nabi Muhammad SAW dan orang-orang Islam Mekkah. Tahun berikutnya, sekumpulan masyarakat Islam dari Yathrib datang lagi ke Makkah. Mereka menemui Nabi Muhammad di tempat yang mereka bertemu sebelumnya. Kali ini, Abbas bin Abdul Muthalib, pakcik Baginda yang belum menganut Islam hadir dalam pertemuan itu. Mereka mengundang Baginda dan orang-orang Islam Mekkah untuk berhijrah ke Yathrib. Mereka berjanji akan melayani mereka sebagai saudara seAgama. Dialog yang memakan masa agak lama diadakan antara mayarakat Islam Yathrib dengan pakcik Nabi Muhammad SAW untuk memastikan mereka sesungguhnya berhasrat mengalu-alukan masyarakat Islam Mekkah di bandar mereka. Nabi Muhammad SAW akhirnya bersetuju untuk berhijrah beramai-ramai ke bandar baru itu. HIJRAH KE MADINAH (YATHRIB) : Mengetahui ramai masyarakat Islam merancang meninggalkan Makkah, masyarakat jahiliyah Mekkah cuba menghalang mereka. Namun kumpulan pertama telahpun berjaya berhijrah ke Yathrib. Masyarakat jahiliyah Mekkah bimbang hijrah ke Yathrib akan memberi peluang kepada orang Islam untuk mengembangkan Agama mereka ke daerah-daerah yang lain. Hampir dua bulan seluruh masyarakat Islam dari Makkah kecuali Nabi Muhammad SAW, Abu Bakar, Ali dan beberapa orang yang daif, telah berhijrah. RANCANGAN MEMBUNUH RASULULLAH SAW : Masyarakat Mekkah kemudian memutuskan untuk membunuh Baginda. Mereka merancang namun tidak berjaya. Dengan berbagai taktik dan rancangan yang teratur, Nabi Muhammad SAW akhirnya sampai dengan selamat ke Yathrib, yang kemudian dikenali sebagai, 'Bandar Rasulullah SAW'. MADINAH : Di Madinah, kerajaan Islam diwujudkan di bawah pimpinan Baginda umat Islam bebas mengerjakan solat di Madinah. Musyrikin Makkah mengetahui akan perkara ini kemudiannya melancarkan beberapa serangan ke atas Madinah tetapi kesemuanya ditangkis dengan mudah oleh umat Islam. Satu perjanjian kemudiannya dibuat dengan memihak kepada pihak Quraish Makkah. Walau bagaimanapun perjanjian itu dicabuli oleh mereka dengan menyerang sekutu umat Islam. Orang Muslim pada ketika ini menjadi semakin kuat telah membuat keputusan untuk menyerang musyrikin Makkah memandangkan perjanjian telah dicabuli. PEMBUKAAN KOTA MAKKAH : Pada tahun kelapan selepas penghijrahan ke Madinah berlaku, Nabi Muhammad SAW berlepas ke Makkah. Tentera Islam yang seramai 10,000 orang tiba di Makkah dengan penuh bersemangat. Takut akan nyawa mereka terkorban, penduduk Makkah bersetuju untuk menyerahkan kota Makkah tanpa sebarang syarat. Nabi Muhammad SAW kemudian mengarahkan supaya kesemua berhala dan patung-patung di sekeliling Kaabah dimusnahkan. MENELADANI PERBUATAN NABI MUHAMMAD SAW : Perbuatan-perbuatan yang dilakukan Nabi Muhammad SAW dibagi menjadi dua cara. Ada yang termasuk perbuatan-perbuatan jibiliyah, iaitu perbuatan yang dilakukan manusia secara Fitriah, dan ada pula perbuatan-perbuatan selain jibiliyah. Perbuatan-perbuatan jibiliyah, seperti berdiri, duduk, makan, minum dan lain sebagainya, tidak ada perselisihan bahawa status perbuatan tersebut adalah mubah (harus), baik bagi Nabi Muhammad SAW maupun bagi umatnya. Oleh kerana itu, perbuatan tersebut tidak termasuk dalam kategori mandub (sunat). Sedangkan perbuatan-perbuatan yang bukan jibiliyah, boleh jadi termasuk dalam hal-hal yang ditetapkan khusus bagi Nabi Muhammad SAW, dimana tidak seorang pun diperkenankan mengikutinya (haram); atau boleh jadi tidak termasuk dalam perbuatan yang diperuntukkan khusus bagi Baginda. KHUSUS BAGI RASULULLAH SAW : Apabila perbuatan itu telah ditetapkan khusus bagi Nabi Muhammad SAW, seperti dibolehkan Baginda melanjutkan puasa pada malam hari tanpa berbuka, atau dibolehkannya menikah dengan lebih dari empat wanita, dan lain sebagainya dari kekhususan Baginda; maka dalam hal ini kita tidak diperkenankan mengikuti Baginda. Sebab, perbuatan-perbuatan tersebut telah terbukti diperuntukkan khusus bagi Baginda berdasarkan Ijmak Sahabat. Oleh kerana itu tidak dibolehkan meneladani Baginda dalam perbuatan-perbuatan semacam ini. Akan halnya dengan perbuatan Baginda yang kita kenal sebagai penjelas bagi kita, tidak ada perselisihan bahawa hal itu merupakan dalil. Dalam hal ini penjelasan tersebut boleh berupa perkataan, seperti RASULULLAH SAW BERSABDA : “ Solatlah kalian sebagaimana kalian melihat aku solat ”. RASULULLAH SAW BERSABDA " Laksanakan manasik hajimu berdasarkan manasikku (apa yang telah aku kerjakan) ". Hadis ini menunjukkan bahawa perbuatan Baginda merupakan penjelas, agar kita mengikutinya. Penjelasan Baginda boleh juga berupa qaraain al ahwal, yakni qarinah/perbuatan yang menerangkan bentuk perbuatan, seperti memotong pergelangan pencuri sebagai penjelas, ALLAH SWT BERFIRMAN : " Maka potonglah tangan keduanya ." (SURAH AL-MAIDAH : 38) Status penjelas yang terdapat dalam perbuatan Baginda, baik berupa ucapan maupun perbuatan yang menerangkan bentuk perbuatan, dapat mengikuti hukum apa yang telah dijelaskan, apakah itu wajib, haram, mandub(sunat) atau mubah(harus) sesuai dengan arah penunjukan dalil. Sedangkan perbuatan-perbuatan Baginda yang tidak terdapat di dalamnya perbuatan yang menunjukkan bahawa hal itu merupakan penjelas, bukan penolakan dan bukan pula ketetapan. Maka dalam hal ini perlu diperhatikan apakah di dalamnya terdapat maksud untuk bertaqarrub (mendekatkan diri kepada Allah SWT) atau tidak. Apabila di dalamnya terdapat keinginan untuk bertaqarrub kepada Allah SWT maka perbuatan itu termasuk mandub (sunat), di mana seseorang akan mendapatkan pahala atas perbuatannya itu dan tidak mendapatkan balasan jika meninggalkannya. Misalnya Solat Duha. Sedangkan jika tidak terdapat di dalamnya keinginan untuk bertaqarrub, maka perbuatan tersebut termasuk mubah (harus). PESANAN TERAKHIR MUHAMMAD (ISI KHUTBAH TERAKHIR MUHAMMAD) : Ketika Nabi Muhammad SAW mengerjakan ibadah haji yang terakhir, maka pada 9 Zulhijjah tahun 10 hijarah di Lembah Uranah, Bukit Arafah, Baginda menyampaikan khutbah terakhirnya di hadapan kaum Muslimin, di antara isi dari khutbah terakhir Nabi Muhammad SAW itu ialah: " Wahai manusia, dengarlah baik-baik apa yang hendak ku katakan, Aku tidak mengetahui apakah aku dapat bertemu lagi dengan kamu semua selepas tahun ini. Oleh itu, dengarlah dengan teliti kata-kataku ini dan sampaikanlah ia kepada orang-orang yang tidak dapat hadir disini pada hari ini. 1. "Wahai manusia, sepertimana kamu menganggap bulan ini dan kota ini sebagai suci, anggaplah jiwa dan harta setiap orang Muslim sebagai amanah suci. 2. Kembalikan harta yang diamanahkan kepada kamu kepada pemiliknya yang berhak. 3. Janganlah kamu sakiti sesiapapun agar orang lain tidak menyakiti kamu lagi. 4. Ingatlah bahawa sesungguhya kamu akan menemui Tuhan kamu dan DIA pasti membuat perhitungan di atas segala amalan kamu. 5. Allah SWT telah mengharamkan riba, oleh itu, segala urusan yang melibatkan riba dibatalkan mulai sekarang. 6. "Berwaspadalah terhadap syaitan demi keselamatan agama kamu. syaitan telah berputus asa untuk menyesatkan kamu dalam perkara-perkara besar, maka berjaga-jagalah supaya kamu tidak mengikutinya dalam perkara-perkara kecil. 7. "Wahai manusia sebagaimana kamu mempunyai hak atas isteri kamu, mereka juga mempunyai hak ke atas kamu. Sekiranya mereka menyempurnakan hak mereka ke atas kamu, maka mereka juga berhak diberikan makan dan pakaian, dalam suasana kasih sayang. Layanilah wanita-wanita kamu dengan baik dan berlemah-lembutlah terhadap mereka kerana sesungguhnya mereka adalah teman dan pembantu kamu yang setia. Dan hak kamu atas mereka ialah mereka sama sekali tidak boleh memasukkan orang yang kamu tidak sukai ke dalam rumah kamu dan dilarang melakukan zina. 8. "Wahai manusia, dengarlah bersungguh-sungguh kata-kataku ini, sembahlah Allah SWT, dirikanlah solat lima waktu, berpuasalah di bulan Ramadhan, dan tunaikanlah zakat dari harta kekayaan kamu. Kerjakanlah ibadah haji sekiranya kamu mampu. 9. Ketahuilah bahawa setiap Muslim adalah saudara kepada Muslim yang lain. Kamu semua adalah sama; tidak seorang pun yang lebih mulia dari yang lainnya kecuali dalam Taqwa dan beramal soleh. 10. "Ingatlah, bahawa kamu akan menghadap Allah SWT pada suatu hari untuk dipertanggungjawabkan diatas segala apa yang telah kamu kerjakan. Oleh itu, awasilah agar jangan sekali-kali kamu terkeluar dari landasan kebenaran selepas ketiadaanku. 11. "Wahai manusia, tidak ada lagi Nabi atau Rasul yang akan datang selepasku dan tidak akan lahir Agama baru. Oleh itu wahai manusia. Nilailah dengan betul dan fahamilah kata-kataku yang telah aku sampaikan kepada kamu. Sesungguhnya aku tinggalkan kepada kamu dua perkara, yang sekiranya kamu berpegang teguh dan mengikuti kedua-duanya, nescaya kamu tidak akan tersesat selama-lamanya. Itulah Al-Qur'an dan Sunnahku. 12. "Hendaklah orang-orang yang mendengar ucapanku, menyampaikan pula kepada orang lain. Semoga yang terakhir lebih memahami kata-kataku dari mereka yang terus mendengar dariku. Saksikanlah Ya Allah, bahawasanya telah aku sampaikan risalah-MU kepada hamba-hamba-MU." RINGKASAN PERKEMBANGAN ISLAM : 570M- Nabi Muhammad SAW dilahirkan. 610M- Nabi Muhammad SAW menerima wahyu pertama di Gua Hira'. 615M- Orang Muslim didera oleh puak Quraish. Hijrah pertama ke Habsyah. 616M- Sayidina Hamzah dan Saidina Umar memeluk Islam. Hijrah kedua ke Habsyah. 619M- Khadijah ra (isteri Baginda) dan Abu Talib (bapa saudara Baginda) meninggal dunia. Melawat Taif. Peristiwa Isra dan Mi'raj berlaku. 621M- Baiat Aqabah 1. 622M- Baiat Aqabah 2. Hijrah ke Madinah. Daulah Islamiyah dibina. 624M- Perang Badar. 625M- Perang Uhud. 627M- Perang Ahzab. 628M- Perjanjian Hudaibiyah. 629M- Perang Khaibar dan dalam menentang tentera Rom Byzantine, Baginda menghantar tentera Islam dalam Perang Mu'tah. 630M- Pembukaan Makkah. Perang Hunain. 631M- Perang Tabuk. 632M- Kewafatan RASULULLAH SAW, perlantikan Syaidina Abu Bakar sebagai khalifah. KEWAFATAN SAHABAT RASULULLAH SAW : 1. Ali bin Abi Thalib lahir di Makkah Wafat 40 H 2. Hasan bin Ali lahir di Madinah Wafat 50 H 3. Husain bin Ali lahir di Madinah Wafat 61 H 4. Ali bin Husain lahir di Madinah Wafat 95 H 5. Muhammad al-Baqir lahir di Madinah Wafat 114 6. Ja’far ash-Shadiq lahir di Madinah Wafat 148 7. Musa al-Kadzim lahir di Madinah Wafat 183 H 8. Ali ar-Ridha lahir di Madinah Wafat 203 H 9. Muhammad al-Jawad lahir di Madinah Wafat 220 H 10. Ali al-Hadi lahir di Madinah Wafat 254 H 11. Hasan al-Asykari lahir di Madinah Wafat 260 H 12. Muhammad bin al-Asykari Samarra, Irak Lahir 255 H atau 868 M