Man prevented from entering event he registered for because he is not Jewish
A man is prevented from attending an event by Keller Williams real estate company at Aish Hatorah in Toronto, Canada for the sale of property in Jerusalem, because he is not Jewish, despite having… pic.twitter.com/WyDZpbHwUM
— Middle East Monitor (@MiddleEastMnt) March 4, 2024
Toronto Zionists try to sell stolen property and genocide
By Yves Engler | March 4, 2024
A recent Israeli real estate sale in Toronto highlights Zionists’ racism and violence. Non-Jews were openly excluded from the event and Palestine solidarity activists were violently attacked.
On Sunday real estate firm Keller Williams hosted a sale for properties in Israel. After a city-owned venue canceled the event it was moved to Aish Hatorah Synagogue in Thornhill. Properties located in illegal Israeli settlements were listed, notably in the relatively new colony of Modi’in Illit, which was built on land from the Palestinian villages of Ni’lin, Kharbata, Saffa, Bil’in and Dir Qadis.
Organizers of the event openly blocked non-Jews from entering the venue. In the parking lot they told an Arab looking man, who printed his event registration, that he could not enter because he wasn’t Jewish.
While it is illegal in Canada to discriminate based on religion or race, the police on site failed to intervene.
In an exchange posted on X the Arab looking man who registered for the event is told that he wouldn’t be able to purchase any property anyway. That’s likely correct as land laws in Israel discriminate against non-Jews. In Canada the Supreme Court banned overt discrimination in property ownership seven decades ago.
Alongside their racism, the Israel supporters were violent. A resident of Vaughn named Ilan-Reuben Abramov attacked Palestine solidarity protesters in a parking lot. CTV reported that he shot two nails into a protester with a nail gun. He yelled “every Palestinian will die” and on video Abramov knocked the phone out of another individual’s hand and repeatedly pushed an older woman. He’s also caught on camera preparing to box with the woman. After an uproar on social media, the police arrested Abramov.
In another incident a car bumped into Palestine protesters. In a more troubling incident, an Israel supporter is caught on camera nearly hitting Palestine solidarity activists with their vehicle at high speed. The individual, who has yet to be identified despite their license plate number circulating online, came within inches of running over two people in an incident that could have been deadly.
Zionists have once again revealed their violence and supremacism. Claims of victimhood notwithstanding, one must hold a deeply racist and violent worldview to promote an apartheid state slaughtering tens of thousands.
And trying to sell stolen property as well as genocide in Canada.
Nuland’s Resignation Related to Failure of US’ Anti-Russian Policy – Zakharova

RT | March 5, 2024
US Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland is poised to leave her post soon, Secretary of State Antony Blinken has announced. The senior official, widely regarded as a foreign policy hawk, played a key role in the Western-backed coup in Kiev in 2014.
In a statement on Tuesday, Blinken noted that his friend “Toria” has held most of the jobs at the State Department, from a consular officer to ambassador and deputy secretary, over her 35-year career. Her most recent posting was as undersecretary for political affairs. She was also Blinken’s acting deputy after the July 2023 retirement of Wendy Sherman, until Kurt Campbell was confirmed to the post last month.
“What makes Toria truly exceptional is the fierce passion she brings to fighting for what she believes in most: freedom, democracy, human rights, and America’s enduring capacity to inspire and promote those values around the world,” Blinken said.
He also noted that her “leadership on Ukraine” will be the subject of study “for years to come” by diplomats and students of foreign policy.
Nuland was directly involved in the Maidan uprising and the subsequent coup in Kiev. In December 2013, she visited Ukraine to hand out pastries to the armed protesters in Kiev’s central square. She was then recorded discussing how to “midwife this thing” with then-US ambassador to Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, just days before the February 2014 coup.
She resigned from the State Department during the Trump administration, taking the helm of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) think-tank before joining the Albright Stonebridge Group and the board of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). She rejoined the government after President Joe Biden’s inauguration in 2021.
In that capacity, she has worked on arming Ukraine and assembling a Western coalition that would supply Kiev with weapons and ammunition for the conflict with Russia. Last month, she pleaded to Congress to approve $61 billion in funding to Ukraine, arguing that most of it would be “going right back into the US economy,” to create jobs in the weapons industry.
Her most recent trip to Kiev involved intervening with President Vladimir Zelensky on behalf of General Valery Zaluzhny, though to no avail. Zaluzhny was subsequently fired.
In a CNN interview at the end of February, Nuland admitted the defeat of US policy towards Moscow, describing today’s Russia as “not the Russia that, frankly, we wanted.”
Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova attributed Nuland’s exit to “the failure of the anti-Russian course of the Biden administration.”
“Russophobia, proposed by Victoria Nuland as the main foreign policy concept of the United States, is dragging the Democrats to the bottom like a stone,” Zakharova said. Posting a photo of Nuland taken at an Orthodox church at some point, she said that if the US politician wanted to “go to a monastery to atone for your sins, we can put in a good word.”
Nuland is married to neoconservative stalwart Robert Kagan. Her sister-in-law Kimberley Kagan, married to Robert’s brother Fred, runs the Institute for the Study of War. Her temporary replacement at the State Department will be Under Secretary for Management John Bass.
Sending NATO soldiers to Ukraine is “apocalypse warning,” says Slovak prime minister
By Ahmed Adel | March 5, 2024
The Prime Minister of Slovakia, Robert Fico, said on March 2 in a video posted on social media that sending soldiers from the European Union and NATO to Ukraine could precipitate a global apocalypse. The social media post was made on the same day that the Slovakian foreign minister met with his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov.
Fico also highlighted Ukraine’s inability to resolve the conflict despite the West’s substantial financial and military aid. He emphasised that an EU and NATO military presence in Ukraine could potentially alter the dynamics of the conflict and trigger catastrophic consequences.
“The West sees that, despite significant financial and military aid, Ukraine is incapable of resolving this armed conflict,” said the Slovak prime minister, adding: “The situation could change with the arrival of EU and NATO military personnel in Ukraine, but then there would be nothing left but to wait for the arrival of the global apocalypse.”
Fico highlighted the pressing need for modern air defence systems for Ukraine but warned that the West could not provide these systems without a commitment to maintaining and operating this equipment. He argued that sending Western military personnel would only worsen the conflict rather than resolve it.
French President Emmanuel Macron said on February 27 during a conference of European leaders that he does not rule out sending troops from Western allies to Ukraine and announced a coalition to deliver missiles to the Ukrainian Army.
“There’s no consensus today to send in an official, endorsed manner troops on the ground. But in terms of dynamics, nothing can be ruled out,” declared Macron.
However, several NATO members, including Slovakia, ruled out the possibility of on-the-ground support for Ukraine which has been in armed conflict for more than two years.
It is recalled that on February 26, Fico warned when speaking ahead of a meeting of EU and NATO national leaders in Paris that several EU and NATO members are considering military deployments to Ukraine. He cited a “restricted document” listing topics to be discussed in Paris that “sends shivers down your spine.”
“These topics,” the Slovak said, “imply that a number of NATO and EU member states are considering sending troops to Ukraine on a bilateral basis. I can’t say for what purpose or what they would do there.”
According to Fico, “This [Paris] meeting is confirmation that the Ukraine strategy of the West has completely failed.”
Macron’s statement was intended to send a strong warning to the Kremlin, but it failed miserably since his comments revealed Western divisions and disagreements instead. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz led the group of European leaders who disagreed with Macron’s claim that NATO had not ruled out sending troops, whilst Washington abandoned Paris in the idea of sending troops and let the French president receive all the flak.
A survey of 12 European Union countries, commissioned by the European Council on Foreign Relations and published on February 21, reveals that only 10% of respondents believe Ukraine can defeat Russia. Furthermore, only 31% of respondents favoured Europe supporting Ukraine until it regained lost territory, while 41% favoured Europe pushing Ukraine to negotiate a peace agreement with Russia.
Unlike many of his European counterparts, Fico acknowledges the reality that Ukraine cannot win the war with Russia. For this reason, Fico sent Foreign Minister Juraj Blanar to hold talks with his Russian counterpart on March 2 on the sidelines of a diplomatic forum in Turkey, a rare high-level encounter between a European Union member state and the country Brussels has attempted to isolate.
The Slovakian prime minister highlighted that the meeting “was an example of our balanced and sovereign [foreign policy],” adding that Blanar and Lavrov spoke about the possibility of a Ukraine peace summit in Switzerland.
For his part, Blanar said in a statement that the war did not have a military solution and urged peace talks. The foreign minister added in the statement that he told Lavrov that Slovakia was against creating an “iron curtain” between Russia and the EU, and its position was based on respect for international law principles, such as territorial integrity and sovereignty.
Fico returned to power after winning an election in 2023 on promises to stop state military aid to Ukraine and has been critical of anti-Russia sanctions. The leftist populist leader also recently said the West’s approach to the Ukraine war is “an absolute failure,” which, as observed by the European Council on Foreign Relations survey, is what most EU citizens also believe. Fico joins Viktor Orban, prime minister of neighbouring Hungary, in resisting major pressure from Brussels and Washington to relent on their efforts to normalise with Moscow, and his actions once again demonstrate the fractures in the EU and NATO.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
German Military Leak Added Embarrassment to Berlin’s Silence on Nord Stream Sabotage
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 04.03.2024
Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has blamed Moscow for the leak, completely glossing over the fact that German military officers were discussing nothing short of an open attack on Russia, Sputnik’s commentators say.
The leaked conversation of German officers discussing attacks against Russian civilian infrastructure by German-made Taurus missiles has prompted a heated debate in Berlin. “It’s a hybrid disinformation attack — it’s about division, it’s about undermining our unity,” German Defense Minister Pistorius rushed to claim: “We mustn’t fall for [Russian President Vladimir] Putin.” Earlier, Berlin stated it wouldn’t send Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine.
“I think in war narrative, control is obviously very important,” Glenn Diesen, professor of international relations at the University of South-Eastern Norway, told Sputnik. “And on this tape it was revealed that German generals were discussing attacks on Russia or more specifically, attacking the infrastructure of the Kerch Strait Bridge [also known as the Crimean Bridge]. And it also revealed that the Taurus missiles will be supplied to Ukraine, in which the Americans would assist in handling them or firing them, attacking Russia with them. So this is, of course, very problematic because it demonstrates NATO’s direct involvement in the war, that is direct attacks on Russia. This is not just weapons and intelligence anymore, but now also picking the targets and, indeed, even pulling the triggers.”
Nord Stream Sabotage and Crimean Bridge Attack Plot
By accusing Russia of launching a “disinformation” attack Germany appears to use the same playbook it used in the aftermath of the Nord Stream sabotage attack of September 26, 2022, when Russia was groundlessly blamed for destroying its own pipeline.
According to Diesen, it’s the US who is pulling the strings of the German government in both cases.
“Obviously, the United States has an interest in this,” the expert said, commenting on the scandal surrounding the possible delivery of Taurus missiles to the Kiev regime. “They’re not able to supply weapons of their own at the moment due to the Republican opposition. So they’re obviously looking for the Europeans to take a greater role in this proxy war against Russia. By comparison, Nord Stream was, I would say, even more awkward because keep in mind that before the Nord Stream pipelines were attacked, the US on numerous occasions told what they were planning to do. They threatened it very publicly, expressing their intention to attack the Nord Stream pipeline if Russia would invade Ukraine.”
In both cases, Washington and its allies in the German government feared that the incidents could create divisions within the West; so, the first instinct was to blame Russia, the professor pointed out. Likewise, in both cases nobody in the West seems willing to dig to the bottom of what happened: an investigation in the Nord Stream sabotage has yet to bear any fruit, while the German military chatter is being downplayed by Berlin and its allies.
“It’s the same pattern of behavior,” Gunnar Beck, AfD European Parliament MEP told Sputnik. “The German government is presented with clear evidence. And they deny it and they go on the attack against Russia. Who’s benefiting from this clearly [are the] fervently anti-Russian interest groups within the German government. I’d say the Greens in particular. But, broadly and in abstract terms, everyone in Germany who defines Germany’s national interest in terms of the interests of the collective West. It’s a majority of the German establishment.”
“The German generals appeared to be part of that camp of the German political establishment, which saw Germany as firmly anchored in the West. That applies to all political parties except my own,” the German politician continued.
“And, of course, the arms industry. Naturally, arms manufacturers in Germany are trying to profit from increased military spending on Ukraine.”
The Bundeswehr chatter clearly indicated that American and British military specialists have also been deployed in Ukraine and could be involved together with the French in the attacks on Russia’s Crimean infrastructure.
According to Beck, the attack on the Crimean Bridge is a symbolic matter for NATO: “That’s an important symbol of Crimea being an integral part of Russia,” he presumed.
“I think there are two objectives,” Diesen said, commenting on the matter. “The first would be, just in terms of the war, the Crimea can be seen as an important logistics hub. And in wars especially on this scale, we see that logistics are imperative in order to be able to bring weapons and supplies and move troops around. So being able to destroy this bridge would be an important way of limiting the logistics flexibility of the Russian army. But I think there’s also now a wider, larger strategic level in which there’s this historical desire, especially by the Americans and British, as the main naval powers over the past 200 years or 200-plus years, which has been to weaken Russia’s access to the seas. So, again, this has been a very old strategy, for centuries, which is, yeah, to limit Russia’s access to these oceans.”
German Public Don’t Want War With Russia
Meanwhile, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov drew attention to the fact that Berlin is much more concerned about the leak taking place, rather than the fact that the German military was discussing in detail a potential sabotage attack on Russia’s Crimean Bridge.
“I think it’s an embarrassment for [Germans], obviously, because it’s been quite important for Germany,” said the Norwegian professor. “They’re trying to balance two positions. They want to be loyal NATO members, which supplies weapons in this proxy war against Russia. But at the same time, they’re very cautious not to be seen as being a participant of the war – this obviously failed. They’re now being caught red-handed, planning attacks on Russia, which makes them participants. I think this is merely an issue of controlling the narrative, which is to shift the focus on what this represents.”
For his part, Beck emphasized that while the German establishment has no scruples about sending more weapons to Ukraine and planning attacks on Russia’s civilian objects, the German public is not warmongering.
“So what this conversation – which is not even the German government – clearly shows is that the German military is planning an attack against Russia, which, according to every interpretation of international law, would make Germany a party in the military conflict in the Ukraine. That’s not what the vast majority of Germans want,” Beck emphasized.
ICC issues arrest warrants for top Russian military commanders
RT | March 5, 2024
The Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC) on Tuesday issued arrest warrants for Lieutenant-General Sergey Kobylash and Admiral Viktor Sokolov, accusing the two top Russian military commanders of committing war crimes amid the Ukrainian conflict.
The two top officers, serving as the commanders of Russia’s Long-Range Aviation and Black Sea Fleet respectively, are accused of committing “the war crime of directing attacks at civilian objects,” causing “excessive incidental harm to civilians,” as well as perpetrating a “crime against humanity,” the ICC said in a press release.
The alleged crimes are said to have taken place during a campaign of missile strikes “against the Ukrainian electric infrastructure from at least 10 October 2022 until at least 9 March 2023,” the court claimed.
The Hague-based tribunal has repeatedly taken hostile steps against Moscow amid the Ukraine conflict, most notably by issuing an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin last spring. Putin is accused of “unlawful deportation” of Ukrainian children to Russia.
Moscow has rebuffed the ICC claims, stating that the children in question were merely evacuated form the warzone, and could be returned to Ukraine should their legal guardians request it. Russia has also taken retaliatory steps against the ICC itself, launching a criminal case against the court’s principal prosecutor and judges, ultimately issuing arrest warrants against them.
Like many other countries, including the US, Moscow does not recognize the authority of the Hague-based tribunal and its actions have no legal validity in Russia. The body has been repeatedly accused of being Eurocentric and biased towards the West.
Free Speech on Trial
By Jeffrey Tucker | Brownstone Institute | March 1, 2024
In a lifetime of observing policy controversies and court cases, we’ve never witnessed anything as crucial to the future of the idea of freedom itself compared with what will transpire on March 18, 2024. On that day, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Murthy v. Missouri concerning whether the government can force or nudge private companies to censor users on behalf of regime priorities.
The evidence that they have been doing so is overwhelming. That’s why the 5th Circuit issued an emergency injunction to stop the practice on grounds that it is inconsistent with the First Amendment of the US Constitution. The censorship industrial complex is working right now and hourly to delete free speech in America. That injunction was stayed pending a review by the highest court.
The case itself hasn’t even gone to court. This decision is only about the injunction itself, which was issued based on the alarming results of discovery alone. Essentially, the lower court is screaming “This must stop.” The Supreme Court is trying to assess whether the violations of liberty are extreme enough to justify a pre-trial intervention now.
A positive ruling for the plaintiffs doesn’t solve every problem but at least it will mean that freedom still stands a chance in this country. A ruling for the defense, which is essentially the government itself, will give license to every federal agency – including those that operate in secret like the FBI and CIA – to threaten every social media and media company in this country to delete any and all content that runs contrary to the approved narrative.
There will be celebration in Washington if this happens. On the other hand, there will be tears if the court decides for the defense. It could be that the court will take an in-between position, refusing to let the injunction go ahead and promising some possible decision at a later date pending trial. That would be a disaster because it could mean three or more years of full censorship pending an appeal of whatever the outcome of the trial is.
Free speech is everything. If we don’t have that, we have nothing and freedom is toast. All other problems pale in comparison. There are plenty of them, from healthcare to immigration but if we don’t have free speech, we cannot get the truth out about any of them. The censorship industrial complex is wholly dedicated to making sure that we have no debates at all and that dissident voices are not even heard.
As it is, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook – and many more besides – already heavily restrict speech. They work in cooperation with government and those tasked by government to do elite bidding. We know this for a fact.
When Elon Musk took over Twitter, he discovered a vast censorship machine operating on behalf of the FBI and other agencies. Millions of posts were being taken down along with users. He has done his best to rip out the guts of this borg. Doing so entirely changed the character of the site. It became useful again.
Not even the scale of the problem is widely understood. Usually people say that free speech is necessary to protect minority opinions. In this case, the numbers don’t matter to the censors. You could have 90% of users trying to advance an idea and still have it censored. This is what the old Twitter did. It was daily and hourly attacking the company’s user base. This was their job, no matter how much it contradicts the whole point of social media.
Brownstone is predictably throttled by all these companies but it is not just about us. It is about everyone who disagrees with the Davos “Great Reset” agenda. This could pertain to EVs, gender transitions, lockdowns, immigration, or anything else. Even now, the Google Artificial Intelligence engine extols the glories of lockdowns, masking, and mass injections while completely ignoring contrary science. This is how they want things to be. Google’s search engine is no better. It might as well be a federal agency.
The Justices hearing the case will be in an awkward position. My guess is that none of them even know that this was going on to the extent it is. They will likely be shocked when they look at the evidence proving that there is a trillion-dollar industry in full operation that has massively distorted the public mind. Every federal agency is involved, deeply embedded in the operations of all media companies and digital technology, which in turn requires universal surveillance and persecution of contrary voices.
Until just a few years ago, this entire industry – which involves federal agencies, universities, nonprofits, shadow companies, bogus fact-checks, and every manner of spook-operated front companies – was not known to exist. Now that we know, we are shocked by the extent of it. It has invaded the whole of our lives to the point that we cannot tell the real news from that which is fed to us by intelligence agencies. Even worse, we’ve come to expect that most of what passes for approved opinion is flat-out false.
The Justices will discover this truth. They will likely be astonished. But they will also be taken aback by how integral to our lives it has become. As it turns out, the federal government for nearly a decade has placed a very high priority on curating the public mind, lying at every turn for its own benefit and that of its industrial partners.
Everyone in the old Soviet Union knew for sure that Pravda spoke for the Communist Party. But do people understand that their Google search results and Facebook timelines are no better? It’s not clear whether and to what extent people do understand this but it is our reality.
Will the Justices really be willing to pull the plug on the entire machinery? Doing that would be more disruptive of an established interest group than anything the court has done in many years or even ever. It would fundamentally change the way our technologies work. It would be devastating to federal agencies. Policing such a new system called free speech would be another matter entirely. It would mean that thousands of people would suddenly have nothing to do. That would be wonderful, but would it happen?
As I say, censorship is now an entire global industry. It involves the world’s most powerful foundations, governments, universities, and influencers. It seems like everyone wants a part in crushing what they called “disinformation,” “misinformation,” and “malinformation,” which is true information that they don’t want out. We are surrounded by this machinery of control and yet most people have no clue.
Every federal agency at this point has taken it upon themselves to cajole every information provider into rigging the system so that only one perspective gets out. This has a massive impact on public opinions.
As an example, four years ago, I wrote an article that accidentally made it through the censors and I watched as millions read my piece. Even now, I hear about it at cocktail parties coming from total strangers who don’t know that I’m the author. Nothing like that has happened since that magical day. Most of my writing goes into a dark hole, and this is despite writing daily for the 4th largest newspaper and having access to a huge public forum at Brownstone. People without such access do not stand a chance. Their posts on Facebook are disappeared the instant they post, while YouTube slams their content as contrary to community standards, with no other explanation.
Self-censorship has become the habitual practice of the intellectual class. Otherwise you only beat your head up against the wall and make yourself a target. Minute-by-minute in real time, public opinion is being shaped by this wicked industry, which dramatically distorts political outcomes.
As I say, this is surely the most important issue we face. A decision by the Supreme Court to let this go on – seeing no real issue here – will lead straight to our doom and the death of freedom itself.
There’s an additional problem that is very serious. These days, there is a massive race on to program censorship into the algorithms themselves so that no one is actually doing it, so that there cannot be any real defendants in a case against them. AI will soon be running everything so that Google and Facebook etc can simply say that their machine learning is doing the dirty work.
Perhaps one of the reasons AI has hit us with such a rush is precisely because of this case before the court. The deep state and its industrial partners are not going to give up easily. Everything depends on their victory over free speech, so far as they are concerned.
This is very worrisome, which is why one should hope for a sweeping statement by the Supreme Court that reaffirms the fundamental American commitment to have government completely out of the business of manipulating public opinion through curating what information you see and read and what you do not see and read.
It’s tragic that such a fundamental human right should so heavily depend on the majority decision of this one body. It’s not supposed to work this way. The First Amendment is supposed to be law but these days, the government has built an entire empire around the idea that it simply does not matter. The job of the Supreme Court is to remind our overlords that the people are not merely putty in the hands of deep state agents. We have fundamental rights that cannot be abridged.
There is a rally scheduled outside the court on March 18th, with many speakers making themselves available to the press. Note the sponsoring organizations: these are the freedom fighters in America today. You are welcome to join us.
It won’t sway the court, of course. And the crowds will surely be thinner than they otherwise would be given how much success the censorship industry already enjoys. Still, it is worth a shot.
Truly, we should all shudder to think of the future of American freedom in absence of a decisive statement by the court on behalf of the basic liberty the Framers intended be protected for everyone.
Jeffrey Tucker is Founder, Author, and President at Brownstone Institute.
Pennsylvania Collaborates With DHS and CISA To Monitor Online Election-Related Speech
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | March 4, 2024
Pennsylvania’s Democratic Governor, Josh Shapiro, announced last week that, in an effort to address perceived “threats” to electoral procedures, the state is launching an initiative in partnership with various state and federal agencies.
These partners include the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and, notably, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), an organization long accused of aiding online censorship to impede freewheeling online speech.
The revelation about Pennsylvania’s collaboration with DHS and CISA surfaced after The Federalist pressed the Pennsylvania State Department for more information about the new initiative.
This program, named the Pennsylvania Election Threats Task Force, is expected to bring forth measures for the protection of the electoral system, safeguard voters from any form of intimidation, and provide accessible and trustworthy information about the election.
Al Schmidt, Secretary of the Commonwealth, stated that the task force would focus on addressing lies and baseless “conspiracy theories” aiming to delegitimize the electoral process.
Accusations have been levied against CISA for serving as the epicenter of the federal government’s efforts to censor speech, which is seen as an assault on civil liberties and First Amendment rights.
Documents acquired by America First Legal uncovered that CISA, despite being aware of the risks associated with unsupervised mail-in voting in the 2020 election, dismissed social media posts voicing similar concerns as “disinformation.”
The conflict in the Red Sea and the reaction of the world community
By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – 04.03.2024
During the discussion that took place on 14 February 2024 at the UN Security Council meeting, questions were raised about the unlawful shelling by the US and UK in Yemen in violation of all international laws and regulations. This serious issue was discussed in detail due to the violations of international law and human rights that accompany these shellings. The UNSC participants condemned these actions by the US and the UK as illegal and unacceptable. Despite demagogic statements about the fight against terrorism and alleged support for international security, such shelling by Western powers located tens of thousands of kilometres away from the Red Sea basin only exacerbates the humanitarian situation in Yemen and causes irreparable harm to the lives of civilians, including primarily children and women. At the meeting, the panellists rightly raised the need to put an urgent end to this shelling and to return to negotiations for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. It was noted that another wave of violence by Western countries would only exacerbate the situation in that poor Arab country and hinder the achievement of sustainable peace in the region.
Russia’s and China’s opinion
Russia and China have deemed the US and UK bombing of Yemeni territory illegal and contrary to the United Nations Charter, accusing them of illegally attacking Yemen, whose residents support the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip in the face of the Israeli regime’s bloodbath. Russia’s Deputy Ambassador to the UN Dmitry Polyansky and China’s representative to the UN Zhang Jun stressed that the UN Security Council has never authorised military action against Yemen. For his part, the UN special envoy for Yemen, Western representative Hans Grundberg, said that the US and UK attacks and the American declaration of the Ansar Allah resistance movement in Yemen as a “specially designated terrorist group” were merely “of concern.” And what exactly could this so-called envoy, who is entirely on Washington’s payroll and receives all instructions from White House officials, have said.
Mr Polansky correctly emphasised that the root cause of the current situation is Israel’s war crimes in Gaza, which have provoked angry reactions in West Asia, including from Yemenis. “An immediate ceasefire in Gaza will help stabilise the situation in the Red Sea, and de-escalation will in turn unblock the efforts of Special Envoy Grundberg,” he said. The Chinese envoy also expressed concern over the escalation of tensions in the Red Sea region, in particular “the continuation of military operations by certain countries” against Yemen. He called for an immediate halt to the Yemeni hostilities against merchant shipping and stressed the fact that the UN Security Council has not authorised the use of force against Yemen.
“At this critical moment, China hopes that all parties in Yemen will put the interests of the people first, show determination and resolutely push the political process forward to achieve final results,” Zhang Jun added. He also emphasised that “the most urgent task is to immediately promote a ceasefire in Gaza and take responsible measures to prevent further escalation in the region.”
Aggressive actions of the US and UK
For weeks, the United States and Britain have been waging a fierce bombing campaign on Yemeni territory. The reason is well known – this Arab country has boldly declared its open support for the Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip against the Israeli carnage since 7 October last year, in which some 30,000 civilians, especially the elderly, women and children, have already been killed. The US, being one of the leading superpowers and a global factor, has stated its brazen stance on the issue of shelling Yemen. They deny their direct involvement in the conflict, claiming that they are only supporting military assistance and supplies to Saudi Arabia, which in turn is conducting operations to defeat the Houthis. However, human rights advocates and humanitarian organisations have raised accusations of US involvement in human rights and civilian violations during these operations.
Despite strong condemnation of its brutal and aggressive actions, the United States has again “conducted five strikes in self-defence” against areas of Yemen controlled by the Houthi militia, the US Central Command said. It struck three mobile anti-ship cruise missiles, one unmanned underwater vessel and one unmanned surface vessel on 17 February, the statement said. “This is the first observed use of an unmanned aerial vehicle by the Houthis since the attacks began on 23 October,” CENTCOM said in a statement on its X website. Central Command said it had determined the missiles and ships posed “an immediate threat to U.S. Navy ships.” The Houthi attacks in the Red Sea area have been one of the signs of spreading conflict in the Middle East since war broke out between Israel and Hamas after 7 October.
Unlike the US, the UK, its closest ally and most likely a country once with a solid international reputation, chooses not to explicitly support Saudi Arabia, but also does not actively oppose it. Instead, London claims to be providing military assistance centred on training and advice to prepare the Saudi army for its tasks. In these statements, the British demagogically point to the importance of maintaining the stability of the region and fighting terrorism. However, in doing so, they forget to recall that it is they, together with their overseas partners, who are the main disturbers of peace and tranquillity and the main “creators” of the atmosphere of terrorism in the region.
Alongside these states, some delegates from US satellite countries expressed support for the US and UK, arguing that the shelling was in response to acts of terrorism and extremism that threaten world security. They emphasise the need for action to ensure the safety of their citizens and partners. The UN Security Council meeting was by all accounts very tense and controversial, reflecting the complexity of the situation in Yemen and the multifaceted challenges faced by the parties to the conflict. But it was nevertheless called for further discussion and for finding ways to end the violence and restore peace. In conclusion, the UN Security Council meeting emphasised that violators of international law and human rights, including the systematic shelling of Yemen, must be brought to justice and those responsible must be punished accordingly. The decision on further steps and investigations was postponed until all the arguments made during the discussion are recorded, and a relevant document is prepared for further voting.
Ways and means of resolving the conflict in the Red Sea
Human rights advocates and humanitarian organisations object to this position and allege US and UK complicity in human rights and civilian violations in Yemen. Critics also point out that US and UK military aid could be used to commit crimes against humanity and military operations could be disproportionate and indifferent to civilians. The need to resolve the conflict in Yemen is integral to upholding international law and protecting human rights. The world community must continue dialogue, find a political solution and provide humanitarian assistance to end the exclusively military approach and eliminate civilian suffering. So, the position of the US and UK on the shelling of Yemen is causing disagreement and concern among human rights supporters and humanitarian organisations. It is necessary to continue the international discussion in order to achieve peace and stability in the region, calling for respect for international law and the protection of human rights.
Yemen continues to actively target American and other ships that deliver supplies to Israel. The Yemenis’ main argument in favour of shelling ships delivering supplies to Israel is the destruction of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip. In their view, the situation in Palestine remains tense due to Israeli occupation and state policies, leading to regular conflict and violence. In turn, by supporting trade with Israel, American and other ships become indirect contributors to Palestinian suffering. Yemen’s weakened economy and infrastructure put the country in a difficult position. Regular new sanctions and the blockade of the country by international allies make Yemen’s economy extremely vulnerable. For Yemen, the shelling of ships delivering supplies to Israel may be an attempt to gain international attention and launch a dialogue on the Palestinian issue.
In today’s world, the Red Sea remains a key region of geopolitical importance. Along with issues of security and economic stability, emerging conflicts between states and factors in the region regularly attract international attention. However, there are different ways and factors that can play an important role in resolving and preventing conflicts in order to achieve peace and tranquility in the Red Sea.
Above all, the States in which the Red Sea is located must take an active part in finding a way to resolve conflicts peacefully. They should seek dialogue and international cooperation rather than the use of force and military action. Instead of creating tension and threatening security, states should seek common interests and co-operation in the fields of economy, trade, transport and combating international terrorism.
However, in addition to the active role of states, international organisations and forums can play an important role in resolving conflicts in the Red Sea. For example, the United Nations can mediate negotiations and facilitate agreements between states in the region. It can propose mechanisms and strategies to resolve disputes and support dialogue between parties. Also, regional international organisations such as the Arab League or the African Union can contribute to conflict resolution and stability in the Red Sea.
In addition, the role of civil society and non-governmental organisations should not be forgotten. They can play an important role in planting peace and tranquility in the region through engaging in diplomatic efforts, supporting dialogue between the parties and publicly highlighting conflicts. Civil society can give a voice to peace and help to shape public opinion in favour of the peaceful resolution of conflicts.
It is quite clear that conflicts in the Red Sea can and must be resolved in the interests of peace and tranquillity in the region. To that end, the active participation of States, international organisations, civil society and non-governmental organisations is essential. Only through cooperation and dialogue can sustainable peace and tranquillity in the Red Sea be achieved, which will benefit all States and peoples living in the region.
Victor MIKHIN is a Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.
Gaza ‘flour massacre’ textbook case of Israel’s war crimes and cover-ups
By Alireza Hashemi | Press TV | March 4, 2024
In the early hours of Thursday, in line with its genocidal war against Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip, Israeli troops opened indiscriminate fire on people waiting for food aid in the southwest of Gaza City.
At least 116 people were killed and more than 760 others injured in what rights groups described as a textbook case of cold-blooded massacre on the Al Rashid street that stretches along the coast of Gaza.
The regime denied involvement in the massacre that came nearly five months into the Israeli genocide in the besieged territory, which has so far claimed the lives of more than 30,400 Palestinians.
The flawed Israeli narrative kept changing and evolving throughout the day, designed to shift the blame on victims, the desperate aid-seekers who were there to get some flour.
The Israeli army claimed they had nothing to do with the incident and blamed a stampede for it. Later, they said trucks carrying aid had run over civilians. Finally, they admitted to having fired at the crowd, but “only targeting the militants trying to sabotage the aid delivery.”
A report by Yediout Aharonot said, “Dozens of Gazans died during a stampede as large crowds descended on humanitarian aid trucks entering northern Gaza, attempting to loot supplies and sparking violent clashes, the IDF reported on Thursday.”
“An initial IDF probe into the incident found that Palestinian gunmen fired at the aid trucks, with most fatalities resulting from trampling and crowding,” the report noted.
Another report by the Times of Israel said it “acknowledged that troops opened fire on several Gazans who moved toward soldiers and a tank at an IDF checkpoint, endangering soldiers, after they had rushed the last truck in the convoy further south.”
Reuters quoted an Israeli official as saying “there had been two incidents”, in one of which “dozens” were “trampled or run over” and in the second “some people” approached troops including a tank who “felt under threat and opened fire” in a “limited response”.
“The soldiers fired warning shots in the air and then fired towards those who posed a threat and did not move away,” Reuters quoted the official as saying.
“This is what we understand. We’re continuing to review the circumstances.”
In the broadest account, the Jerusalem Post, quoting Israeli army sources, said three incidents occurred.
The first one was the stampede that left most of the casualties, the second when the armed Palestinians fired on the trucks and stole supplies, and the third when a large group of Palestinians approached the Israeli forces nearby, who responded with live fire.
The Israeli newspaper, quoting its sources, claimed that “it was unclear if they had aggressive intentions or were civilians caught up in a chaotic moment.”
Later on Thursday, Israeli army spokesman Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari said the military had fired “a few warning shots” to try to disperse a “mob” who had “ambushed” the aid trucks.
“As these vital humanitarian supplies made their way toward Gazans in need, thousands of Gazans [rushed] the trucks, some began violently pushing and trampling other Gazans to death, looting the humanitarian supplies,” he said.
Some accounts identified those targeted as ordinary people and others identified them as a “mob”.
For example, Israel’s far-right minister Itamar Ben Gvir said Israeli soldiers “acted excellently against a Gazan mob that tried to harm them”.
In some versions, the victims were said to have trampled each other and in others, the trucks were believed to have mowed down people.
Israeli regime spokesman Eylon Levy blamed “Gaza truck drivers” for the massacre.
In this age of technology, it is interesting that Israeli accounts are never consistent and the regime officials are always “reviewing” things and struggling to find simple answers.
The regime offered no evidence to back its claims. It released a 100-second, heavily edited drone video as proof, which showed aid seekers surrounding trucks, but no trampling or trucks running over people.
If the Israeli drones recorded the situation, why did the regime not publish the scenes showing the moment when people were “trampled” or “run over”?
Holes in Israeli story
However, the strategy of ‘cover-up’ didn’t work this time. There are several glaring holes in the Israeli version of the incident that demand unraveling.
How did Gazan truck drivers start to kill their own people? Why hasn’t this ever happened before?
Or, why did Israeli troops kill 10 unarmed, starved Palestinians who had approached them? What kind of threat did these people pose to armed-to-the-teeth soldiers and tanks?
And, how scores of people were trampled? In any case, who is to blame for the desperate humanitarian situation that this regime claims was the cause of the incident?
These holes are filled by the Palestinian witness accounts that present a different chain of events.
Palestinians say most of the people present at the scene fell victim to Israeli gunfire, and the stampede occurred only after the Israeli troops started indiscriminately firing at them.
Local journalist Khadeer Al Za’anoun, a reporter for the Palestinian news agency Wafa, who witnessed the incident, said the chaos and confusion were sparked after Israeli forces opened fire, which led to people being hit by aid trucks.
Al-Jazeera journalist Ismail al-Ghoul reported that Israeli tanks “advanced and ran over many of the dead and injured people.”
The acting director of the Al-Awda Hospital said they received 161 wounded patients, most of whom appeared to have been shot.
Also, an initial probe by the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor showed that the Israeli army gunfire was responsible for most deaths in a massacre of Palestinian civilians.
In a follow-up report, the rights group confirmed the regime’s “full involvement” in the massacre at the Nabulsi roundabout, calling for an “effective international investigation to hold Israeli officials accountable.”
Its field team – present at the time of the incident – “documented Israeli tanks firing heavily towards Palestinian civilians while trying to receive humanitarian aid,” the report noted.
Trying to get away with another massacre
The incident has been widely condemned by governments and organizations. The United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for an independent probe into the killing of civilians.
Iran slammed “the barbaric attack by the Zionist regime”. Iranian foreign ministry in a statement said “The wound of Gaza will not be erased from the memory of the free people of the world.”
China said it was “shocked” while Colombia said, “This is called genocide and recalls The Holocaust.”
Even European allies of Israel, including France and Italy, denounced the massacre. Josep Borrell, the EU’s top diplomat, described the incident as a “totally unacceptable carnage”.
It wasn’t the first massacre of Palestinians though. There have been massacres every day in the Gaza Strip since October 7.
On January 26, Gaza’s Health Ministry said Israeli fire struck a crowd of people waiting for humanitarian aid at a roundabout in Gaza City on Thursday, killing at least 20 and wounding 150.
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said on February 4, “a group of people a group of people waiting for humanitarian aid trucks near Al Kuwaiti roundabout in southern Gaza City were reportedly fired at.”
Another report referred to the February 5 attack on an aid convoy at the same place, Al-Rashid Street. That attack forced the UN Agency for Palestinian Refugees to warn it could not carry out its mission and provide humanitarian relief if safety conditions were not met.
A day before the latest attack, on Wednesday, Wafa news agency reported that three Palestinians, who were waiting for aid near Gaza City, were killed after being hit by Israeli artillery fire on al-Rashid Street.
Israel has a long record of massacring Palestinians in cold blood and then trying to cover up their crimes and avoid accountability, say observers. A notable example is the Deir Yassin massacre in 1948 when at least 107 Palestinians were slaughtered by Zionists.
The bloodthirst of the child-murdering regime has only increased over the years.

