Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Arab tribes seize control of US-occupied Syrian towns in large-scale assault

The Cradle | August 7, 2024

A coalition of Syrian Arab tribes seized several towns from US-backed Kurdish forces in the countryside of eastern Syria’s Deir Ezzor governorate on 7 August.

Tribesmen launched the “largest” attack on Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) sites since the start of the Arab tribal rebellion against the US-backed militia last year, Sputnik reported, adding that the attack took place “under the cover of artillery and mortar shells.”

“Violent clashes have been ongoing since the early morning hours between the forces of the SDF-linked Deir Ezzor and Hajin Military Councils on the one hand, and the attacking groups of the ‘Army of Tribes’ coalition on the other, in the vicinity of the towns of Abu Hamam, Dhiban, Al-Lattwa, Al-Kashkiya, and Gharanij,” the news outlet’s correspondent said.

The clashes were concentrated in the towns of Al-Sabha and Al-Tayana, east of Deir Ezzor, the correspondent added.

The Arab tribes used RPGs and machine guns against the SDF during the onset of the attack, according to Al Mayadeen.

“SDF militants imposed a complete curfew in the towns under their control in the Deir Ezzor countryside, after the arrival of large military reinforcements from Hasakah and Raqqa, coinciding with a wide search operation in the villages surrounding the areas of clashes,” the Sputnik correspondent went on to say.

Residents told Sputnik that many people were displaced as a result and that three civilians were killed while seven others were injured due to the fighting. Local sources also told the outlet that at least 10 SDF militants were taken captive by tribal fighters, who also seized large amounts of light and heavy weapons.

The SDF and the tribal coalition also took some casualties.

“Arab tribal fighters managed to damage three Hummer military vehicles in the vicinity of the American base in the Al-Omar oilfield,” Sputnik said.

The SDF imposed security belts and closed roads around several areas in Hasakah, northeastern Syria.

“American helicopters targeted a group of tribal forces using machine guns near the banks of the Euphrates River in the town of Dhiban, east of Deir Ezzor,” Al Mayadeen’s correspondent reported on Tuesday.

The US army also deployed reinforcements to the vicinity of its base in the Al-Omar oilfield.

Sheikh Ibrahim al-Hafel, who led the tribal rebellion against the US-backed armed group last year, was quoted by Al Mayadeen as saying on 7 August: “We will not accept submission to the SDF militants … [the tribes and] their sons have the right to liberate their areas from these militants.”

Arab tribes launched their rebellion against the SDF in late August last year, with fierce clashes raging for several weeks afterward.

Despite brief instances of de-escalation, tensions and armed clashes between the two sides have remained ongoing. At the time, it was said that the tribal forces were coordinating with and receiving military aid and training from the Syrian Arab Army (SAA).

“After continuous training received by the tribal forces during the past months, the tribes led by Sheikh Ibrahim Al-Hafel launched a violent attack on the largest in the cities and towns of Deir Ezzor, and took control of several military points in the city of Al-Busayrah and the towns of Ibriha, Al-Harijiya, Al-Tayana, Abu Hamam, Gharanij, Al-Kashkiya, Dhiban, Al-Latwa neighborhood, and all the riverside points,” Syrian journalist Mohammad Dabaa said on 7 August.

The tribal assault came a month after the SDF released hundreds of ISIS fighters from their prison camps in northern Syria.

August 7, 2024 Posted by | Illegal Occupation | , , , | Leave a comment

Toward a Second Cuban Missile Crisis?

Theodore Postol, Alexander Mercouris & Glenn Diesen

Glenn Diesen | August 6, 2024

I had a very interesting discussion with Alexander Mercouris and Theodore Postol – a nuclear engineer and missile technology expert professor from MIT and former advisor to the Pentagon.

Professor Postol spoke about the new missiles that the US will deploy to Germany, which will be able to reach Moscow within 2-3 minutes and thus dramatically elevate the potential for a successful nuclear first-strike. Russia will have very little time to respond to a possible strike, which increases the risk of an accidental nuclear war or a NATO nuclear first-strike. Russia will have to respond by decentralising decision-making and granting more people the authority to launch a counter-strike against the US to reduce the threat of a decapitating strike against Russia’s decision-making headquarters, and Russia will be under pressure to launch a pre-emptive strike on the US/NATO if it suspects a first-strike in coming. This has happened before when NATO’s Able Archer exercise in 1983 almost triggered a Soviet nuclear attack as Moscow thought the NATO military exercise was a cover for a first-strike.

As the world was almost consumed by a nuclear holocaust, both Washington and Moscow recognised the need to extend the warning period for a possible nuclear first-strike. The result was the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 1987 to remove an entire class of missiles from Europe (500-5,500km range). In 2019, the US unilaterally withdrew from the INF Treaty, and new missiles will now be deployed to Germany which will give the US the possibility to strike Moscow with almost no warning. The US and Germany are thus setting the stage for something comparable to another Cuban Missile Crisis. The decision has no clear purpose in terms of improving security, it does not respond to any changes in the Russian nuclear posture, and the obedient media has offered no critical reporting.

August 7, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

US Planning to Spend Some $15Bln on B-52 Bombers Upgrade – Reports

Sputnik – 06.08.2024

The United States Air Force is planning to upgrade its 1960s B-53 Stratofortress bombers at a cost of at least $15 billion, the Defense One news portal reported on Tuesday, citing service officials.

The air force is seeking to equip the bombers with new engines and radars to keep them operational for another three decades, as the B-1 and B-2 bombers are set to be retired in the early 2030s, the media outlet reported, adding that the current plan to replace the engines with ones made by Rolls-Royce and radars made by Raytheon faces obstacles due to the high price tag.

The previously estimated upgrade price jumped by $2.5 billion to $15 billion, the news portal quoted Brian Knight, deputy senior material leader for the B-52 program, as saying. He added that the air force was still refining its estimates and expects new proposals from Boeing.

To replace the engines, the bombers themselves would have to be reworked, Knight said. Meanwhile, radar replacement costs reportedly increased by $1 billion to $3.3 billion.

August 6, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | | Leave a comment

It’s Weird to See a Retired General Scotch a Plea Bargain

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | August 5, 2024

Given that we have all been born and raised under a national-security state form of governmental structure, no one in the mainstream press is batting an eyelash over Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s role in a plea bargain into which military prosecutors had entered with three men who are accused of participating in the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, and Mustafa al-Hawsawix. Austin scotched the plea bargain because it eliminated the possibility of a death sentence for the three men.

To be sure, there are some mainstream pundits who have expressed disagreement with Austin’s decision to cancel the plea bargain. But none of them question the very notion that a retired military general is making a major decision in a case involving criminal justice. That’s because the mainstream press, along with many Americans, has come to accept the normality and permanence of the judicial system that the Pentagon established in Cuba after the 9/11 attacks.

But the fact is that Austin’s role in a criminal prosecution is weird — extremely weird. A retired military general serving as U.S. Secretary of Defense has no more legitimate role in America’s criminal-justice system than he does in America’s public-school system.

The U.S. Constitution established one judicial system. It consists of U.S. District Courts, federal courts of appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. It encompasses both civil and criminal jurisdiction. Under the Constitution, when the U.S. government targets someone with criminal prosecution, it must do so within the rules and constraints of the federal-court system.

In other words, the Constitution did not set up two dual, competing criminal-justice systems — one run by civilians and one run by the military. It set up only one criminal-justice system. And that one judicial system is subject to the constraints of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, specifically the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments.

Contrary to popular opinion, terrorism is not an act of war. It is a criminal offense under the U.S. Code. When someone is charged with the crime of terrorism, the Constitution requires that he be treated like any other defendant in the federal-court system.

What happened after the 9/11 attacks, however, was that the military-intelligence establishment seized on the crisis, panic-filled environment to establish a brand new dual, competing judicial system at its imperial outpost in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Mind you, there was no constitutional authority for such a judicial system but given the climate of “emergency” and the dominant role that the national-security establishment had already come to play in America’s federal governmental system, the Pentagon knew that no one would interfere with its new judicial system.

Thus, under America’s dual, competing judicial systems, the military now decides how an accused terrorist is going to be handled. If the military decides that an accused terrorist, whether foreigner or American, should go into the constitutional system, that’s where he will go. In fact, there have been a number of criminal prosecutions for terrorism in America’s federal-court system, both before and after the 9/11 attacks.

However, if the military decides that an accused terrorist, including an American citizen, will instead be placed in the military’s judicial system at Gitmo, that’s where he will end up. That’s why the plea bargain into which the accused 9/11 planners entered was done with military prosecutors rather than with U.S. Attorneys and assistant U.S. Attorneys.

The difference between these two judicial systems is like day and night. In the constitutional system, the accused has the right to a speedy trial, the right to trial by jury, the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishments, and other procedural protections.

None of those protections exists for people who are shunted into the military’s judicial system at Gitmo. That’s why criminal defendants have been held there for some 20 years without a trial — there is no right to a speedy trial at Gitmo. The accused can also be convicted on hearsay evidence, which means that he has no right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. He can be tortured into confessing to his crimes. He has no right to trial by jury. Instead his guilt or innocence is determined by a military commission whose kangaroo-court-like verdict will inevitably turn on pleasing superior officers.

This entire dual, competing judicial system is about as weird as weird can get, including the fact that a retired military general now wields the authority to involve himself in plea bargains in criminal prosecutions. The fact that this weird judicial system has become a normal and permanent part of American life just goes to show how the national-security establishment controls, manages, and directs the federal government, with the other three branches simply playing a supportive role. See National Security and Double Government by Michael J. Glennon.

August 6, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, False Flag Terrorism | , , | Leave a comment

FBI To Resume Meetings With Social Media Companies, Ignoring Censorship Concerns

By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | August 5, 2024

Here we go again – another US election is coming up, and there’s another push to find ways to censor “disfavored” voices, and one of those ways is the focus on the foreign malign influence (FMI) boogeyman.

Americans (and the world) have seen this play out already before and after the contested 2020 vote.

The infamous case of the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop news story came after the FBI issued a warning to social media companies about an incoming FMI “disinformation dump” – from Russia.

We know how that went and was eventually debunked, the laptop being authentic, rather than a figment of some “disinformation” peddling operation’s imagination. But here is the FBI again, more than just emboldened by the recent Supreme Court’s ruling in the Murthy v. Missouri case.

That decision lifted an injunction that banned the US government from colluding with Big Tech in order to promote censorship. Now the case is back in the lower courts, and in the meanwhile, mere months before the election, the legal hurdle to resume suspected collusion has been cleared.

And so the FBI will now “resume regular meetings” with social media companies, the pretext being finding ways to combat “potential” FMI threats. The Hunter Biden laptop scandal illustrates very well how the supposed hunt for FMI can go astray, straight into the political censorship territory.

But none of that seems to matter now, as the current White House presses on with the old practices. On July 12 this year, just after the Supreme Court’s decision, Department of Justice (DOJ) Associate Deputy Attorney General George D. Turner penned a memo that shows the collusion never really stopped – even after last October’s court injunction restricting this type of “collaboration.”

We obtained a copy of the memo for you here.

The memo reads that after this, the DOJ – always “appropriately accounting for First Amendment considerations” (wouldn’t it be easier to say – without violating the First Amendment?) – “began developing a standardized approach for sharing FMI information with social media companies.”

Come February, and the FBI started using that standardized approach and “actively sharing FMI threat information with social media companies on a continuing basis.”

And now, on top of that, the FBI is free to resume regular meetings with social media companies.

August 6, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson Is Encouraging Residents To Report Neighbors for “Misinformation”

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | August 6, 2024

Michigan’s Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has launched a campaign to root out supposed “election misinformation” – by urging the state’s residents to report each other.

As if more chaotic divisiveness was needed ahead of the November vote, the idea here, in one of the swing states, seems to be to get people to keep an eye on their neighbors, and if what they see and hear is interpreted as “misinformation” – report it, complete with a photo, “if possible.”

A document from Benson’s office provides a Michigan government email as the address for such reports, while the call to this type of action can be found on the official page about “voter education resources.”

The Michigan Bureau of Elections has published a document that aims to address a host of threats to “a healthy democracy” – foreign, domestic, partisan, “or simply malicious.”

Their actions – and that would be “misinformation” about the election process, voter rights, “or even an issue on the ballot” – are presented as a serious threat to election security.

Other than reporting anything they consider to be misinformation about voting and elections in the state, residents are encouraged to seek sources of information and media outlets that offer “true” stories.

Voters are treated as not entirely capable of critical thinking regarding their news, so to help with this, the Bureau recommends itself as a “trusted, verified, non-partisan” place where information can be checked as true or untrue.

Here come the “fact-checkers.” These are the places people in Michigan are recommended to go to in order to seek “truth about elections”: the state’s own government’s “SOSFactCheck” page, but also left-leaning Snopes, FactCheck, and PolitiFact.

The Bureau, however, says they are in the business of debunking misinformation, conspiracy theories, hoaxes, and verifying the “accuracy of political speech” – whatever that may include – as well as of ads, debates, interviews, statements, press releases.

Speaking of “non-partisan” activities, the Democrat secretary of state just recently introduced a program called “Democracy Ambassador,” which promises those who join will receive information about “non-partisan facts and resources” which they should then spread in their communities.

“Squash misinformation before it spreads,” is one of the messages.

But that’s not all from Jocelyn Benson. Yet another recent document from her office focused on “misinformation and AI.” Here, residents are warned about “partisans, grifters, and other opportunists here at home” out to “hack the minds of American citizens.”

August 6, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Political and Media Elites ‘Turned UK Into Tinderbox’

Sputnik – 06.08.2024

Britain’s cities have been engulfed in riots triggered by a deadly stabbing attack which killed three children and injured ten others in the seaside town of Southport, England. British political analyst and former MEP Nick Griffin told Sputnik what role government policy, and the US Deep State, played in setting the stage for the explosion.

Hundreds of people have been arrested and dozens injured in the ongoing riots across England, Wales and Northern Ireland in the wake of the July 29 stabbing rampage in Southport.

British authorities and media have cast the riots as a misinformation-fueled act of far-right subversion and violence. But while high profile right-wing figures “confrontational” social media posts and messaging have certainly played a role in sparking the disorder, its cause is related to decades of ignoring the will and wishes of ordinary Britons by the country’s political and media class, former MEP Nick Griffin told Sputnik.

“The British people have been extremely patient with successive governments which have imposed a swamping tide of mass immigration on the country, without the slightest democratic mandate or any good or properly explained reason,” Griffin said.

“17.4 million people – the largest democratic mandate in UK electoral history – voted for Brexit, which was a very clear instruction to the political elite to get a grip on our borders and to halt the uninvited transformation of the country into a foreign place,” Griffin said.

“If the political class had listened to that warning and accepted the verdict of the people, the killings in Southport either would not have happened at all (because the killer and his family would have been sent back to now entirely peaceful and safe Rwanda) or would have been seen as a terrible crime which the police and courts alone should deal with,” the ex-lawmaker believes.

“But the political and media elite refused to accept the vote, failed to deliver the secured borders and only increased the contempt they showed for ordinary Brits – especially the white working class. It is this, together with an endless litany of two-tier policing and criminal justice, which make indigenous Brits, and especially the English, feel like second-class citizens in their own country. Frustration and anger over this had turned large parts of the country into a tinderbox, just waiting for a spark,” Griffin said.

The observer, who is the former leader and MEP lawmaker from the right-wing British National Party, says he doesn’t rule out the presence of foreign money and influence in the unrest overwhelming the UK, recalling how in 2008, he was approached by a man “with very good connections in the UK broadcasting media and press” who offered the party “limitless support” if it attacked Islam but dropped its opposition to neocon warmongering overseas, and the BNP’s “hostile position to the international banking cartel.”

“The money offer was repeated a few years ago, with literally a blank check available if the Christian nationalist social media network with which I became involved after leaving the BNP dropped any criticism of Zionism and Israel, stopped criticizing the banking cartel, abortion and the LGBTQ agenda, and concentrated on condemning Muslims and Islam,” Griffin said, emphasizing that that both offers were refused.

The observer believes the offers came from “very wealthy members of the pro-Likud Zionist lobby in America,” and estimates “that the US Deep State finds the highly motivated Zionist lobby to be very useful front for moves which fit its own agenda.”

“It’s similar,” Griffin said, “to the way that George Soros for so long funded all sorts of radical [liberal] leftist causes, leading many critics to focus on his far-left sympathies and even his Jewish heritage. This provided camouflage for the fact that his Open Society Foundation worked extremely closely with the National Endowment for Democracy, which is of course a CIA front. People have been so busy (rightly) condemning Soros that they missed the Deep State involvement altogether.”

In the wake of the mass migration crisis affecting many European countries, Griffin believes the US Deep State may have deliberately helped to create the crisis, “and is now stoking it,” to destabilize its “supposed allies,” just as the US sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline network ostensibly targeted Russia, but really struck the German economy and the euro, damage to which set back the looming end to the dollar’s hegemony.

“Likewise, destabilizing Britain and EU states with artificially imported and provoked racial conflict is a typical US Deep State trick. It’s using the same CIA playbook as was applied to destroy the former Yugoslavia. As with their coups and other interference, they never care about how many innocent people get hurt,” Griffin summed up.

August 6, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , | Leave a comment

US ‘guarantees’ Israel can resume Gaza war after captive swap: Report

The Cradle | August 5, 2024

The US has agreed to guarantee that Israel will be able to resume the war against the Palestinian resistance in Gaza after the first phase of an exchange deal, according to Hebrew media.

According to Yedioth Ahronoth and Haaretz, Washington has not yet given a written commitment, but has agreed in principle to the idea of Israel resuming the war once captives are exchanged.

Netanyahu is “still waiting for a letter of commitment from the Americans. This is a letter regarding the possibility of continuing the war between the first and second stages of the exchange deal,” Yedioth Ahronoth’s Ynet news site reported on 5 August, citing “prominent” sources.

“Netanyahu intends to demand, among other things, the disarmament of Hamas and the removal of its leadership, as a condition for the second part of the deal … they are not expected to go up well [in the security establishment],” it added.

The idea of the US committing to Israel’s right to continue the war was raised during the meeting between Netanyahu and President Joe Biden in Washington recently, according to the report.

“The US had already agreed to give this letter, in one form or another, and there are already drafts.”

The US commitment is “about giving a guarantee to Israel that it has no obligation to stop the fire forever, under any conditions.”

The report also highlights the complete “lack of trust” of the security establishment in Netanyahu.

Efforts to reach an agreement have been severely hindered by the Israeli assassination of Hamas’ political bureau chief, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran on 31 July. Haniyeh was among those leading the negotiations.

Israel has consistently obstructed a deal from being reached by insisting on the right to continue fighting Hamas once captives were exchanged in the first phase of any agreement.

Hamas has stuck to its terms for a permanent ceasefire and withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza, including from the Rafah crossing and Philadelphi Corridor on the strip’s border with Egypt.

Netanyahu’s recent insistence on a “mechanism” to inspect displaced Gazans returning to the northern strip as part of a deal has also hindered the talks.

The Israeli negotiating team visited Cairo over the weekend for talks with mediators, yet no progress was made.

Netanyahu had announced on Friday that he approved the delegation’s continued participation in the negotiations. A Hamas official told Reuters that Netanyahu’s announcement was full of “empty statements” and that he does not wish to end the war or reach a deal.

“This was a trip solely for reasons of protocol, playing for time. Netanyahu’s current positions will not yield real progress,” Hebrew news outlet Channel 12 cited a senior official as saying on 3 August.

August 5, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

Resistance Axis: a calculated, simultaneous strike on Israel

Hezbollah source: Iran, Lebanon, and Yemen will launch simultaneous retaliatory strikes against Israel, to overwhelm the Iron Dome.

By Ali Rizk | The Cradle | August 5, 2024

West Asia stands on a knife’s edge as the region’s Axis of Resistance prepares to retaliate against a series of recent Israeli assassinations and aggressions.

Iran, Hezbollah, and Yemen’s Ansarallah-aligned armed forces have vowed to make the occupation state pay a heavy price following the targeted killing of Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and Hezbollah senior commander Fuad Shukr in southern Beirut.

Additionally, Israel bombed the Hodeidah port in Yemen following Sanaa’s successful ‘Yafa’ drone operation in Tel Aviv on 19 July.

An official from the Lebanese resistance has informed The Cradle that “The response will come at once from Iran, Hezbollah, and Yemen,” adding that the goal was to “inflict a painful blow to Israel which may not be achieved should separate retaliations be pursued.”

Executing the ‘Unity of Fronts’ 

Retaliation is all but certain and could happen within hours, according to senior US officials. A report yesterday by Axios claims that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken informed his G7 counterparts that the response could begin as early as within the next 24 hours.

Just yesterday, Ali al-Qahoum, a member of the political bureau of Ansarallah, emphasized that the response to Israel will not just come from Tehran:

We affirm our commitment to the battle, steadfastness, awareness, honor, and pride in standing with Palestine, the cause of the nation.

The critical question now is the scope and severity of the retaliation. Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah has promised a painful yet calculated blow to Tel Aviv. During Shukr’s funeral procession, Nasrallah warned that Israel had crossed the line, promising “a real and well-calculated response” – distinct from the cross-border operations Hezbollah has conducted against Israel since 8 October.

Flattening the Iron Dome 

Other well-informed sources agree that the response could be coordinated, suggesting that retaliation from multiple fronts simultaneously is likely. They tell The Cradle that such an approach could take Israel’s primary air defense system, the Iron Dome, out of commission by preventing it from rapidly rearming. They believe this is achievable given Hezbollah’s capacity to launch a significant barrage of missiles and given Lebanon’s geographical proximity to potential Israeli targets.

These assessments appear to be consistent with those made by US officials who have warned that the Iron Dome could be overwhelmed by Hezbollah’s missile and drone arsenal should a full-scale war erupt.

Senior US military officials, meanwhile, have gone on the record cautioning that Washington would probably be unable to provide Tel Aviv with sufficient protection even in a single front, full-scale war with Hezbollah. US Joint Chief of Staff Charles Brown said as much in his remarks to the press in late June.

From our perspective, based on where our forces are, the short-range between Lebanon and Israel, it’s harder for us to be able to support them [Israel] in the same way we did in April [with Operation Truthful Promise].

Unwilling US support for Tel Aviv 

Although much has been said about the US and its allies successfully thwarting Iran’s response to the Israeli attack on its consulate last April, it is noteworthy that all targeted Israeli military bases were hit during the Iranian retaliatory strikes. Operation Truthful Promise was intended more as a message, indicating that Tehran would no longer tolerate Israeli aggression against its interests.

US military reinforcements in the region may help intercept missiles and drones coming from Lebanon, while vassal state Jordan could also play a part as it did during Iran’s retaliatory strikes. However, this also makes US military assets and those of its partners legitimate targets for the Resistance Axis.

As former Pentagon analyst Michael Maloof explains to The Cradle:

Hezbollah would likely target US warships in the region that would take part in intercepting missiles directed at Israeli targets.

“As in 2006, I envision US involvement focused more on evacuating many of the 86,000 Americans now in Lebanon who would want to leave,” adds Maloof.

Washington’s top military officials also appear firmly opposed to being drawn into an active offensive role should a wider war erupt with Hezbollah, let alone a dreaded multi-front war. This stance is supported by statements from US Joint Chiefs of Staff Charles Brown, indicating the Pentagon’s limited willingness to protect the occupation state.

Note that Washington’s pledges to defend Israel have made no mention of potential offensive action, reflecting an American desire to avoid a wider war. Experts doubt the US will become heavily involved in any full-scale war, supported by public statements underscoring the importance of avoiding regional escalation – and voiced more privately, the desire to keep US military targets safe from retaliatory strikes.

Military risk and political calculations 

As Brown said at the time, Washington’s main message is:

To think about the second order of effect of any type of operation into Lebanon, and how that might play out and how it impacts not just the region, but how it impacts our forces in regions as well.

The general – the most senior ranking US military official and the senior military advisor to the White House – was delivering a message that carries special significance amidst the recent developments.

By stating that an Israeli-initiated war on Lebanon put US troops at risk, Brown was essentially saying that a wider regional war was not seen as helping US interests by the Pentagon’s top brass.

Given these statements, it remains possible – though far from guaranteed – that the outgoing Biden administration may rein in Israel regardless of how painful a blow is delivered to it by the Axis of Resistance.

The upcoming US election in November is another factor that may prevent a regional conflagration. “The US getting more militarily involved with Israel,” warns Maloof, “would lead to riots in the streets of Chicago at the Democratic Convention later this month.”

These realities suggest a scenario where Washington might force Tel Aviv to absorb the Axis of Resistance’s retaliation, however severe it may be.

August 5, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

West too fearful of escalation with Russia – Zelensky

RT | August 5, 2024

Ukraine is pushing NATO nations to create a coalition that would attempt to intercept Russian missiles, Vladimir Zelensky has said. The US-led military bloc has previously declined to do so.

Kiev has long been pressuring its Western backers to become more involved in the conflict with Moscow and start shooting down Russian drones and missiles over Ukrainian territory. However, its efforts have been rebuffed by foreign powers reluctant to engage in a direct military confrontation with Russia.

“[Western nations] are always concerned about possible escalation. We are fighting against that. We will work on it,” Zelensky told journalists on Sunday. The government in Kiev is considering “technical possibilities for neighboring nations to use military aircraft against missiles that strike Ukraine” after flying in the general direction of NATO countries, he added.

Zelensky has been calling for the establishment of a no-fly zone over Ukraine since the outbreak of hostilities with Russia in February 2022. Military experts pointed out that any realistic enforcement of Kiev’s wish would require NATO members to attack Russian planes in the air and at airfields inside Russia.

The idea of a less ambitious shield over Western Ukraine was floated last month, as Kiev signed a bilateral security deal with Warsaw and ramped up its lobbying efforts ahead of a NATO leaders’ summit in the US.

The Polish government indicated it was willing to answer the Ukrainian call, provided that NATO approved, although other nations, including the US, objected. Washington said it believed that supplying more air defense systems to Ukraine to operate on its own was the best way to counter Russian barrages.

Zelensky spoke to the press after confirming that sponsors had delivered US-designed F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine. Media reports have suggested that the new Ukrainian capability is too small-scale to become a gamechanger on the front line. It would likely be used to intercept cruise missiles delivering long-range strikes instead, defense experts have suggested.

Moscow has been targeting Ukrainian military assets as well as some key infrastructure sites, such as power stations, which it considers crucial for Kiev’s war effort. According to Russian officials, the conflict is a US-led proxy war in which Ukrainian troops serve as “cannon fodder” for Western geostrategic interests.

On Saturday, Zelensky said Kiev wants to attack targets deep inside Russia, a type of operation for which Ukraine is not allowed to use donated Western weapons and relies on domestically produced kamikaze drones instead.

August 5, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

US Sees South America as Testing Ground for Political Spin Techniques – Russia

Sputnik – 05.08.2024

CARACAS -The position of recognizing or not recognizing elections in a sovereign country is a manifestation of colonial policy, and Washington continues to view Latin America as its own backyard and testing ground for political spin techniques, Russian Ambassador to Venezuela Sergey Melik-Bagdasarov told Sputnik.

After the announcement of the official election results in Venezuela, Moscow said the Venezuelan opposition should concede defeat. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned third countries against supporting attempts to destabilize the situation inside Venezuela.

“Even before the election in Venezuela, the US hinted that they would not tolerate the reelection of Nicolas Maduro. The very position of recognizing or not recognizing elections in a particular sovereign country is a clear manifestation of colonial policy. The people of Venezuela have made their choice. It must be respected. But it seems that such an approach is alien to Washington,” Melik-Bagdasarov said.

He explained that United States believes Latin America to be a testing grounds for election interference methods.

“The United States continues to view the Latin America region as its backyard and a testing ground for political technologies [political spin techniques]. According to President Nicolas Maduro, today we are seeing attempts to repeat the ‘Juan Guaido’ project with some changes,” the Russian diplomat added.

Venezuela’s presidential election was held on July 28, and the National Electoral Council declared Nicolas Maduro the winner.

Washington, without waiting for the results of the vote count and subsequent audit, called on the international community to recognize opposition leader Edmundo Gonzalez as the winner of the presidential election in Venezuela. US and EU lawmakers overseeing international relations on Friday threatened Maduro with “responsibility” if he does not voluntarily give up his powers as legitimate head of state.

August 5, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

‘The Movement is Winning.’: Polling Shows Drop in Support for Free Speech

By Jonathan Turley | August 2, 2024

In my new book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I write about a global anti-free speech movement that is now sweeping over the United States. While not the first, it is in my view the most dangerous movement in our history due to an unprecedented alliance of government, corporate, academic, and media forces. That fear was amplified this week with polling showing that years of attacking free speech as harmful has begun to change the views of citizens.

As discussed in the book, our own anti-free speech movement began in higher education where it continues to rage. It then metastasized throughout our politics and media. It is, therefore, not surprising to see the new Knight Foundation-Ipsos study revealing a further decline in students’ views concerning the state of free speech on college campuses.

The study shows that 70 percent of students “believe that speech can be as damaging as physical violence.” It also shows the impact of speech codes and regulations with two out of three students reporting that they “self-censor” during classroom discussions.

Not surprisingly, Republican students are the most likely to self-censor given the purging of conservative faculty and the viewpoint intolerance shown on most campuses.

Some 49 percent of Republican students report self-censoring on three or more topics. Independents are the second most likely at 40 percent. Some 38 percent of Democrats admit to self-censuring.

Sixty percent of college students strongly or somewhat agree that “[t]he climate at my school or on my campus prevents some people from saying things they believe, because others might find it offensive.”

The most alarming finding may be that only 54 percent of students believe that colleges should “allow students to be exposed to all types of speech even if they may find it offensive or biased.” That figure stood at 78 percent in 2016.

The poll follows similar results in a new poll by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) of the population as a whole. It found that 53% of Americans believe that the First Amendment goes too far in protecting rights. So there is now a majority who believe that the First Amendment, including their own rights, should be curtailed.

The most supportive of limiting free speech are Democrats at a shocking 61%. However, a majority (52%) of Republicans also agreed.

Roughly 40% now trust the government to censor speech, agreeing that they trust the government “somewhat,” “very much,” or “completely” to make fair decisions about what speech should be disallowed.

It is no small feat to convince a free people to give up their freedoms. They have to be afraid or angry. These polls suggest that they appear both very afraid and very angry.

It is the result of years of indoctrinating students and citizens that free speech is harmful and dangerous. We have created a generation of speech phobics who are willing to turn their backs on centuries of struggle against censorship and speech codes.

Anti-free speech books have been heralded in the media. University of Michigan Law Professor and MSNBC legal analyst Barbara McQuade has written how dangerous free speech is for the nation. Her book, “Attack from Within,” describes how free speech is what she calls the “Achilles Heel” of America, portraying this right not as the value that defines this nation but the threat that lurks within it.

McQuade and many on the left are working to convince people that “disinformation” is a threat to them and that free speech is the vehicle that makes them vulnerable.

This view has been pushed by President Joe Biden who claims that companies refusing to censor citizens are “killing people.” The Biden administration has sought to use disinformation to justify an unprecedented system of censorship.

Recently, the New York Times ran a column by former Biden official and Columbia University law professor Tim Wu describing how the First Amendment was “out of control” in protecting too much speech.

Wu insists that the First Amendment is now “beginning to threaten many of the essential jobs of the state, such as protecting national security and the safety and privacy of its citizens.” He claims that the First Amendment “now mostly protects corporate interests.”

There is even a movement afoot to rewrite the First Amendment through an amendment. George Washington University Law School Professor Mary Anne Franks believes that the First Amendment is “aggressively individualistic” and needs to be rewritten to “redo” the work of the Framers.

Her new amendment suggestion replaces the clear statement in favor of a convoluted, ambiguous statement of free speech that will be “subject to responsibility for abuses.” It then adds that “all conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons.”

Franks has also dismissed objections to the censorship on social media and insisted that “the Internet model of free speech is little more than cacophony, where the loudest, most provocative, or most unlikeable voice dominates . . . If we want to protect free speech, we should not only resist the attempt to remake college campuses in the image of the Internet but consider the benefits of remaking the Internet in the image of the university.”

Franks is certainly correct that those “unlikeable voices” are less likely to be heard in academia today. As discussed in my book, faculties have largely cleansed with the ranks of conservative, Republican, libertarian, and dissenting professors through hiring bias and attrition. In self-identifying surveys, some faculties show no or just a handful of conservative or Republican members.

The discussion on most campuses now runs from the left to far left without that pesky “cacophony” of opposing viewpoints.

One of the most dangerous and successful groups in this anti-free speech movement has been Antifa. I testified in the Senate on Antifa and the growing anti-free speech movement in the United States. I specifically disagreed with the statement of House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler that Antifa (and its involvement in violent protests) is a “myth.”

In the meantime, Antifa continues to attack those with opposing views and anti-free speech allies continue to “deplatform” speakers on campuses and public forums. “Your speech is violence” is now a common mantra heard around the country.

Faculty continue to lead students in attacking pro-life and other demonstrators.

Antifa is now so popular in some quarters that it recently saw two members elected to the French and European parliaments.

Antifa is at its base a movement at war with free speech, defining the right itself as a tool of oppression. It is laid out in Rutgers Professor Mark Bray’s “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook” in which he emphasizes the struggle of the movement against free speech: “At the heart of the anti-fascist outlook is a rejection of the classical liberal phrase that says, ‘I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’”

Bray quotes one Antifa member as summing up their approach to free speech as a “nonargument . . . you have the right to speak but you also have the right to be shut up.”

However, the most chilling statement may have come from arrested Antifa member Jason Charter after an attack on historic statues in Washington, D.C. After his arrest, Charter declared “The Movement is winning.” As these polls show, he is right.

August 5, 2024 Posted by | Book Review, Civil Liberties | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »