Even The Moustache Of Understanding Is Telling Israel "To Be Smart!!!"

Israel Has Never Needed to Be Smarter Than in This Moment

the cradle  |  Hamas did not coordinate its military operation with any of its Resistance Axis allies. It also did not plan to achieve the stunning results that were soon to follow. The Qassam Brigades' immediate goal was only to destroy Israeli army positions around the Gaza Strip and capture as many soldiers as possible, which they could later exchange for the thousands of Palestinian captives in Israeli prisons. 

But the Palestinian resistance forces were taken by surprise at the laxity of the occupation army. Contrary to expectations, they stumbled upon security vacuums and poorly guarded military sites in which a large number of enemy soldiers and officers were fast asleep. It was this unexpected opportunity that prodded the Palestinian fighters to reach for bigger gains.

Hamas' military leadership planned to carry out this operation in complete secrecy. Just weeks earlier, their fighters had conducted military maneuvers/exercises that were observed by the Israelis. But Tel Aviv's rather complacent intelligence assessment had been that "Hamas is training for what it does not dare to do." The Israelis, in short, thought that Hamas was merely flexing in order to gain financial concessions for Gaza. No actual operation was ever expected by Israel's military brass.

The veil of secrecy over the operation also extended to the Hamas fighters who carried out the attack. Sources close to Hamas say that their cadres believed, until the morning of the operation, that they were assembling for a training exercise, not for the real thing. 

Very few knew details of the comprehensive attack plan. Even Hamas' allies in Lebanon and Iran learned of the operation at zero o'clock and not a moment before, according to well-informed sources in the Resistance Axis. 

Even for this axis, the Hamas operation went beyond all possible expectations. Although true that many of the Hamas tactics employed are shared among the Axis' fighters in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, and Yemen, the innovation in the Al-Aqsa Flood operation was the signature of the Al-Qassam Brigades, and particularly its brilliant leader Muhammad Deif.

The operation was coordinated with remarkable professionalism: accurate and detailed intelligence was amassed, high-level training exercises organized, secrecy was paramount, and superior coordination was established between the myriad drones, paratroopers, and vast majority of Hamas fighters who crossed into the occupation state, through tunnels and above ground. 

Al Qassam also planned to target Israeli communications towers and all military sites surrounding Gaza. From a military perspective, this was a near-perfect operation that led to the destruction of all the facilities of the Israeli army's “Gaza Division" and the annihilation of entire Israeli brigades. For Israel, this was a total humiliation - something it had never experienced before, even in the devastating 1973 Arab-Israeli war. 

A zero-sum game

With the support of the collective west, Israel is now assembling a plan to restore its deterrence. Operation Al-Aqsa Flood didn't only affect the Israelis - it has also endangered western deterrence throughout West Asia and the Arab world. The decline in Israel's deterrent capacity correlates directly with the weakening of western hegemony in the region.

While Israel has been scurrying around to mobilize its troops and equipment for a counterattack, the Americans sent messages to the Resistance Axis - specifically Iran and Hezbollah - saying, essentially: “We don’t want this to escalate. We want and need stability on the Lebanese border with Israel. We are urging you not to interfere in this war.” 

The messages were sent on 7 October, as events unfolded, and through more than one medium. Hezbollah's response was seen on the ground the very next morning, when it bombed Israeli army positions in the occupied Lebanese Shebaa Farms. This was a warning message, which was clarified further by Hezbollah's Executive Council Chief Hashem Safi Al-Din when he said: “We will not remain neutral in this battle.” 

Neither will Washington, which immediately announced $8 billion in aid to Israel, and sent an aircraft carrier to the eastern Mediterranean Sea. The US cannot afford for Israel to take more losses, but how far will they go to deter Tel Aviv's adversaries?

Within the axis of resistance, from Iran to Gaza, there is a uniform decision to prevent the defeat of any of the principal allies. As this axis made clear during the Syrian war, a major attack on one will be viewed as an attack on all. Today, their red line is preventing the collapse of the resistance in Gaza.

Israel's urgent need to restore its deterrence is not, however, possible without destroying Gaza's resistance factions. Both Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Galant have ominously warned that Tel Aviv’s response to Gaza’s attack will “change the Middle East.”  Those are fighting words indeed: the US called for the birthing of a “new Middle East” during Israel's month-long bombardment of Lebanon in July 2006.

Tel Aviv and Washington want to take down the Palestinian resistance while ensuring that no other battle fronts flare up to distract from that mission. Of course, the Resistance Axis principals will seek to do exactly the opposite, doing what is necessary to distract Israel from its strategic objective. 

 

What Becomes Of Israel When Suicide Drones Converge From Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen?

ejmagnier  |  The ongoing conflict’s impact is deeply felt in Israel’s economic and social fabric. On a single tumultuous day, the Israeli stock market plunged by a staggering $13.5 billion, a sign of growing investor anxiety. Adding to the economic strain, the local currency has experienced a sharp decline.

But the impact isn’t limited to the financial charts. On the ground, there’s a palpable sense of desperation. A growing number of Israelis and foreigners are going to the civilian airport, eager to escape the rising tensions. Their urgency is heightened because many foreign airlines have suspended flights to and from Israel. This mass departure highlights not only the immediate dangers of the conflict, but also the more profound, lasting effects it may have on Israel’s social morale and economic resilience. The recent announcement of a US frigate’s support for Israel may seem significant. However, in the grand scheme of things, its impact on boosting Israeli morale appears minimal.

As the conflict intensifies, the recent deployment of a US fleet supporting Israel has attracted some attention. However, insiders within the Axis of Resistance have expressed scepticism about the real impact of this move.

While the arrival of a US fleet is a significant show of force, the strategic calculus of the situation is more complicated. Israel, with its already formidable air capabilities, has hundreds of aircraft and a powerful naval force. Adding 80 to 90 aircraft from the US carrier may not tip the balance as decisively as one might think. The Axis of Resistance argues that the US intervention won’t guarantee victory.

But the implications of this US military support go beyond immediate tactical considerations. There’s a wider geopolitical dimension at play. Any overt US intervention in the conflict could have repercussions far beyond Israel’s borders. The US maintains a significant military presence in Iraq, and these forces could become targets if the US is perceived as intervening too directly in the Israel-Gaza conflict. Resistance groups in Iraq have been unequivocal in their warning: US bases in the region would be at risk of retaliatory attacks.

Moreover, the Hezbollah’s supersonic anti-ship missiles adds another layer of complexity. These missiles, if deployed, have the potential to block Israeli ports, effectively choking off a vital lifeline and adding a naval dimension to the conflict. Such a move would further escalate the situation, potentially drawing in other regional players and expanding the theatre of operations.

The current conflict is deeply intertwined with the broader geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. Any move can have repercussions far beyond the immediate battlefield. The coming days and weeks will reveal how these dynamics play out and whether the region is on the brink of a more comprehensive and complex confrontation.

The sources also criticised Prime Minister Netanyahu’s approach, highlighting the targeting of civilian structures in Gaza, including the residences of leaders, media personalities and vital infrastructure. However, they believe that such anticipated destruction is merely tactical. They believe these actions will not weaken the resistance’s resolve or alter its strategic plan.

Israel’s recent military manoeuvres, including the deployment of troop carriers, tanks and ground forces, indicate a clear intention to launch a ground assault on Gaza. While the scope of this incursion may not be limited, reminiscent of the 2014 ground operation that only penetrated a few hundred metres into Gaza, its implications could be far-reaching.

In the face of these developments, the involvement of the Axis of Resistance alliance becomes crucial. The need for a united and cohesive multi-regional front is more urgent than ever.

Inside sources have highlighted the growing unity and strength of the ‘Axis allies’ in the face of the Israeli military. They argue that the Israeli army, which traditionally relies on air strikes to pave the way for ground operations, avoids direct confrontation unless areas are pre-emptively cleared with extensive bombing. The sources point to instances where Israeli forces withdrew, leaving behind their war equipment when Palestinian militants attacked their military barracks in the Gaza Strip encirclement.

Drawing parallels with the 2006 conflict, the sources suggest that the Israeli army may face determined and fierce resistance, similar to the combined forces it encountered in southern Lebanon after the initial heavy bombardment.

The message is clear: if Israel persists in its aggressive actions in Gaza, the united resistance bloc is ready to offer comprehensive support, possibly opening several fronts. This stance remains firm, regardless of threats from the West. Given the current dynamics, sources no longer rule out the possibility of a barrage of suicide drones entering the conflict launched from Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

The Palestinian resistance in the settlements surrounding the Gaza Strip remains unyielding. This continued defiance provides an insight into the apparent indecision and inconsistency of the Israeli army. On the one hand, they tell the 50,000 residents of the settlements to evacuate, only to later reverse this order and ask them to stay put closed indoors.

Haaretz Blames Netanyahu For Getting Israel Into This Existential Crisis

Haaretz  | (archived) The disaster that befell Israel on the holiday of Simchat Torah is the clear responsibility of one person: Benjamin Netanyahu. The prime minister, who has prided himself on his vast political experience and irreplaceable wisdom in security matters, completely failed to identify the dangers he was consciously leading Israel into when establishing a government of annexation and dispossession, when appointing Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir to key positions, while embracing a foreign policy that openly ignored the existence and rights of Palestinians.

Netanyahu will certainly try to evade his responsibility and cast the blame on the heads of the army, Military Intelligence and the Shin Bet security service who, like their predecessors on the eve of the Yom Kippur War, saw a low probability of war with their preparations for a Hamas attack proving flawed.

They scorned the enemy and its offensive military capabilities. Over the next days and weeks, when the depth of Israel Defense Forces and intelligence failures come to light, a justified demand to replace them and take stock will surely arise.

However, the military and intelligence failure does not absolve Netanyahu of his overall responsibility for the crisis, as he is the ultimate arbiter of Israeli foreign and security affairs. Netanyahu is no novice in this role, like Ehud Olmert was in the Second Lebanon War. Nor is he ignorant in military matters, as Golda Meir in 1973 and Menachem Begin in 1982 claimed to be.

Netanyahu also shaped the policy embraced by the short-lived “government of change” led by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid: a multidimensional effort to crush the Palestinian national movement in both its wings, in Gaza and the West Bank, at a price that would seem acceptable to the Israeli public.

In the past, Netanyahu marketed himself as a cautious leader who eschewed wars and multiple casualties on Israel’s side. After his victory in the last election, he replaced this caution with the policy of a “fully-right government,” with overt steps taken to annex the West Bank, to carry out ethnic cleansing in parts of the Oslo-defined Area C, including the Hebron Hills and the Jordan Valley.

This also included a massive expansion of settlements and bolstering of the Jewish presence on Temple Mount, near the Al-Aqsa Mosque, as well as boasts of an impending peace deal with the Saudis in which the Palestinians would get nothing, with open talk of a “second Nakba” in his governing coalition. As expected, signs of an outbreak of hostilities began in the West Bank, where Palestinians started feeling the heavier hand of the Israeli occupier. Hamas exploited the opportunity in order to launch its surprise attack on Saturday.

Above all, the danger looming over Israel in recent years has been fully realized. A prime minister indicted in three corruption cases cannot look after state affairs, as national interests will necessarily be subordinate to extricating him from a possible conviction and jail time.

This was the reason for establishing this horrific coalition and the judicial coup advanced by Netanyahu, and for the enfeeblement of top army and intelligence officers, who were perceived as political opponents. The price was paid by the victims of the invasion in the Western Negev.

The Occupation Of The American Mind

al-jazeera  |   Since World War II, the US has vied to achieve two main foreign policy objectives in the Middle East: Control the region and its resources and prop-up its allies (often dictators), while maintaining a degree of “stability” so that the US is able to conduct its business unhindered.

Nevertheless, Israel remained on the warpath. Wars that Israel couldn’t fight on its own required American intervention on Israel’s behalf, as was the case in Iraq. The outcome was disastrous for US foreign policy. Even hardened military men began noticing the destructive path their country had chosen in order to defend Israel.

In March 2010, General David Petraeus, then head of the US Central Command told the Senate Armed Services Committee during a testimony that Israel had become a liability for the US and that has become a challenge to “security and stability”, which his country aimed to achieve.

He said: “Israeli-Palestinian tensions often flare into violence and large-scale armed confrontations. The conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of US favouritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of US partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR (Area of Operations) and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab World. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilise support.”

Although speaking strictly from a US military interest, the Israeli lobby attacked Petraeus almost immediately. Abe Foxman, Director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which often mischaracterises its role as that of combating racism in the US lashed out at the top American commander calling his conclusions “dangerous and counterproductive.”

That spectacle alone demonstrated that Israel’s power in the US has grown tremendously through time.

In the US, no one is immune to Israeli criticism, including the president himself, who is expected to accommodate Israeli whims, without expecting any Israeli reciprocation.

A particularly telling episode revealed the degree of Israeli influence in the US, when then-House Speaker John Boehner plotted with then-Israel’s ambassador to Washington, Ron Dermer to arrange a visit and a speech before Congress for Netanyahu, in defiance of President Obama.

Netanyahu then raged and raved before a united Congress (with a few exceptions) that repeatedly endowed the Israeli prime minister with many standing ovations as he belittled their president and strongly criticised US foreign policy on Iran.

Obama felt isolated as if a target of a political coup; a few Democrats fumbled in a disorganised press conference to respond to Netanyahu’s accusations, but they were certainly the tiny minority.

That spectacle alone demonstrated that Israel’s power in the US has grown tremendously through time from a “client regime”, to a “partner”.

But how did Israel achieve such commanding influence over US foreign policy?

Wall Street Journal Blames Iran For Hamas Rebellion

 WSJ  |  Iranian security officials helped plan Hamas’s Saturday surprise attack on Israel and gave the green light for the assault at a meeting in Beirut last Monday, according to senior members of Hamas and Hezbollah, another Iran-backed militant group.

Officers of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had worked with Hamas since August to devise the air, land and sea incursions—the most significant breach of Israel’s borders since the 1973 Yom Kippur War—those people said.

Details of the operation were refined during several meetings in Beirut attended by IRGC officers and representatives of four Iran-backed militant groups, including Hamas, which holds power in Gaza, and Hezbollah, a Shiite militant group and political faction in Lebanon, they said.

U.S. officials say they haven’t seen evidence of Tehran’s involvement. In an interview with CNN that aired Sunday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said: “We have not yet seen evidence that Iran directed or was behind this particular attack, but there is certainly a long relationship.” 

“We don’t have any information at this time to corroborate this account,” said a U.S. official of the meetings.

A European official and an adviser to the Syrian government, however, gave the same account of Iran’s involvement in the lead-up to the attack as the senior Hamas and Hezbollah members.

Asked about the meetings, Mahmoud Mirdawi, a senior Hamas official, said the group planned the attacks on its own. “This is a Palestinian and Hamas decision,” he said. 

How the Hamas Attack on Israel Unfolded

 

A spokesman for Iran’s mission to the United Nations said the Islamic Republic stood in support of Gaza’s actions but didn’t direct them.

“The decisions made by the Palestinian resistance are fiercely autonomous and unwaveringly aligned with the legitimate interests of the Palestinian people,” the spokesman said. “We are not involved in Palestine’s response, as it is taken solely by Palestine itself.”

A direct Iranian role would take Tehran’s long-running conflict with Israel out of the shadows, raising the risk of broader conflict in the Middle East. Senior Israeli security officials have pledged to strike at Iran’s leadership if Tehran is found responsible for killing Israelis.

The IRGC’s broader plan is to create a multi-front threat that can strangle Israel from all sides—Hezbollah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in the north and Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank, according to the senior Hamas and Hezbollah members and an Iranian official.

 

Netanyahu Laying Down With Dogs Has All Of Israel Itching With Fleas...,

timesofindia  |  NEW DELHI: Israel carried out deadly air strikes and pounded hundreds of locations in Gaza on Sunday, a day after suffering its bloodiest attack in decades when Hamas fighters rampaged through Israeli towns, killing hundreds and abducting an unknown number of others, threatening a major new war in the Middle East.

Across the Middle East, there were demonstrations in support of Hamas while Iran and Hezbollah praised the attack.

Western countries, led by the United States, have denounced the attack by Hamas, while President Joe Biden issued a blunt warning to Iran and other countries: "This is not a moment for any party hostile to Israel to exploit these attacks."

Israel pounds Gaza after deadly Hamas raid as conflict threatens to spiral

Osama Hamdan, Hamas leader in Lebanon, said Saturday's operation should make Arab states realise that accepting Israeli security demands would not bring peace.
Our guns and rockets are with you: Hezbollah tells Hamas

In a sign the conflict could quickly spread beyond Gaza, Israeli artillery responded to mortar fire from Lebanon and drone strikes hit a post of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militia along Israel's northern border on Sunday.

Hezbollah said in a statement that it had carried out a rocket and artillery attack on three posts including a "radar site" in the Shebaa Farms, a slice of land occupied by Israel since 1967 that Lebanon claims. Israel responded with artillery fire on southern Lebanon. There were no reports of casualties.

Senior Hezbollah official Hashem Safieddine said his group's "guns and rockets" were with Hamas. "Our history, our guns and our rockets are with you. Everything we have is with you," Safieddine said at an event in the Hezbollah stronghold of Dahieh on Beirut's outskirts in solidarity with the Palestinian fighters.

Hezbollah and Israel exchange fire as Israeli soldiers battle Hamas on second day of surprise attack

Hezbollah fought a war with Israel in 2006 and tensions have regularly flared since.

"We recommend Hezbollah not to come into this and I don't think they will," Israel's army spokesperson said.

Taliban fighters to join Palestine conflict?

Meanwhile, some media reports also stated that the Taliban regime in Afghanistan has requested the Iranian and Iraqi governments to provide safe passage to its fighters so they can join the conflict in Palestine. Most of the reports have cited a social media account on X by the name 'Taliban Public Relations Department'.
The authenticity of the social media account has not been verified.

Several media reports have cited a Taliban spokesperson who denied that any such request had been sent to Iran or Iraq.

Ever since storming to power in Kabul after US troops pulled out in August 2021, the Taliban has been attempting -- with little success -- to train its fighters to use US military hardware that has been left behind. The fighters are, however, well armed.

More than $7.1 billion in US-funded military equipment was in the possession of the Afghan government when it fell to the Taliban in August 2021, according to a Defense Department report. Though more than half of it was ground vehicles, it also included more than 316,000 weapons plus ammunition and other accessories.

Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, meanwhile, said the assault that began in Gaza will spread to the West Bank and Jerusalem. Gazans have lived under an Israeli blockade for 16 years, since Hamas seized control of the territory in 2007.

Why is al-Aqsa at the centre of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

In a speech, Haniyeh highlighted what he called threats to Jerusalem's al-Aqsa Mosque, a site that is also holy to Jews who know it as the Temple Mount, the continuation of Israel's blockade on Gaza and Israeli normalisation with countries in the region.


"How many times have we warned you that the Palestinian people have been living in refugee camps for 75 years, and you refuse to recognise the rights of our people?"

Cornpop Hopped Up On Drugs, Reading The Teleprompter And Slurring His Words

WSJ  |  As explosions rang out and bullets flew over Tamir Erez’s home in Mefalsim near the Gaza Strip border, he said he kept asking himself, “Where is the Israeli military?” He fled town with his children holding their heads down so they couldn’t see the bodies of dead Israelis killed by Palestinian militants.

“It will take a long time for us to recover from this day,” Erez said. 

Israel’s failure to anticipate an attack Saturday that left hundreds of soldiers and civilians dead and militants rampaging through villages punctured a sense of invincibility built on its vaunted military and intelligence apparatus. It left the world questioning what went wrong and Israel’s leaders facing pressure to retaliate with overwhelming force.

The assault came as Israel faces its most difficult series of threats in the decades since what remains the country’s greatest security failure, the Yom Kippur War, the surprise attack launched 50 years ago this week by Egyptian and Syrian forces.

Iran has provided unprecedented coordination among the forces of several militant groups, including Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and stoked deadly conflict in the West Bank, putting Israel at risk on three fronts.

Using rockets, paragliders, motorcycles, pickup trucks, and boats, Hamas militants from the Gaza Strip launched a coordinated attack that showed an unexpected level of sophistication. 

Israeli forces appeared to be caught completely by surprise as Hamas militants in Gaza used bulldozers to tear down the security fence with Israel and streamed into the country.

How Israel’s Iron Dome works

Interception

The missile destroys the incoming rocket by exploding near it.

Launcher

Each has 20 interceptor missiles

with an in-built radar seeker

Mobile control Unit

Analyses trajectory, estimates impact point and commands launch of interceptor missile

Radar

Identifies rocket shell

Source: Rafael Advanced Defense Systems

“Clearly this was a well-planned operation that didn’t just emerge overnight and it’s surprising it was not detected by Israel or any of its security partners,” said Brian Katulis, vice president of policy at the Middle East Institute think tank in Washington. “It’s hard to think of a security failure of this magnitude in Israel’s recent history.”

Israeli security leaders had played down the threat from Hamas in recent months, as the group abstained from conflicts started by its smaller ally in Gaza, Palestinian Islamic Jihad. There was a sense that Israel, with its Iron Dome air defense systems, had rendered ineffective Gaza’s main threat of short-range rockets. 

Last month, the Israeli military confidently characterized Gaza as being in a state of “stable instability,” suggesting that the dangers posed by Hamas militants were largely contained. 

Recent Israeli intelligence assessments of Hamas were that the militant group had shifted its focus to trying to stoke violence in the West Bank and that it was looking to avoid launching major attacks from Gaza in an effort to avoid the kinds of punishing Israeli military responses that have devastated the isolated area in the past.

 

President Vladimir Putin At The Valdai International Discussion Club

kremlin.ru  |  President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Participants in the plenary session, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen,

I am glad to welcome you all in Sochi at the anniversary meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club. The moderator has already mentioned that this is the 20^th annual meeting.

In keeping with its traditions, our, or should I say your forum, has brought together political leaders and researchers, experts and civil society activists from many countries around the world, once again reaffirming its high status as a relevant intellectual platform. The Valdai discussions invariably reflect the most important global political processes in the 21^st century in their entirety and complexity. I am certain that this will also be the case today, as it probably was in the preceding days when you debated with each other. It will also stay this way moving forward because our objective is basically to build a new world. And it is at these decisive stages that you, my colleagues, have an extremely important role to play and bear special responsibility as intellectuals.

Over the years of the club’s work, both Russia and the world have seen drastic, and even dramatic, colossal changes. Twenty years is not a long period by historical standards, but during eras when the entire world order is crumbling, time seems to shrink.

I think you will agree that more events have taken place in the past 20 years than over decades in some historical periods before, and it was major changes that dictated the fundamental transformation of the very principles of international relations.

In the early 21^st century, everybody hoped that states and peoples had learned the lessons of the expensive and destructive military and ideological confrontations of the previous century, saw their harmfulness and the fragility and interconnectedness of our planet, and understood that the global problems of humanity call for joint action and the search for collective solutions, while egotism, arrogance and disregard for real challenges would inevitably lead to a dead-end, just like the attempts by more powerful countries to force their opinions and interests onto everyone else. This should have become obvious to everyone. It should have, but it has not. It has not.

When we met for the first time at the club’s meeting nearly 20 years ago, our country was entering a new stage in its development. Russia was emerging from an extremely difficult period of convalescence after the Soviet Union’s dissolution. We launched the process of building a new and what we saw as a more just world order energetically and with good will. It is a boon that our country can make a huge contribution because we have things to offer to our friends, partners and the world as a whole.

Regrettably, our interest in constructive interaction was misunderstood, was seen as obedience, as an agreement that the new world order would be created by those who declared themselves the winners in the Cold War. It was seen as an admission that Russia was ready to follow in others’ wake and not to be guided by our own national interests but by somebody else’s interests.

Over these years, we warned more than once that this approach would not only lead to a dead-end but that it was fraught with the increasing threat of a military conflict. But nobody listened to us or wanted to listen to us. The arrogance of our so-called partners in the West went through the roof. This is the only way I can put it.

The United States and its satellites have taken a steady course towards hegemony in military affairs, politics, the economy, culture and even morals and values. Since the very beginning, it has been clear to us that attempts to establish a monopoly were doomed to fail. The world is too complicated and diverse to be subjected to one system, even if it is backed by the enormous power of the West accumulated over centuries of its colonial policy. Your colleagues as well – many of them are absent today, but they do not deny that to a significant degree, the prosperity of the West has been achieved by robbing colonies for several centuries. This is a fact. Essentially, this level of development has been achieved by robbing the entire planet.

The history of the West is essentially the chronicle of endless expansion. Western influence in the world is an immense military and financial pyramid scheme that constantly needs more “fuel” to support itself, with natural, technological and human resources that belong to others. This is why the West simply cannot and is not going to stop. Our arguments, reasoning, calls for common sense or proposals have simply been ignored.

I have said this publicly to both our allies and partners. There was a moment when I simply suggested: perhaps we should also join NATO? But no, NATO does not need a country like ours. No. I want to know, what else do they need? We thought we became part of the crowd, got a foot in the door. What else were we supposed to do? There was no more ideological confrontation. What was the problem? I guess the problem was their geopolitical interests and arrogance towards others. Their self-aggrandisement was and is the problem.

We are compelled to respond to ever-increasing military and political pressure. I have said many times that it was not us who started the so-called “war in Ukraine.” On the contrary, we are trying to end it. It was not us who orchestrated a coup in Kiev in 2014 – a bloody and anti-constitutional coup. When [similar events] happen in other places, we immediately hear all the international media – mainly those subordinate to the Anglo-Saxon world, of course – this is unacceptable, this is impossible, this is anti-democratic. But the coup in Kiev was acceptable. They even cited the amount of money spent on this coup. Anything was suddenly acceptable.

At that time, Russia tried its best to support the people of Crimea and Sevastopol. We did not try to overthrow the government or intimidate the people in Crimea and Sevastopol, threatening them with ethnic cleansing in the Nazi spirit. It was not us who tried to force Donbass to obey by shelling and bombing. We did not threaten to kill anyone who wanted to speak their native language. Look, everyone here is an informed and educated person. It might be possible – excuse my ‘mauvais ton’ – to brainwash millions of people who perceive reality through the media. But you must know what was really going on: they have been bombing the place for nine years, shooting and using tanks. That was a war, a real war unleashed against Donbass. And no one counted the dead children in Donbass. No one cried for the dead in other countries, especially in the West.

This war, the one that the regime sitting in Kiev started with the vigorous and direct support from the West, has been going on for more than nine years, and Russia’s special military operation is aimed at stopping it. And it reminds us that unilateral steps, no matter who takes them, will inevitably prompt retaliation. As we know, every action has an equal opposite reaction. That is what any responsible state, every sovereign, independent and self-respecting country does.

Everyone realises that in an international system where arbitrariness reigns, where all decision-making is up to those who think they are exceptional, sinless and right, any country can be attacked simply because it is disliked by a hegemon, who has lost any sense of proportion – and I would add, any sense of reality.

Unfortunately, we have to admit that our counterparties in the West have lost their sense of reality and have crossed every line. They really should not have done this.

The Ukraine crisis is not a territorial conflict, and I want to make that clear. Russia is the world’s largest country in terms of land area, and we have no interest in conquering additional territory. We still have much to do to properly develop Siberia, Eastern Siberia, and the Russian Far East. This is not a territorial conflict and not an attempt to establish regional geopolitical balance. The issue is much broader and more fundamental and is about the principles underlying the new international order.

Lasting peace will only be possible when everyone feels safe and secure, understands that their opinions are respected, and that there is a balance in the world where no one can unilaterally force or compel others to live or behave as a hegemon pleases even when it contradicts the sovereignty, genuine interests, traditions, or customs of peoples and countries. In such an arrangement, the very concept of sovereignty is simply denied and, sorry, is thrown in the garbage.

Happy Birthday Vladimir Putin

livemint  |  Russian politician and former intelligence officer Vladimir Putin, serving as the president of Russia since 2012, has turned 71 years on 7 October.

Born on 7 October, 1952, in Leningrad, Soviet Union, Putin is the youngest of three children of Vladimir Spiridonovich Putin and Maria Ivanovna Putina.

Details say, his grandfather, Spiridon Putin, was a personal cook to Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin. His father was a conscript in the Soviet Navy, serving in the submarine fleet in the early 1930s. But during Nazi German invasion of Soviet Union, his father served in the destruction battalion of the NKVD, but in 1942 transferred to the regular army and was severely wounded in 1942.

A graduate in law from the Leningrad State University -- now Saint Petersburg State University -- in 1975, he also received his Ph.D. in economics at the Saint Petersburg Mining University for a thesis on the strategic planning of the mineral economy in 1997.

Apart from studies, he also studied German at Saint Petersburg High School and speaks German as a second language. He practice sambo and judo.

Career:

Putin joined the KGB in 1975 and trained at the 401st KGB School in Leningrad's Okhta. In his career, he was transferred to New Zealand, East Germany, and other places.

He was appointed as deputy chief of the Presidential Staff in 1997 by President Boris Yeltsin and then chief of the Main Control Directorate of the Presidential Property Management Department.

Putin was appointed First Deputy Chief of the Presidential Staff for the regions in 1998 and was appointed head of the commission.

He was appointed one of three first deputy prime ministers in 1999 and was appointed acting prime minister of the Government of the Russian Federation by President Yeltsin.

Putin has held continuous positions as president or prime minister since 1999. He served as prime minister from 1999 to 2000 and from 2008 to 2012, and as president from 2000 to 2008 and since 2012.

The Establishment vs. The American Liberation Movement

Newsweek  |   Newsweek has also reviewed secret FBI and Department of Homeland Security data that track incidents, threats, investigations and cases to try to build a better picture. While experts agree that the current partisan environment is charged and uniquely dangerous (with the threat not only of violence but, in the most extreme scenarios, possibly civil war), many also question whether "terrorism" is the most effective way to describe the problem, or that the methods of counterterrorism developed over the past decade in response to Al-Qaeda and other Islamist groups constitute the most fruitful way to craft domestic solutions.

"The current political environment is not something that the FBI is necessarily responsible for, nor should it be," says Brian Michael Jenkins, one of the world's leading terrorism experts and senior adviser to the president of the RAND Corporation.

In a statement to Newsweek, the FBI said: "The threat posed by domestic violent extremists is persistent, evolving, and deadly. The FBI's goal is to detect and stop terrorist attacks, and our focus is on potential criminal violations, violence and threats of violence. Anti-government or anti-authority violent extremism is one category of domestic terrorism, as well as one of the FBI's top threat priorities." The FBI further said, "We are committed to protecting the safety and constitutional rights of all Americans and will never open an investigation based solely on First Amendment protected activity, including a person's political beliefs or affiliations."

The White House declined to comment. The Trump campaign was given an opportunity to comment but did not do so.

What the FBI Data Shows

From the president down, the Biden administration has presented Trump and MAGA as an existential threat to American democracy and talked up the risk of domestic terrorism and violence associated with the 2024 election campaign.

"Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans are a threat to the very soul of this country," President Biden tweeted last September, the first time that he explicitly singled out the former president. "MAGA Republicans aim to question not only the legitimacy of past elections but elections being held now and into the future," Biden said.

Biden's Homeland Security Advisor Liz Sherwood-Randall said: "The use of violence to pursue political ends is a profound threat to our public safety and national security...it is a threat to our national identity, our values, our norms, our rule of law—our democracy."

For Attorney General Merrick Garland: "Attacks by domestic terrorists are attacks on all of us collectively, aimed at rending the fabric of our democratic society and driving us apart."

Though the FBI's data shows a dip in the number of investigations since the slew of January 6 cases ended, FBI Director Christopher Wray still says that the breach of the Capitol building was "not an isolated event" and the threat is "not going away anytime soon." In a joint report to Congress this June, the Bureau and the Department of Homeland Security say that "Threats from...DVEs [domestic violent extremists] have increased in the last two years, and any further increases in threats likely will correspond to potential flashpoints, such as high-profile elections and campaigns or contentious current events."

The FBI and DHS report concludes: "Sociopolitical developments—such as narratives of fraud in the recent general election, the emboldening impact of the violent breach of the U.S. Capitol, conditions related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and conspiracy theories promoting violence—will almost certainly spur some domestic terrorists to try to engage in violence."

The threats listed in that paragraph are all clearly associated with America's right and in particular with Trump's MAGA supporters. Right after January 6, the FBI co-authored a restricted report ("Domestic Violent Extremists Emboldened in Aftermath of Capitol Breach, Elevated Domestic Terrorism Threat of Violence Likely Amid Political Transitions and Beyond") in which it shifted the definition of AGAAVE ("anti-government, anti-authority violent extremism") from "furtherance of ideological agendas" to "furtherance of political and/or social agendas." For the first time, such groups could be so labeled because of their politics.

It was a subtle change, little noticed, but a gigantic departure for the Bureau. Trump and his army of supporters were acknowledged as a distinct category of domestic violent extremists, even as the FBI was saying publicly that political views were never part of its criteria to investigate or prevent domestic terrorism. Where the FBI sees threats is also plain from the way it categorizes them—a system which on the surface is designed to appear nonpartisan. This shifted subtly days after the events of January 6 when it comes to what the Bureau calls AGAAVE.

"We cannot and do not investigate ideology," a senior FBI official reassured the press after January 6. "We focus on individuals who commit or intend to commit violence or criminal activity that constitutes a federal crime or poses a threat to national security."

If You're Willing To Be Hated By Rich People - You Can Help Your Own People

RT  |   The McCarthy drama shows that a small band of representatives can actually change things in Washington – even if all it leads to is chaos.

Former Speaker of the US House of Representatives Kevin McCarthy just got ousted from his post as the third-highest constitutional officer in Washington after a contingent of Republican lawmakers joined Democrats to remove him.

While the details of this situation are, to be honest, pretty hilarious and indicate a lack of a serious plan by those GOP members, it also reveals what’s possible if elected representatives in America actually hold the establishment’s feet to the fire.

First, a word on what happened. In a nutshell, Florida Representative Matt Gaetz forced a vote on a motion to vacate the office of the speaker after threatening to do so last week because McCarthy apparently acquiesced to Democrats by passing a bipartisan temporary spending bill, funding the government through November 17 and narrowly avoiding a government shutdown.

Where it goes from there is not fully detailed yet, but some emerging reports from the right-wing press, such as Fox News, suggest that even the Republicans who joined Gaetz, first of all, weren’t even sure of their own votes until the very moment they cast them. They also don’t seem to have any sort of plan at all.

Acting Speaker Patrick McHenry adjourned the House, since pretty much the only thing he can do is form a session to specifically vote for a new speaker (this has never happened before and the rules are vague). With the House adjourned, no congressional hearings can happen, subpoenas can’t go through, and committees can’t convene. This is telling because the same Republicans who ousted McCarthy are also leading an impeachment inquiry against President Joe Biden. Without a speaker, the impeachment process is halted. 

Given this, it was foolish for these lawmakers to vote out McCarthy. And that’s especially the case when it took nearly two months of negotiations to install him in the first place back in January. Now, there’s no telling where things will go or how long it will take to cut deals and find a new speaker. If it takes even the same amount of time as before, then a government shutdown would be inevitable. That level of dysfunction from the GOP is not only poor governance but also bad politics, since it would allow Democrats to look good by contrast.

“Follow your heart, but take your brain with you. The American people expect us to govern. I also advise my House colleagues to be sure and take your meds,” Louisiana Senator John Kennedy, a Republican, said to the press after McCarthy was booted. 

At the same time, this situation demonstrates quite clearly that the establishment – especially during a period of intense partisan divide – is not truly safe. Even powerful figures such as McCarthy can be dethroned by a small contingent of representatives. That shows that people like Jimmy Dore, a well-known YouTube personality, are unfortunately correct for once. The so-called comedian called on progressives to refuse to vote for Nancy Pelosi as speaker when Democrats controlled the House until a vote was taken on Medicare for All. It turns out he was completely correct on that.

If ‘The Squad’ (a team of relatively young Democratic lawmakers who got into the House on a super-progressive platform) had any backbone, as Gaetz and his gang of rebels have shown, they could have forced a vote on that important issue and many others. They certainly could have squeezed out concessions from Pelosi and the political establishment, making her understand that her position on the pedestal is contingent on the support of progressives and not the other way around. The fact that they, who are supposed to be more savvy and calculated than the MAGA mutineers, didn’t do that indicates, at the very least, a lack of commitment to the values that got them elected. 

For their part, the MAGA wing of the Republican Party is making waves: they have made Ukraine funding a hot-button issue, censured Rep. Adam Schiff (a mortal enemy of their cause), put ‘the border’ and fake allegations of election fraud front and center, shouldered out establishment Republicans such as Liz Cheney and Mitt Romney, and they’re building their own media ecosystem. Even though their self-imposed speaker debacle clearly lacks any serious intent, MAGA is flexing its muscles – even if, at times, for nothing.

Will those who are supposedly fighting for the working class in Congress ever exert the same pressure? Doubtful, and it’s also doubtful if these people have any serious commitment to doing that in the first place, since they have the very same tools as Gaetz and his friends yet refuse to wield them. Undoubtedly, however, the political situation in the US is getting a whole hell of a lot more interesting.

 

 

 

Beyond VAIDS (Vaccine Acquired Immune Deficiency) mRNA May Have Intergenerational Consequences

lewrockwell  |  In early April 2023, microbiologist Kevin McKernan — a former researcher and team leader for the MIT Human Genome project¹ — posted a preprint paper² detailing massive DNA contamination in Pfizer’s and Moderna’s bivalent COVID booster shots.^3,4,5,6 As explained in the abstract:⁷

“Several methods were deployed to assess the nucleic acid composition of four expired vials of the Moderna and Pfizer bivalent mRNA vaccines. Two vials from each vendor were evaluated …

Multiple assays support DNA contamination that exceeds the European Medicines Agency (EMA) 330ng/mg requirement and the FDAs 10ng/dose requirements …”

The highest level of DNA contamination found was 30%, meaning nearly one-third of the content of certain vials was plasmid DNA, the presence of which dramatically increases the likelihood of genomic integration and cancer.

What this means, in plain English, is that the shots could potentially alter your DNA, which is something vaccine makers, health authorities and fact checkers have vehemently denied and written off as “impossible.” Yet here we are, with inconvenient facts staring us in the face yet again.

Regulatory Agencies Were Aware of the Problem

In a May 20, 2023, Substack article,⁸ McKernan pointed out that regulatory agencies were clearly aware of this problem early on, as Pfizer submitted documents to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) showing sampled lots had a broad range of double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) in them.

The EMA’s limit for dsDNA is 330 nanograms per milligram (ng/mg), and Pfizer’s data show sampled lots had anywhere from 1 ng/mg to 815 ng/mg of DNA. And, according to McKernan,⁹ the EMA’s limit may be too high to begin with, as “lower limits should be applied if the DNA is packaged in transfection ready lipid nanoparticles,” as they are in the shots.

In a sane regulatory environment, this kind of contamination would have resulted in a massive recall, considering the known and suspected dangers of dsDNA contaminants. Yet nothing was done about it.

Since McKernan’s paper was posted, others have confirmed the presence of dsDNA contaminants in the COVID shots. To be clear, DNA should not be present in a commercial product that has been made under good manufacturing practices.

Obviously, Pfizer and Moderna have not perfected their commercial process, or have taken shortcuts they shouldn’t have. As a result, countless millions have been injected with unnecessarily risky COVID shots.

University of South Carolina professor Phillip Buckhaults has since confirmed the presence of dsDNA in the COVID shots. September 13, 2023, he testified¹⁰ to this before the South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs Ad-Hoc Committee on the Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC).

Buckhaults is a molecular biologist and cancer geneticist with extensive experience in DNA sequencing, and initially set out to debunk McKernan’s claims. To his shock, he replicated McKernan’s findings instead.

In his testimony, he explained how these DNA contaminants can integrate into your genome and disrupt the function of other genes, either long term or permanently, and may be passed on to offspring for generations.

He told the senators he was “alarmed about this DNA being in the vaccine,” as “there is a very real hazard” of the dsDNA integrating into a person’s genome and becoming a “permanent fixture of the cell” that can result in autoimmune problems and cancers.¹¹

Buckhaults suspects high levels of DNA contaminants may also be causing some of the more serious side effects of the jabs, such as lethal cardiac arrest.¹² Of the two lots he analyzed, he found between 5 nanograms and 20 ng of plasmid DNA — ranging from one to 200 base pairs long — per 300 microliter dose, and he points out that having a multitude of tiny fragments is far riskier than having one big piece of DNA.¹³

The risk of genome integration by dsDNA has been known for decades,¹⁴ so the individuals who decided to allow this contamination to remain cannot claim they didn’t know public health would be put at risk.