"The Jewish historian Gershom Shafir, in the Encyclopedia of Global Human Migration, points out that prior to the relationship between the Zionists and the Nazis, Jewish immigration to Palestine did not exceed 3% of total Jewish immigration following the First Zionist Conference [in 1897] in Basel until 1914. He notes that the Balfour Declaration and all the facilities provided by the British Mandate authorities to the Jews for settlement in Palestine did not create a Jewish consensus for immigration to Palestine, as the percentage of Jewish immigrants heading to Palestine never grew above 30% until after 1933.

Based on the ideological similarity between Nazism and Zionism, the Zionists considered the arrival of Hitler to power in 1933 a historical opportunity to achieve the Zionist’s ultimate goals. The Zionist Federation in Germany, with the support of the World Zionist Organization, repeatedly sought to obtain direct protection from Hitler.

Consequently, the Zionists successfully came to an agreement with the German Nazis that Jews were never part of the German people and didn’t belong in German territory. This unwritten agreement paved the way for signing the Haavara Agreement on August 25, 1933, between the Jewish Agency and the German Ministry of the Economy.

The extent of the cooperation between the Nazis and the Zionists

The Haavara agreement, which was also known as the “Transfer Agreement,” brought about a dramatic change that is evident in the numbers. Among its provisions is the assistance in the deportation of millions of Jews from Central Europe to Palestine.

The terms of the agreement imposed a tax on anyone leaving Germany; however, the fees for the departure of German Zionists were lower, so it was an opportunity for Jews to transfer their money and the value of their property which was threatened with confiscation in Germany. The departing Jews bought goods that were sold in Israel and the Middle East in exchange for economic benefits, such as the desire of Jewish communities around the world to promote German exports and help the Germans invest in Palestine.

The agreement also guaranteed military training for Jewish youth in Nazi training camps before they were deported in order to ensure their readiness to join the ranks of the terrorist paramilitary gangs, which at that point constituted the “army” of the Zionist entity.

The Haavara agreement led to the most dangerous waves of immigration to Palestine, with the number of Jewish immigrants between 1933 and 1936 rising to 600,000 European Jews. They began to collude with the Jewish-Zionist associations to implement the plan for the displacement of Jews to Palestine. Crucially, they also work to sabotage and eliminate Jewish associations that opposed this trend and encouraged the integration of Jews in their European countries. ... Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the relationship between Nazism and Zionism is the disconnect between Zionism and the Holocaust during World War II. Zionism was not interested in the massacres of Jews and rescuing them as much as it was in the facilitating the emigration of Jews to Palestine. And those Jews who did not emigrate to Palestine before the establishment of the “state” in 1948 were not a matter of concern for Zionism, whose conviction was limited to the fact that the solution to the Jewish question was solely related to the establishment of a state, and that anything else was irrelevant.

This is confirmed by Egon Redlich in his diaries, Memoirs of a Zionist: The Terezin Diary of Gonda Redlich in which he confirms the sacrifice of tens of thousands of Jews who were eliminated and sent to their deaths through deals that Redlich himself felt ashamed of, in exchange for false promises. He wrote: “The Zionist movement in Czechoslovakia sent thousands of Jews to Nazi extermination camps in exchange for Nazi promises to send a few dozen or hundreds of Zionist leaders and financial figures to Palestine.”

Abdul Wahab Al-Masiri, author of the eight-volume Encyclopedia of Jews, Judaism and Zionism, mentions that Adolf Eichmann succeeded in his mission thanks to the cooperation of the Hungarian Jew Rudolf Kastner, who convinced members of the Jewish community in Hungary that the Nazis would relocate them to new places where they would settle, or to vocational training camps for rehabilitation, and not to the concentration camps which were their true destination.

In exchange for this, the Nazi authorities in 1941 allowed over 1,700 Jews from a concentration camp to be sent to Palestine, “Jews of the best biological material,” according to Eichmann."

https://english.almayadeen.net/articles/analysis/houthis-or-ansar-allah:-why-western-media-including-washingt

"designating Ansar Allah as "Houthis", according to Amer, “is no longer used in referring to Ansar Allah’s members, but all the [Yemeni] people who live under the [National] Salvation Government in Sana’a and all those who support it.

Asked about how the labeling of Ansar Allah as ‘Houthis’ is going to affect their reputation domestically and internationally, Amer stressed that there is neither a direct effect on them nor is it a distortion for the Yemeni people. But those who label Ansar Allah [as Houthis] are considered by the Yemeni people as “real enemies”.

Amer also said that the US-backed Saudi-led coalition has been “targeting everyone by killing, perpetrating massacres, imposing illegal siege. However, it is displayed in front of the World that those who are targeted are the Houthis.”

“And according to the accusations attributed to what they call Houthis, these crimes become acceptable; although, they are in fact targeting over 80% of the Yemeni population who live in areas under Sanaa Government control”, Amer told Al-Mayadeen English.

Journalism code of ethics' principle stipulating the "limitation of harm" states that journalists and news outlets should refrain from publishing names that cause harm, so labeling Ansar Allah as "Houthis", a name that the Saudi and UAE media machines use to attribute to it alleged "violations of human rights", has become a scarecrow to harm them and tarnish their reputation so that no person can join their ranks; and if they do, he might be a "legitimate" target for the western-backed Saudi-led airstrikes.

T Here have been defining times in history-moments, epochs, and periods that are typically marked by notable events or particular characteristics that have changed the world forever.

Nicolaus Copernicus’ publication of On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres in 1543, postulating the model of the universe that placed the Sun rather than Earth at its center was such a moment.

The Industrial Revolution (1760 – 1840), was a defining period in the methods and processes of global capitalist production that transitioned most of the world away from hand production, towards more efficient and stable mechanical manufacturing.

In 1957, the Soviet Union successfully launched Sputnik I, the Earth’s first artificial satellite, launching the “space race” that led to America landing the first humans on the moon in 1969.

These are just a few examples of moments in time that have changed people’s perceptions of the world as it was known. Humankind once again finds itself in the midst of one of those epochs.

Humankind is witnessing the fall of the Western empire. The shift is away from the unipolar world, financed by the US dollar and controlled by American military power projection and hegemony, to a new multipolar geo-political landscape.

This “new world order” will not be controlled by American interests. It will be managed by the cooperation of numerous countries, with a goal of establishing, “… a more just, balanced, and stable multipolar world order, firmly opposing all types of international confrontation.”

People naturally tend to think that a “fall” or collapse of this nature would be more immediate, dramatic, and easily recognized. On the contrary, empires tend to collapse over time. It’s analogous to going bankrupt.

In Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises, Mike Campbell, a bankrupt Scottish war veteran, was asked how he went bankrupt. Mike replied, “Two ways. Gradually and then suddenly.” When asked what brought his bankruptcy on, Mike replied, “Friends. I had a lot of friends. False friends. Then I had creditors, too.”

Just as Mike had “friends,” the US has allies. As Mike had “creditors,” the US is trying to finance multiple wars on multiple fronts.

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s pronouncements that “… the U.S. can afford to support both Ukraine and Israel in their respective war efforts without hindering the nation’s economy,” reeks of overreach. Financial overreach and military overreach are among the contributing factors that have historically led to the fall of empires.

As empires begin their decline, messaging becomes very important. The narrative that’s created to control people’s perceptions of reality are key.

MSNBC told us, the “US is using intel to fight an info war with Russia, even when the intel isn’t rock solid.” Simply put, the government is lying to you in order to maintain some semblance of order.

It’s Plato’s “noble lie.” This is very important. These are the lies that need to be told so Americans will believe that more US taxpayer dollars need to be sent to Ukraine and Israel while American infrastructure disintegrates.

We’re told that the US needs to invade Haiti again, that sovereign African countries should be sanctioned for doing business with Russia, and a humanitarian pause in hostilities in Occupied Palestine is a bad idea and only benefits Hamas.

These distortions and lies are part of the narratives that directly impact the development of our perceptions. These manufactured realities then determine the policies put into place and actions taken. This becomes a vicious cycle as in the Easton model of systems analysis.

In telling the narrative, who tells it can be as important as what is being told. This is where the minstrel and “minstrel diplomacy” rears its ugly head.

In the 19th century in the United States, minstrels were bands of entertainers (or an individual), typically white who would blacken their faces with burnt cork referred to as “corking up.” They performed songs, dances, and formulaic comic routines based on stereotyped and demeaning depictions of African Americans. Sometimes, African American performers wore blackface when taking the stage in order to make their presentations more acceptable to White audiences.

What was once found to be an effective entertainment device, the minstrel show has now become a device to disseminate the dominant imperialist and racist, Western narrative of American foreign policy.

Since the phenotype of many of the victims of these policies are people of the darker hue; the disseminators of the narrative have decided to “cork up” the people being used to sell the story.

In a nutshell, using Black faces to explain and rationalize racism and white supremacy in order to make the audience more comfortable with and receptive to the message. These people are easy to find.

They are part of what the late Glen Ford called “The Black Misleadership Class” who have “been busy selling out Black people for half a century.” The late Amiri Baraka called them “functionaries of the US government.” They know their proper place, stay in it, and do their jobs well.

...

We must be vigilant and aware of the Black faces that are being used by the failing empire to sell us on failed racist, white-supremacist, imperial, and neo-colonial militarism.

If we continue to allow these narratives to go unchallenged, Americans will continue to blindly support money laundering schemes disguised as military and humanitarian support bills for countries such as Ukraine, Israel, and Haiti. As Woodson stated, “When you control a man’s thinking you do not have to worry about his actions…”

The real goal is to pay stock dividends to investors in the military-industrial complex and bonuses to the CEOs of companies like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin with Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars. (Defense Secretary Austin sat on the board of Raytheon before heading the Pentagon.)

These are just some of the dangers of minstrel diplomacy. As the late Fred Hampton told us,

“it’s a class struggle… We know that in order to be able to talk about power, that what you’ve got to be able to talk about is the ability to control and define phenomena and make it act in a desired manner.”

Listening to the minstrels we continue to get confused. We continue to come up with, as Hampton said,

“answers that don’t answer, explanations that don’t explain and conclusions that don’t conclude.”

Syria and Russia military leaders held a joint press conference on 7 November to detail the successful work of the two countries in destroying al Qaeda terrorist factions involved in the horrific drone bombing of the Homs Military Cadets graduation ceremony on 5 October.

The carnage resulted in 89 murders of graduates, military teachers, family and friends, and injuries to more than two hundred who were part of what should have been a joyous occasion. The two generals told the reporters that one thousand, one hundred twenty-five (1,125) terrorist targets were successfully destroyed.

NATO countries’ response to the massacre was silence; not a single world leader sent any words of condolence to President Bashar al-Assad and the citizenry of the Syrian Arab Republic.

NATO diplomats of the UN also did not extend messages of consolation, though Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, and his incompetent Special Envoy on Syria, Geir O. Pedersen, immediately voiced passionate concern for the safety of the al Qaeda warlords still occupying Idlib – and the same concern also from Dan Stoenescu, head of the EU Delegation against to Syria, freshly returned from his trip to Gaziantep, where he cheerfully handed €4 million of Europeans’ tax monies to the titular head of the stethoscope-less al Nusra White Helmets.

Faithful to NATO imperialism language, the above trio used the word “retaliation,” as it seems impossible for colonialists intent on hammering out a new Sykes-Picot against the Levantine Republic to consider the sane idea that successful attacks on the terrorist warlords would prevent the mass murderers from having the ability to slaughter more Syrians.

Held at the Armed Forces Club, the press conference was addressed by Major General Hassen Suleimani, the Director of the Political Department of the Syrian Arab Army, and Major General Vadim Collet, the Head of the Russian Coordination Center in Damascus.

Gen. Suleimani opened the joint presser by telling all that the “Syrian Arab Army, in coordination with the friendly Russian forces operating in Syria, launched a series of specific operations and focused strikes that targeted the organizations….[that] committed the terrorist attack on the Military College in Homs.”

The Syrian general announced: “The joint Syrian-Russian operations led to the destruction of all targeted sites and headquarters, including ammunition and equipment depots, and the elimination of hundreds of terrorists affiliated with the so-called ‘Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS),’ the ‘Turkistan Islamic Party,’ and other terrorist organizations, and to the paralysis of combat and organizational capabilities…preventing them from regrouping and creating a state of chaos and panic among them, [causing them] to seek help from their masters and employers following the heavy losses they suffered.”

Assistance from those “masters and employers” quickly came from al Qaeda’s first air force, the IAF, which simultaneously bombed Damascus and Aleppo International Airports on 12 October. Such war crimes have persisted, as grotesquely evidenced by Israel, the US, ISIS, and al Qaeda all bombing Syria on 8 November.

Maj. Gen. Collet detailed, “that in cooperation with the Syrian army, the appropriate response was implemented to this crime committed by terrorist organizations against the officer cadets of the Military College in Homs, and that the response was ‘to target observation points and terrorist headquarters with aircraft and artillery and strike 23 A control point, training camps, and 35 tunnels and underground shelters,’ stressing that ‘all those involved in this crime will receive the punishment they deserve.'”

General Collet further noted:

The joint Syrian-Russian operations included the implementation of more than 230 air strikes by Russian aviation, and the implementation of more than 900 fire missions by Russian and Syrian artillery on sites of terrorist organizations, during which more than 630 terrorists were eliminated, including 34 of the leaders. 15 experts of foreign nationalities, 450 others injured, and 1,125 targets destroyed, including the destruction of 467 points and the destruction of terrorist weapons and equipment, including 153 vehicles.

"Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s ‘strategic silence’ unnerves Zionists

By Julia Kassem

Amid the ear-splitting sound of air raid sirens and the relentless barrage of rockets pounding Palestinian homes in the densely-populated Gaza Strip, only the sound of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s silence is the most deafening.

Since the Lebanese resistance movement warned to join the war in the event of the Israeli regime moving ahead with its ambitious plan of ‘ground invasion’, both Israelis and Americans have been forced to sit back and consider different scenarios and consequences of the foolhardy, risky adventure.

US President Joe Biden, according to a report in Axios, was “particularly concerned” in his meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu in Tel Aviv that Hezbollah “would decide to join the war”, which would “increase the odds of a broader conflict” in the West Asia region.

Amid the war rhetoric in the power corridors of Tel Aviv and Washington, one question everyone seems to be asking is: how would the Lebanese Hezbollah resistance movement react if the war expands?

Headlines in the Western and Zionist media in recent weeks point to the importance of Hezbollah and how the movement can damage the calculations of the Zionist enemy in the event of ground offensive.

“Where’s Nasrallah? Hezbollah leader silent among Gaza attacks,” asked Middle East Eye. “Nasrallah remains silent while thousands flee South Lebanon,” wrote Israeli Ynetnews. “Hassan Nasrallah’s ominous silence in Lebanon,” wrote Jewish News Syndicate.

What these headlines reveal is the desperation in the occupying regime to come out of the confusion it finds itself in and to get a sense of what lies ahead for it from Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s speech.

The US has been urging Tel Aviv to hold back and delay the ground offensive, and the regime has so far obliged, primarily due to its own compulsions and the need for US reinforcements.

The Palestinian resistance, already gaining the upper hand in terms of strategy, strength, and might, has demonstrated that the ground offensive will be a costly proposition. It has prevented the much-hyped Merkava tanks from even entering the Gaza borders at Khan Yunus and Rafah – destroying them.

On October 25, Hezbollah leader announced that 41 soldiers of the group who were martyred in post-October 7 battles with the Zionist enemy were ‘Martyrs in the path of Al-Quds’, setting the tone for what lies ahead – the complete liberation of the Al-Quds from the Zionist occupation.

Hinting at the ultimate endgame of the current battle as the liberation of Palestine, the announcement has opened a new stage in the objectives of the Resistance Axis with greater conviction and resolve.

Though a speech is yet to be made, Hassan Nasrallah’s actions have been louder than any speech - desecuritizing the border, causing 40+ settlements within 5 km of the Lebanese border to evacuate, hitting every target with 20 mortar attacks, more than 70 AGTM launches, and over a dozen tanked Merkavas. These actions have spoken louder than words, but much more is yet to come.

The discourse around Hezbollah’s involvement in the war misses the point that all weaponry of the Axis of Resistance is employed with careful coordination and strategy.

On October 18, Biden warned Hezbollah against joining the war, terrified of the existential threat Hezbollah poses to the regime that is in reality a tinder box. This existential threat to the occupation prompted Biden to also advise his allies in Tel Aviv to not make any hasty, imprudent move.

While Hezbollah has engaged in limited battles against the Zionist entity from the North in recent weeks, basically aimed at distracting and confusing the enemy that is weaker than Spider’s Web, it has so far allowed the Palestinian resistance to manage the overall situation on the frontline.

Hezbollah has spun the Zionist entity around in a knot from the threads of its own weak web in the North - enough to increase the confusion and distraction without creating an escalation.

What the Zionist entity seems to be begging for is a response on its quickly ticking watch, a sign, an answer, a step in its plan to be watched, observed, and recorded.

The tactic of strategic patience, which US think tank The Washington Institute described as an "Enduring Challenge for the Biden Administration" - is derived from its Islamic root concept (patience) to be just as much of a political strategy in struggle as it is a personal struggle through one's personal trials.

Considering this, Washington-based war hawks are far from being good planners. The resistance, with his strategy and patience, holds the key here. And this battle will also end as the resistance plans."

"Around 5:30 a.m. on the morning of Sunday, October 23, 1983, a yellow Mercedes truck entered the main compound of the United States Marine Corps (the marines) near Beirut Airport. The truck driver circled the area south of the parking lot of the compound and then left the premises. At 6:22 a.m., the truck returned and broke into the compound. However, this time it approached from the west side of the parking area, making a detour, before heading directly towards the barbed wire fence that separated the parking area from the building. After crashing through the fence, it broke through the front doors and exploded in the main lobby inside the building. The force of the explosion lifted the four-story building into the air, destroying the support columns and foundations before the entire building collapsed.

Numerous narratives and theories have been presented about what happened; most people agree with the conclusions of investigations conducted by the US government. However, no group has taken responsibility for the act or presented an explanation of how it was carried out. Eyewitnesses, on the other hand, unanimously agreed that what occurred seemed like a well-planned operation. The guards said they had previously seen the truck and did not suspect anything about it because it resembled the trucks that delivered supplies to the compound. The guards were caught completely off guard and did not even open fire on it before it breached the security checkpoint and the main entrance. According to Deputy Sergeant Eddie DeFranco, who survived and was stationed at guard post number seven, near the main entrance where the truck broke in, when he first saw the truck before it approached, he believed it was just another of the dozens of trucks that transported water, goods, and other equipment from the airport on a daily basis.

Conflicting estimates have circulated regarding the amount of explosives planted in the truck, but most experts believe it was approximately five tons of highly explosive TNT. The explosives were deliberately arranged in order to direct the force of the explosion upward, resulting in significant destruction and injuries to everyone inside the building. It was later announced that 241 US citizens were killed, including 220 marines.

Just a few minutes after the explosion, another massive explosion struck a building known as Drakkar, a few kilometers away, where the French paratroopers were stationed, killing 58 of them. The cause of this explosion is also disputed; however it was initially attributed to a car bomb loaded with approximately five tons of explosives.

Another narrative about the truck was presented 30 years later. In 2013, the French newspaper Le Monde published an investigation based on the investigations carried out by the French government. It cited testimonies from French soldiers who were in a nearby building called Catamaran, located less than 100 meters from Drakkar. They stated that they had gone onto the balcony after the US compound explosion, and, two minutes later, Drakkar exploded. However, they claimed they did not see any truck entering the building. The officer responsible for protecting the surviving building, Omer Marie Magdeleine, stated that “the building was surrounded by fences, each entrance was protected by barriers with machine guns and anti-tank weapons, and the street was closed from both sides. Between the fences and barriers it would be impossible for a truck to pass without being noticed.” Nonetheless, none of these witnesses were interviewed during the official investigations, and survivors were prohibited from speaking to anyone about the event.

Washington sent retired admiral Robert L.J. Long, a representative of the US Department of Defense, to investigate the bombing of the marines’ headquarters. But the situation was rapidly deteriorating for Washington’s forces, as operations against the marines continued until former US President Ronald Reagan announced, on February 7, 1984, the transfer of the marines from the bases in Beirut to US ships on the shore. Over the next two weeks, the battleship USS New Jersey carried out retaliatory bombing operations against many areas in Lebanon before the US order was issued to permanently leave Lebanon and its waters on February 26, 1984.

Who was behind the operation?

The bombing at the marines’ headquarters was not an ordinary event for Washington. It had significant repercussions which eventually led to the collapse of Washington’s puppet government in Lebanon and the retreat of “Israeli” forces into southern Lebanon. Because of the ongoing Cold War with the Soviet Union, Washington initially accused Moscow and Damascus of being behind the attack or facilitating it. However, US military intelligence swiftly blamed a new group on the scene: mujahideen with connections to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

A relatively short time after the US directly accused fighters close to Iran of being behind the attack, the West started linking it to the attacks on US intelligence officers in Lebanon, including the captured US and Western hostages. Within a few years, the Western governments began to suggest that the groups affiliated with Hezbollah were responsible for these operations. This is when the martyr Imad Mughniyeh was placed at the top of the US most wanted list.

US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) teams that rotated through Middle East assignments always carried a grudge against those whom they held responsible for the attack. According to a number of US reports written by former intelligence analysts, “the hunt for Imad Mughniyeh was personal.” Washington also accused al-Hajj Radwan (Imad Mughniyeh) of orchestrating the bombing of the US embassy in Beirut in 1983, which led to the destruction of the entire CIA station and the death of the head of the agency’s Middle East branch. It was also claimed that he was responsible for the abduction and execution of the CIA station chief William Buckley in 1984. Buckley had been sent to Beirut in 1983 to establish a new CIA station after the previous one was destroyed. A senior official in the Central Intelligence Agency stated that “Buckley’s capture led to the closure of all CIA activities in [Lebanon].”

In his book Known and Unknown, Donald Rumsfeld, the US special envoy to Lebanon during the Reagan administration, devoted a special chapter to the bombing of the marine barracks in Beirut, which he called “Smiling Death.” Everyone who writes about that operation mentions that, according to eyewitnesses, the driver of the truck that destroyed the marines’ headquarters was seen smiling seconds before the explosion. The explosion killed 241 soldiers out of the 350 who made up the 1st Battalion 8th Marines, and is the largest blow to the marines in their history. Rumsfeld stated the bombing of the Marine Corps Headquarters was the largest terrorist attack on the United States before September 11th.

Rumsfeld himself quoted a statement by the then US vice president, George H.W. Bush, in which Bush vowed, “we’re not going to let a bunch of insidious terrorists, cowards, shape the foreign policy of the United States.” Rumsfeld commented that “I was uncomfortable with his word choice. I have never thought people willing to drive a truck bomb into a building and kill themselves were cowards.” Rumsfeld also notes that he told US secretary of state at the time, George Shultz, firstly, that US policymakers “should close the gap between inflated perceptions of our abilities and reality;” secondly to “never use US troops as a “peacekeeping force,” we were too big a target;” and, thirdly, ”keep reminding ourselves that it is easier to get into something than it is to get out of it.”

Today, 40 years after one of the most important resistance operations against the US occupation in the region, the leaders of the United States are repeating the same scenario. Just days ago, United States Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin ordered 2,000 US soldiers to be prepared for the possibility of participating in a war alongside “Israel.” However, experts believe that this group of military personnel will not have combat roles but will be limited to logistical support. Nevertheless, this step may serve as a prelude to sending more soldiers on combat missions in the future. In the event that the United States decides to directly enter the ongoing war today, those in Lebanon and the region are waiting for them. Among them are Lebanese who adhere to the Lebanese Ministry of Tourism’s campaign, saying to them, “Ahla Bhal Talleh!”

"The Islamic Resistance in Iraq claimed responsibility for attacks on several US military bases in Syria on 23 October, the second series of attacks on US military bases in a week, Al-Mayadeen reported.

The Islamic Resistance stated that offensives were carried out with drones that caused severe damage after they directly hit their targets at bases in Al-Tanf and Al-Rukban near the Syria-Iraq-Jordan border.

The sources said that in Al-Tanf, the drones "managed to target the base without information about the extent of the losses," adding that there was a subsequent mobilization from the US military forces inside the base.

The US military established the Al-Tanf base in 2016, under the pretext of fighting ISIS.

However, Russian and Syrian officials say the US has supported ISIS from the base, which is located on the strategic M2 Baghdad–Damascus Highway. The US seeks to use its forces stationed at Al-Tanf to block Iran from moving weapons and fighters overland between Syria and Iraq. The US has also trained separatist Druze forces at Al-Tanf.

The Resistance also announced that its fighters conducted a drone strike on the US military's Al-Malikiyah base in Syria’s northeastern Hasakah Governorate.

The Al-Malikiyah base was established by the US in 2021 near the Turkiye-Syria-Iraq border to facilitate the theft of Syrian oil, Syrian state media SANA said.

Meanwhile, the US base at the Conoco oil fields in Deir Ezzor's countryside was struck with two missiles, sources speaking with Al-Mayadeen said, also noting that no information regarding damage has been revealed so far.

On 19 October, three drones were able to fly above the Al-Tanf base and launch several successful airstrikes.

Sources within the US-led coalition that spoke with Iraq's Shafaq News on Wednesday claimed that the occupation forces “successfully intercepted and downed two of the drones, but the third managed to target the base.”

The US base at the Conoco oil field was also hit by multiple rockets.

Hours before the 19 October airstrikes on US troops, the Israeli air force attacked the Syrian army in the southwestern Quneitra governorate, causing material damage. Explosions were also reported in the Israeli-occupied Syrian Golan Heights.

US troops stationed in Iraq's Ain al-Asad airbase were also targeted by airstrikes on Wednesday, which were claimed by the Kataib Hezbollah resistance faction. Although the Pentagon initially claimed its forces repelled the attack, the official story changed to include reports of wounded soldiers as the hours went on.

“The resistance in Iraq has entered the battle of ‘Al-Aqsa Flood’ and directed its strikes at US bases,” the military spokesman for Kataib Hezbollah declared on Thursday.

Since the start of the historic Operation Al-Aqsa Flood in the Gaza envelope, factions within the Resistance Axis in West Asia have warned they are ready to join the battle against Israel in support of the Palestinian cause and that US occupation troops and bases would become “legitimate military targets” if Washington also decides to enter the fray.

As tensions escalate, the Pentagon has deployed multiple warships and thousands of troops to the Israeli coast. The UK, Germany, and the Netherlands have mobilized troops to support Israel's ethnic cleansing campaign against Palestinians."

Pentagon announced "increased force posture" yesterday

Last night the US/'Israel' began first air strikes against West Bank in Jenin and also bombed Damascus again.

Escalation continues...

Doing basic math, this means every murderered Arab in Gaza is the possibile profit of between 5-10 million USD to US military industry. Right in front of us accumulation by waste...

Auto translation from the linked Russian telegram:

"During the 11 days of Israel’s fighting with the Gaza Strip, the capitalization of the top 40 military-industrial corporations of the West increased by $55 billion. Prior to this, against the backdrop of the failure of the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ counteroffensive, the capitalization of corporations was falling, losing the same 7% ($58 billion) in 4 months. Top 10 public corporations of the Western military-industrial complex by capitalization, $ billion (change as of 10/06/23, %)

1. 🇺🇸 Boeing – 112 (-1%)
2. 🇺🇸 Lockheed Martin – 111 (+10%)
3. 🇺🇸 Raytheon – 108 (+6%)
4. 🇺🇸 Northrop Grumman – 74 (+16%)
5. 🇺🇸 General Dynamics – 66 (+10%)
6. 🇺🇸 TransDigm – 48 (+2%)
7. 🇬🇧 BAE Systems – 40 (+10%)
8. 🇺🇸 L3Harries – 34 (+9%)
9. 🇫🇷 Thales – 32 (+11%)
10. 🇺🇸 Booz – 17 (+8%) Top 40 – 816 (+7%)."

"Yemeni military expert Aziz Rashid posits that the US "is unable to engage in a direct clash with the Axis of Resistance because this will have serious repercussions on American and Zionist interests."

Speaking to The Cradle, Rashid explains that that the "red lines" justifying Yemeni involvement in the conflict are not limited to direct US intervention. He points to other triggers for crossing these lines, including ongoing Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians, attacks on Jerusalem, Jenin, and Nablus in the West Bank, the request for intervention by Gaza's resistance, and any serious attempts to eliminate the resistance. Crucially, he points out that these violations will trigger a coordinated response by the entire Axis “through the joint operations rooms.”

For the Yemeni populace, the Palestinian cause has long represented a principled, religious, moral, and national commitment. Political analyst Talib al-Hassani believes that “one of the reasons for the US-Saudi aggression against the state since March 2015 is Yemen’s position within the Axis of Resistance and the great danger it poses to the United States' interests in the region."

But the question remains whether a nation already worn down by eight years of relentless conflict and besieged conditions can realistically participate in military action against Israel.

“Some may see this position as a show,” Hassani tells The Cradle, “but, in reality, Yemen has significant military capabilities that enable it to target Israel.” He highlights the transformation Yemen underwent after the 21 September Revolution in 2014, whose objectives encompassed liberating itself from foreign dominance and aligning with Arab and Islamic causes, including the Palestinian issue.

Ansarallah’s arsenal

Tel Aviv takes these threats seriously. Israeli media sounded the alarm after Operation "Yemen Hurricane" on 17 January, 2022 when Ansarallah-aligned Yemeni forces struck UAE oil facilities with ballistic missiles and drones in Abu Dhabi and Dubai - this, from a distance of around 1,600 kilometers, which is equivalent to the distance between Yemen and Israel. That the Yemenis could potentially target the Israeli ports of Eilat, Tel Aviv, and Haifa were no longer in question.

Rashid underscores that any Yemeni involvement in the war would likely materialize in the form of drone and missile attacks targeting specific objectives, as per the Resistance Axis' strategic plan, the Unity of Fronts.

Hassani further explains that these strikes “may extend beyond the occupied Palestinian territories to the sea lanes and American and Israeli bases in the Red Sea and the African side of the Red Sea.” He points to Houthi's emphasis in his last speech that “we must have an impact on the Israeli enemy,” which means that the strikes “will be large, focused, accurate, and painful."

Ansarallah's formidable arsenal, some of which were showcased in a military parade in Sanaa during last month’s anniversary of the revolution, includes the impressive Samad 3 attack drones, which have a range of 1,800 kilometers and are armed with explosive warheads weighing between 20 and 50 kilograms.

Additionally, there's the Eid 2 drone, carrying a hefty 40-kilogram explosive warhead and capable of reaching targets of up to 2,000 kilometers. The Yemeni army also possesses long-range surface-to-surface ballistic missiles like the Quds 4, Aqeel, and Toofan. Notably, their naval missiles can target Israeli and US bases in the Red Sea, as well as US bases in the Persian Gulf.

Checking the US in Iraq

In Iraq, the resistance has already begun to hint at what lies ahead. On Wednesday, Kataib Hezbollah claimed credit for drone attacks on the Ain al-Assad and Al-Harir bases, in which a number of US servicemen were injured. The following day, the group's spokesman, Jaafar al-Husseini, explained the reasons for the strike clearly:

“The Americans are essential partners in killing the residents of the Gaza Strip and therefore, they must bear the consequences…[The US] knows very well the potential of the Iraqi resistance, which has multiplied for some time, and today we are at a stage capable of striking all American bases in Iraq."

Iraq, a country in which the Resistance Axis played a pivotal role in territorially defeating ISIS, exhibits no less enthusiasm for supporting the Palestinian resistance, especially in the face of relentless Israeli bombardment and potential direct US involvement.

In addition to Iraqi Prime Minister Muhammad Shiaa al-Sudani's official condemnation of the occupation army’s genocide campaign, factions aligned with the Axis are gearing up for potential engagement in the multi-front war when the call is made. These factions aim to replicate the role they played in the Syrian theater against foreign-backed terrorist organizations.

A source within one of the Iraqi resistance factions reveals to The Cradle that coordination has already been established with Hamas. In recent days, meetings have taken place between Iraqi resistance factions to map out strategies for responding to Israeli attacks on Gaza, with a focus on expanding the battle's scope to deter Israeli occupation forces. And the first course of action will be to ensure that Tel Aviv fights alone:

“The Iraqi factions are monitoring the course of events in Palestine, especially with regard to American and European intervention in military operations alongside Israel. We have taken measures on the ground and we are fully prepared, and the target bank has been determined in the event of any direct American intervention in the war.”

Secretary-General of the Iraqi Hezbollah Brigades Abu Hussein al-Hamidawi threatened in a statement to target US bases in Iraq if the US intervened in Israel's Gaza war. He stressed that “our missiles, drones, and special forces are ready to target the American enemy in its bases if it intervenes in this battle, and we will target known sites of the Zionist entity.” Additionally, a source close to the Iraqi resistance told The Cradle that there are other means available to support Gaza's resistance from Iraq that might place pressure on the US and Israel and change the equation - that we might witness in the upcoming hours or days.

Palestine's got allies too

The leader of Asaib Ahl al-Haq, Sheikh Qais al-Khazali, made a phone call to Hamas Political Bureau Chief Ismail Haniyeh on 10 October, in which they discussed developments in Gaza. In a statement afterward, Khazali stressed that “Iraq is committed to supporting the Palestinian cause, and that the Iraqi resistance factions are fully prepared for any action required of them to liberate Holy Jerusalem and support the Palestinian people.”

Meanwhile, the head of the Badr Movement, Hadi al-Ameri, threatened the US occupying forces with “heavy losses” if Washington decided to intervene directly in the war. At a recent press conference, he held the US “responsible for what is happening in the Gaza Strip because of its unlimited support for the Zionists,” and said it “will suffer a great loss if it decides to enter the war on the side of the Zionist entity against the Palestinian people."

Military expert Nawaf al-Badrani explains that, unlike Yemen's resistance forces, Iraqi groups have some geographic limits:

"The Iraqi factions do not have ballistic missiles capable of reaching the occupied territories. Its involvement in the battle may be through targeting American forces stationed in 10 major military bases in Iraq, or coordinating with Syria to allow faction fighters to reach the borders of the occupied Golan."

Iraqi sources reveal that fighters from certain armed factions have already moved toward areas near occupied Palestine, awaiting instructions to engage in the battle against the Israeli occupation army.

Contact made by The Cradle with several faction leaders confirms that these parties are prepared to participate in this "great fight" alongside the Palestinian resistance."

"Coordinated airstrikes hit two US occupation bases in southern and northeast Syria in the morning of 19 October, in the latest escalation against US troops in West Asia since the start of the Gaza-Israel war.

According to informed sources who spoke with Al-Mayadeen, three drones were able to fly above the Al-Tanf base at the Syrian-Iraqi-Jordanian border and launch several successful airstrikes.

“The attack led to a major alert within [Al-Tanf], with continuous flights of military aircraft and helicopters in the area,” Al-Mayadeen reported.

Sources within the US-led coalition that spoke with Iraq's Shafaq News on Wednesday claimed that the occupation forces “successfully intercepted and downed two of the drones, but the third managed to target the base.”

The US occupation base at Conoco oil field in Deir Ezzor governorate was also hit by multiple rockets.

No group has taken responsibility for the attacks and no casualties have been reported.

Hours before Thursday's airstrikes on US troops, the Israeli air force attacked the Syrian army in the southwestern Quneitra governorate, causing material damage. Explosions were also reported in the Israeli-occupied Syrian Golan Heights.

US troops stationed in Iraq's Ain al-Asad airbase were also targeted by airstrikes on Wednesday, which were claimed by the Kataib Hezbollah resistance faction. Although the Pentagon initially claimed its forces repelled the attack, the official story changed to include reports of wounded soldiers as the hours went on.

“The resistance in Iraq has entered the battle of ‘Al-Aqsa Flood’ and directed its strikes at US bases,” the military spokesman for Kataib Hezbollah declared on Thursday.

Since the start of the historic Operation Al-Aqsa Flood in the Gaza envelope, factions within the Resistance Axis in West Asia have warned they are ready to join the battle against Israel in support of the Palestinian cause and that US occupation troops and bases would become “legitimate military targets” if Washington also decides to enter the fray.

As tensions escalate, the Pentagon has deployed multiple warships and thousands of troops to the Israeli coast. The UK, Germany, and the Netherlands have mobilized troops to support Israel's ethnic cleansing campaign against Palestinians."

Full video is 22 minutes.

"The name Nisa-Nashim, a combination of the Arabic and Hebrew words for women, denotes harmony for all. It elevates the idea of coexistence. The question is: coexistence with what exactly?

Nisa-Nashim was founded in 2016 and is seemingly in a potentially terminal decline. Today we ask: what was it in the first place? and who exactly is behind it?

Nisa-Nashim claims to be an interfaith partnership between Muslim and Jewish women. In reality, it’s a vehicle for normalizing Zionism in the Muslim community.

The pro-Israel Board of Deputies of British Jews even admits that it ‘incubated’ Nisa-Nashim. The group also claims it has two co-founders one Muslim and one Jewish. In reality, there was a third undisclosed founder.

The first co-founder of Nisa-Nashim, Laura Marks, was previously the Senior Vice-President of the Board of Deputies. The BoD, according to its own trustees' report, has a "close working relationship with the Israeli Embassy in the UK through the Ambassador, diplomats, and professional staff, and strengthened links to the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs and the Israeli Offence Forces.

"Another co-founder, Julie Siddiqi, has a long history of working with the British armed forces. In 2014, she was briefed by the Ministry of Defense on British military operations in Iraq. She claimed that ‘our concerns and feedback’ have been ‘taken on board and taken seriously. She added: ‘I can’t see any other country in the world where you could have something like this, so it is something we should be proud of’.

Denise Joseph is the third undisclosed co-founder, the only one that remains a director. She describes herself as an "ardent Zionist” and is the Chair of the European Board of OneVoice, an anti-BDS organization which pushes normalization propaganda in British schools.

Another director, Hifsa Haroon-Iqbal is simultaneously the Regional Prevent lead for the West Midlands. Prevent is a British government spying program in which children as young as three can be questioned by Counter Terror police without parents present. It is overseen by the Homeland Security Group which is one of the seven agencies and departments that form the UK intelligence community.

But who funds Nisa-Nashim? Well, it states that it has been funded by the Department for Communities and Local Government and the Board of Deputies. It has also received funding from David Dangoor whose family Foundation also funds the Islamophobic Henry Jackson and the BoD.

The foundation has also given money to the Jerusalem Foundation – an organization involved in promoting illegal settlement activity in occupied East Jerusalem. So, here we have an interfaith as subterfuge organization working to blunt criticism of the Zionist movement in the Muslim community by leveraging personal contacts and friendships. No to Nisa-Nashim."