
PM Modi to visit Cyprus, attend G7 summit in Canada, meet leaders in Croatia from June 15-19
Having been carrying out its ongoinggenocideof the Palestinians for almost two years, wrecking Lebanon and Syria, repeatedly assaulting Iran and Yemen, and using subversion of Western political, economic, intellectual, and media elitesto stifle its opponentswhereverthey speak up, Israel has now launched its most serious effort yet to either cripple or destroy Iran, its last remaining opponent with the potential to do it serious harm.
As Russia for one has stated, Israel's massive attack on Iran is unambiguously criminal. It violates the UN Charter and international law in general. In particular, it does not fulfillthe narrow- and rightly so - legal criteria for a justifiable defensive preemptive strike. Israel's shameless attempts to deploy this phrase to shield its actions are pure information warfare. They are insultingly brazen - propaganda that can "work" only on the willingly obtuse - and as absurd as the repulsive Israeli habit of trying to pass off genocide,including by starvation, as self-defense.
Incidentally, against this background, it comes as no real surprise that Israeli tactics against Iran have included the same perfidious - as in literally, technically criminal under the law of armed conflict - method recently deployed by Ukraine's Zelensky regime (and its Western helpers):Israel as well used sneak drone attacks from inside its opponent's territory.
In reality, if any state did have a good case for claiming the right to a preemptive strike in this case, it would have been Iran. Because the core criterion for a military strike to be considered preemptive is that it must disrupt an imminent enemy attack. With Israel and its US symbiont recently not having let a day go by without threatening Iran with pretty much the assault that has now happened, Tehran would have had excellent evidence to show just that: That an Israeli - and thus Western - attack was imminent.
Yet, especially after more than a year and a half of a live-streamed Zionist colonial genocide carried out, in effect,by Israel and the West together, we know that international law counts for very little in the hellish "rules-based" world the "value"-concerned West has made.
Hence, the key question is not if Israel could possibly have a right to act as it does. That's a no-brainer: absolutely not. But unfortunately, that does not help its victims. Israel is impunity embodied. Among all the monstrous states that modern history has witnessed commit horrific crimes, none has been getting away with murder (mass murder, really) like Israel; except perhaps the US, of course.
Indeed,as the Israeli dissident and genocide expert Raz Segal has recently explained, the sense that they are above the law is a key factor in how so many Israelis function - and often enjoy themselves - as merciless mass murderers.
That's why the real question, the one that is relevant in the world as it really is, is why Israel can do what it is doing. And there the short, one-word answer is of course: America. Other states of the West (as well as the EU monster association) and the Middle East are also complicit in Israel's atrocities. But in terms of power, it is Washington that is decisive. Israel can commit its endless crimes and never face consequences only because of US support.
Just try to imagine a state as territorially and demographically tiny and geopolitically precarious as Israel displaying so much aggression but without American backing. Exactly - there's nothing to imagine because it would long be gone.
Yet in the case of Israel's latest outrage, Washington is claiming that it did not participate in it, sort of. Secretary of State Marco Rubiowants us to believe that Israel's assault was "unilateral" and the US was "not involved." Is there anyone left naïve enough to not understand two simple facts? Namely, Washington lies easily and without hesitation, and the US-Israel symbiosis is so firm and pervasive that an Israeli strike against Iran, especially of this magnitude, without American connivance and input is inconceivable.
But let's set aside the obvious big fat lie. That's just the US being its bad old US self. What's more interesting is that, even on its own mendacious terms, the official American position simply makes no sense. Washington implausibly claims that it played no role in Israel's criminal attack on Iran. US mainstream media and establishment mouthpieces, such as Bloomberg and the Washington Post, go so far as to pretend that President Donald Trump's officially still ongoing negotiations with Iran may have been disturbed by Israel's oh-so-independent strike. They still uncritically quoteTrump as voicing opposition to an Israeli attack as recently as the day just before the Israeli assault. For Bloomberg, that means that Israel struck "in apparent defiance" of Trump.
Really? The old the-leader-didn't-know defense? That's funny because by now Trump himself has admitted that he knew about the attack, perverselyblamed Iran and not Israel, and called on Tehran to - in essence - surrenderbefore Israel hits it so hard that nothing would be left of Iran. And all this while Israel has already threatenedanother two weeksof "operations" or even more, namely as long "as it takes." Trump, consequently, has not only sided unambiguously with the aggressor Israel, but has also signaled that he is fine with his Israeli friends battering Iran as long as they like, including to the point of extermination.
That is, Washington's absurdly incredible official story is first, Israel massively defied America's declared policy; second, the US does not really mind; and third, quite to the contrary, Washington just loves being made a fool of in front of the world, as long as it's done by Israel.
It loves it so much, in fact, that the American response is to immediately side with Israel without limits, writing out a blank check for its "defiant" friends to do whatever they want, because as Trump has assured those who have just "apparently defied" him, not only can they hammer away at Iran to their heart's content, but in addition, the US will also always defend them against Iran in case the latter should try to strike back.
Even Washington's lies are revealing. In this case the lie of not being involved casts a sharp light on just how uninhibited the US elite is by now in publicly subordinating everything, including of course the interests of ordinary Americans, to Israel and its American lobby. The truth is, of course, that the US is deeply involved in the war of aggression against Iran. After Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria, the undead neocons are finally getting to the last - for now - victim on their old murder board.
The lie is that the US pretends not to be involved. And the ultimate, unintentional reveal of the whole affair is that Washington's elites think a lie implying that they are absolutely obedient to Israel, even when directly "defied" by it, is a good-enough story. For absolute, craven submission to Israel is now considered perfectly normal. And that, actually, is a fundamental truth about America as it now really is.
(RT.com)

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Winnipeg Free Press
5 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Partisan podcasts are failing at comedy
Opinion Comedy has long been one of our most effective tools for speaking truth to power. The weapon of satire is capable of humbling even the revered and the royal, when wielded effectively. Wit and insight combined have the unique capacity for cutting through dogma, laying bare the truth that humans are preening primates who take the social mores we have contrived for ourselves far too seriously. So it has been a grating experience to witness the rise of the podcast bro edgelord as a strain of popular comedy — exemplified by the extended Joe Rogan cinematic universe, including figures like Andrew Schulz, Tim Dillon and the rest of their clones. Not only have they lost the plot when it comes to comedy, there is also much to be said about their shortcomings as interviewers when they stray into the territory of journalists. The way they are always 'just asking questions' while conveniently evading information which might lead them to real answers. Perhaps the most egregious example of this was when the Canadian podcasters known as the Nelk Boys recently interviewed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The hosts of this supposed comedy podcast acknowledged that they had little understanding of the conflict in the Middle East and were ill-equipped to conduct such an interview. Yet they proceeded on the weak premise that somehow speaking with Netanyahu personally would provide some sort of clarity, as if conversing directly with a propagandist is an avenue to truth. Unsurprisingly, the result was an unchallenged Netanyahu selling his war in Gaza to an audience of millions. The only pushback he received from his interviewers was when he contended that Burger King is better than McDonald's. This, the Nelk Boys contended, was Netanyahu's 'worst take' of the interview. Never mind being effective journalists, I'm not sure the Nelk Boys can be trusted near stairs unless there's a baby gate in place. But what all these podcasters will tell you is that they aren't trying to be journalists or pundits. They are, first and foremost, comedians. It's an excuse that was weak when Jon Stewart first contended it decades ago, but has grown fully laughable when these podcast bros push it. Because while Stewart undeniably strays into the territory of punditry, he remembers a rule of comedy that these podcasters have seemingly never learned. George Carlin was master of this lesson. Carlin understood that comedy suffers when you allow yourself to become a partisan. During this past American election cycle, many of these podcasters conducted interviewers with members of Donald Trump's political team, including Trump himself. These were uncritical interviews, entirely credulous of everything the Trump team said, and in many cases ended with outright endorsements from the podcasters for Trump's presidency. Carlin was the greatest satirist of his age because he understood all the things wrong with this. Firstly, he understood that as soon as you throw your lot in with a politician or a political party, you can never be taken seriously again as a pure comedian. Many of these podcasters are understanding this now, far too late, and speaking out against Trump's brutal policies. Somehow they had failed to foresee what a Trump term would bring, astute social analysts that they are. But even if Trump had been having an unlikely milquetoast term, think of the corner these comedians had painted themselves into through their sycophancy. For years they had established themselves as edgy truth-sayers as they mocked the Democrats in power, cultivating an audience of aggrieved Republicans. But now their guy is in power. What were they going to do on their edgy truth-saying podcast, talk about what a good job the president is doing for an hour? But even beyond the simple tenuous nature of their partisan branding, Carlin understood that most of the problems our society faces are systemic. His greatest bits were all about breaking down institutional power and traditional hierarchies. Subverting cultural norms and poking fun at our sacred cows. Did he have jokes about specific politicians and culture figures? Sure, tons of them. But he never fell into the trap of letting the news cycle du jour run his entire analysis. He satirized everyone who held power in a fashion that always let you know that the power itself was the target, leaving himself credible to go on the attack again when a new hand took the reins. And he would certainly never let himself become what these podcasters have become: at best duped mouthpieces for partisan propaganda, and at worst propagandists themselves. Distinctly choosing a side and selling yourself out to become a champion for one brand of institutional power effectively reduces you to a proponent of the system that satire is meant to undermine. A disastrous position for a would-be comedian. I think we have come to an impasse though. In our current political climate, the lines of morality and power have grown stark enough that even the typically wilfully blind are being forced to see light. And so I have hope the blueprint for effective satire will become the norm again as well, and that we will remember there is more to good comedy than making a room full of fools fawn over how politically incorrect one can be. Maybe we can even turf all these partisan mouthpieces for the hacks that they are. Alex Passey is a Winnipeg writer.


Calgary Herald
11 hours ago
- Calgary Herald
Israel admits targeting reporter as Al Jazeera says 5 journalists killed in Gaza
Article content Gaza City — Al Jazeera said two of its correspondents, including a prominent reporter, and three cameramen were killed in an Israeli strike on their tent in Gaza City on Sunday. Article content The Israeli military admitted in a statement to targeting Anas al-Sharif, the reporter it labelled as a 'terrorist' affiliated with Hamas. Article content The attack was the latest to see journalists targeted in the 22-month war in Gaza, with around 200 media workers killed over the course of the conflict, according to media watchdogs. Article content 'Al-Sharif, 28, was killed on Sunday after a tent for journalists outside the main gate of the hospital was hit. The well-known Al Jazeera Arabic correspondent reportedly extensively from northern Gaza.' Article content Article content The channel said that five of its staff members were killed during the strike on a tent in Gaza City, listing the others as Mohammed Qreiqeh along with camera operators Ibrahim Zaher, Mohammed Noufal and Moamen Aliwa. Article content The Israeli military confirmed that it had carried out the attack, saying it had struck Al Jazeera's al-Sharif and calling him a 'terrorist' who 'posed as a journalist'. Article content 'A short while ago, in Gaza City, the IDF struck the terrorist Anas Al-Sharif, who posed as a journalist for the Al Jazeera network,' it said on Telegram, using an acronym for the military. Article content Article content 'Anas Al-Sharif served as the head of a terrorist cell in the Hamas terrorist organisation and was responsible for advancing rocket attacks against Israeli civilians and IDF troops,' it added. Article content Al-Sharif was one of the channel's most recognisable faces working on the ground in Gaza, providing daily reports in regular coverage. Article content Article content Following a press conference by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday, where the premier defended approving a new offensive in Gaza, al-Sharif posted messages on X describing 'intense, concentrated Israeli bombardment' on Gaza City. Article content One of his final messages included a short video showing nearby Israeli strikes hitting Gaza City. Article content In July, the Committee to Protect Journalists issued a statement calling for his protection as it accused the Israeli military's Arabic-language spokesperson Avichay Adraee of stepping up online attacks on the reporter by alleging that he was a Hamas terrorist.


Calgary Herald
11 hours ago
- Calgary Herald
Australia joins Canada in plan to recognize Palestinian state
CANBERRA — Australia will recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Monday. Article content 'A two-state solution is humanity's best hope to break the cycle of violence in the Middle East and to bring an end to the conflict, suffering and starvation in Gaza,' he told reporters in Canberra. Article content 'Until Israeli and Palestinian statehood is permanent, peace can only be temporary. Article content Article content 'Australia will recognize the right of the Palestinian people to a state of their own. We will work with the international community to make this right a reality.' Article content Article content The decision follows a push from several countries, including France, Britain and Canada, to recognize statehood for the Palestinians after Israel launched a war on Gaza nearly two years ago in response to the Hamas attacks. Article content 'There is a moment of opportunity here, and Australia will work with the international community to seize it,' Albanese added. Article content He said that Australia's decision was predicated on reassurances from the Palestinian Authority that there would be 'no role for the terrorists of Hamas in any future Palestinian state'. Article content The PA, however, does not have a presence in Gaza, which has been governed by Hamas for nearly two decades. Article content Following Australia's announcement, Israel's embassy in Canberra told AFP the ambassador was 'unavailable' to comment. Article content Article content Just hours earlier, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu criticized international calls to recognize Palestinian statehood, saying it would 'not bring peace, it will bring war'. Article content 'To have European countries and Australia march into that rabbit hole, just like that, fall right into it and buy this canard is disappointing, and I think it's actually shameful,' he said. Article content Article content International concern is growing about the plight of the more than two million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, where the fighting has triggered a dire humanitarian crisis and warnings of mass starvation. Article content Albanese further criticized the Israeli government Monday and said it continued to defy 'international law and deny sufficient aid'. Article content As the global movement to recognize Palestine grows, New Zealand's Foreign Minister Winston Peters said his country would carefully consider whether to do the same over the next month. Article content He added that New Zealand's recognition of a Palestinian state is a 'matter of when, not if'.