US intel indicates war between Israel and Hezbollah inching closer

 

US intel indicates war between Israel and Hezbollah inching closer

A large-scale confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah is likely to break out in the next several weeks if Jerusalem and Hamas fail to reach a cease-fire deal in Gaza, U.S. intelligence indicates.

U.S. officials are trying to convince both sides to deescalate — a task that would be significantly easier with a cease-fire in place in Gaza. But that agreement is in tense negotiations and U.S. officials are not confident Israel and Hamas will agree to the deal on the table in the near future. Meanwhile, the Israel Defense Forces and Hezbollah have drafted battle plans and are in the process of trying to procure additional weapons, according to two senior U.S. officials briefed on the intelligence.

Both sides have publicly said they do not want to go to war, but senior Biden officials increasingly believe that intense fighting is likely to break out despite efforts to try and prevent it.

The risk is higher now than at any other point in recent weeks, according to another senior U.S. official, who, like others in this story, was granted anonymity to speak freely about sensitive intelligence.

A war between Israel and Hezbollah could ignite a conflict that forces the U.S. to help defend Jerusalem and pushes the Biden administration to engage more deeply in a region it has for years tried to leave. It also risks another humanitarian disaster, punching the aid community at a time when it is already stretched thin and trying to manage the crisis in Gaza. — Politico

Our Take: Netanyahu is completely botching this military campaign. He is making rookie mistakes that even a child playing a real-time strategy war simulation video game understands.

He has failed to properly wrap up the Gaza adventure, or even negotiate a cease-fire with Hamas, and yet he is opening up a second front in the north. Is he trying to get Israel pinched in a double-envelopment? What does he think Hamas is going to do, now that the IDF is reportedly pulling their armor (tanks) out of Rafah and sending them north to join der blitzkrieg?

As Colonel Macgregor has told Judge Napolitano, Hamas has not only replenished all of their lost personnel, they have now expanded their political support into the West Bank. That means that Hamas can theoretically not only launch attacks from the south in Gaza, but also from the east in the West Bank.

That means that the IDF could potentially be facing a THREE front war, with two of them (Hamas) being asymmetric conflicts, which will be extremely difficult to maintain, long-term.

The fight with Hezbollah will be a more conventional affair. In fact, that fight will be more intense and difficult than anything they have faced thus far in Gaza. And that doesn't even account for the Wagner Group, Russia, Iran, or North Korea, all of whom would likely get involved on the ground and fight alongside Hezbollah.

The US is now announcing that they are moving two aircraft carriers into the region. Looks like the stage is set for World War 3...

...accelerate. — GhostofBasedPatrickHenry

~ ~ ~

Biden administration moves toward allowing American military contractors to deploy to Ukraine

The Biden administration is moving toward lifting a de facto ban on American military contractors deploying to Ukraine, four US officials familiar with the matter told CNN, to help the country’s military maintain and repair US-provided weapons systems.

The change would mark another significant shift in the Biden administration’s Ukraine policy, as the US looks for ways to give Ukraine’s military an upper hand against Russia.

The policy is still being worked on by administration officials and has not received final sign-off yet from President Joe Biden, officials said.

“We have not made any decisions and any discussion of this is premature,” said one administration official. “The president is absolutely firm that he will not be sending US troops to Ukraine.”

Once approved, the change would likely be enacted this year, officials said, and would allow the Pentagon to provide contracts to American companies for work inside Ukraine for the first time since Russia invaded in 2022. Officials said they hope it will speed up the maintenance and repairs of weapons systems being used by the Ukrainian military.

Over the last two years, Biden has insisted that all Americans, and particularly US troops, stay far away from the Ukrainian frontlines. The White House has been determined to limit both the danger to Americans and the perception, particularly by Russia, that the US military is engaged in combat there. The State Department has explicitly warned Americans against traveling to Ukraine since 2022. — CNN

Our Take: Moving forward, we should always refer to the CIA as the State Department, to gaslight the naive public into understanding how sinister and duplicitous that agency is.

The State Department is using their mercenaries to attack Russia and destabilize America.

ISIS is not a "radical Islamic terrorist" organization. I know this because I have personally interviewed two separate veterans who served on High-Value Target (HVT) teams, one in Afghanistan and one in Iraq, and both said that in ten years of raiding ISIS safe houses to extract terrorist leaders, they never once found a Quran or any Islamic prayer materials.

They never found any evidence that a single Muslim lived at any of these locations.

What they did find was an abundance of western pornography, video game consoles, DVD's, and other "contraband" that would be extremely difficult to acquire in remote parts of the Middle East—unless you had friends in the West.

President Putin has also said on multiple occasions that ISIS fighters are highly-paid mercenaries, not religious zealots. (This is exactly what the two HVT veterans told me, as well. They go out and find the degenerate losers in any village, and offer them US cash to join their gang.)

The State Department has been waging kinetic war against the Sovereign Alliance for years. Now, it appears they intend to wage kinetic war against the American People on US soil.

Now is not the time to panic. Now is the time to keep a cool head. Those who panic are the ones who will lose. Whenever chaos erupts, always look for the guy in the room who is calm. He is the one who is going to make it. Be that guy. — GhostofBasedPatrickHenry

Biden’s shaky debate has overseas allies bracing for Trump return as US president

Biden’s shaky debate has overseas allies bracing for Trump return as US president

While the first US presidential debate of the 2024 race dwelled little on foreign policy, a shaky performance by President Joe Biden will have America’s allies steeling for the return of Donald Trump, analysts say. — Reuters pic

Friday, 28 Jun 2024 7:41 PM MYT


TOKYO, June 28 — While the first US presidential debate of the 2024 race dwelled little on foreign policy, a shaky performance by President Joe Biden will have America’s allies steeling for the return of Donald Trump, analysts say.

Biden’s supporters had hoped the debate would erase worries that he was too old to serve, but several lawmakers, analysts and investors said the event had given Trump a boost.


“Mr. Trump didn’t win but Mr. Biden might have imploded,” said Kunihiko Miyake, a former Japanese diplomat and now research director at the Canon Institute for Global Studies, a think tank.

“Unlike eight years ago, we are much more prepared, as are other European and Asian allies. Still, Mr. Trump is unpredictable.”


For Japan and South Korea, among the closest US allies in Asia, relations with Trump’s administration were at times strained by his demands for more payments towards military assistance as well as trade tensions.


“The biggest question for Japan would be whether Trump will truly value and maintain the security alliance,” said Takashi Kawakami, a professor at Japan’s Takushoku University in Tokyo.

Peter Lee, research fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul, said the debate had put into “much more stark relief” the possibility of a second Trump administration. Lee said he expected Trump to be “very tough” second time around in pressuring allies to up their defence spending.

Trump also started a tariff war with China, the world’s second largest economy, and has floated tariffs of 60 per cent or higher on all Chinese goods if he wins the November 5 election.

Overseas firms dependent on US markets, such as automakers, would also be wary of the heightened possibility of Trump’s return given the “myriad” of tariff-related policies he imposed during his previous term, said Lee Jae-il, analyst at Eugene Investment & Securities.

“Trump, like a trade war maniac, might not just target China but impose tariffs against other countries as well under the concept of American exceptionalism,” added Stephen Lee, chief economist at Meritz Securities in Seoul.

War in Ukraine

In Europe, Trump’s criticisms of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and demands that other members pay more dominated his previous administration. His scepticism towards Nato is causing further anxiety this time, as Russian’s war in Ukraine has brought conflict to the bloc’s doorstep.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz previously cheered on Biden’s prospects for re-election. But today a senior defence figure in the ruling coalition lamented Biden’s performance and urged Democrats to find another candidate.

“The fact that a man like Trump could become president again because the Democrats are unable to put up a strong candidate against him would be a historic tragedy that the whole world would feel,” Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, of the liberal FDP party, told the Rheinische Post paper.

A spokesperson for Scholz did not comment on the specifics of the debate, but stressed the chancellor valued Biden highly and that Scholz had never spoken to Trump as their terms did not overlap.

During the debate, Trump accused Biden of not standing up to China on trade. He also said China’s Xi Jinping, North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and Russia’s Vladimir Putin “don’t respect” Biden and that he was driving the country “into World War Three”.

Biden retorted by saying Trump’s tariff proposals would result in higher costs for American consumers, and that he “cuddles up” to the likes of Kim and Putin.

Putin has said it made little difference to Russia who was in the White House, and on Friday the Kremlin declined comment on what it said was an internal US matter.

US allies including Japan and Germany have in any case started laying the groundwork for a possible Trump return in recent months.

“The possibility of a Trump comeback may have increased. High tariffs and support for Ukraine will also bring about major changes,” said Kazuhiro Maeshima from the Sophia University in Tokyo.

“The Japanese government has also been anticipating various developments in the event of a Trump and has been gradually taking steps to deal with them, including making contact with people close to Trump.”

‘Trump 2.0’

In Sydney, several Australian officials and experts had attended a workshop titled “Trump 2.0” as the debate was aired.

“The overwhelming feeling from today is that it was a disaster for Biden,” said Peter Dean, a professor at the United States Studies Centre in Sydney who was at the workshop.

“The mood has changed considerably after the debate and the general view is that if you weren’t preparing for a Trump 2.0 then that is the smart play and the smart move now.”

Keir Starmer, the leader of Britain’s Labour party and the frontrunner in an election due next week, was asked on BBC radio if he was concerned about Biden after the debate.

“I’ve got enough on my hands with our own election campaign at the moment...The relationship between the UK and the US is strong, it’s historic, and obviously, it’s above the individuals,” he said. — Reuters

Indira fails in lawsuit against IGP over abducted daughter’s recovery, court says police didn’t neglect duties to find ex-husband

Indira fails in lawsuit against IGP over abducted daughter’s recovery, court says police didn’t neglect duties to find ex-husband

Chairman of the Indira Ghandi Action Team (Ingat), Arun Dorasamy, with lawyer Pavitra Loganathan (right), speak to reporters at the Kuala Lumpur High Court, June 27, 2024. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa

Friday, 28 Jun 2024 4:18 PM MYT

• M. Indira Gandhi failed to declare the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and the government of neglecting a Federal Court order to arrest her ex-husband and return her daughter, Prasana Diksa, abducted 15 years ago.
• The High Court said the IGP's and police's efforts to find Indira's ex-husband showed that they did not neglect their duties or had any ill-intention in this matter.
• The court also said there is evidence that an investigation has been conducted and is still in progress.
• Indira filed the suit in 2020, alleging the IGP had deliberately and negligently disregarded a court order to recover her missing daughter. She was seeking damages for the emotional distress this had caused.

KUALA LUMPUR, June 28 — Hindu mother M. Indira Gandhi today failed at the High Court in her lawsuit to have the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) declared as having failed in his duties in public office, with the court also finding that both the national police chief and the police had not neglected their duties to track down her former husband.

Indira has been separated from her daughter Prasana Diksa for more than 15 years now, after her former husband abducted the child when she was just 11 months old. Prasana Diksa is now aged 16.

Chairman of the Indira Ghandi Action Team (Ingat), Arun Dorasamy, with lawyer Pavitra Loganathan (right), speak to reporters at the Kuala Lumpur High Court, June 27, 2024. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa


This afternoon at the High Court here, Judicial Commissioner Datuk Raja Ahmad Mohzanuddin Shah Raja Mohzan dismissed Indira's lawsuit after considering the Federal Court's 2016 decision related to this case. The judge gave no order for costs.


In delivering the broad grounds of his decision, the judge began by saying that "it is impossible to imagine the agony" that Indira had experienced, with her barely year-old youngest daughter Prasana Diksa taken away from her in 2009.


Noting that Indira's "anguish and pain as a mother has persisted to the present time", the judge also said: "Sadly, the plaintiff has never met her youngest daughter again. it is unknown where the beautiful daughter of hers is located."

Indira and her Muslim convert ex-husband Muhammad Riduan Abdullah had married as non-Muslims, but the latter took the youngest child away before converting himself and the couple's three children without Indira's knowledge.

Riduan had obtained custody in the Shariah court over the three children, while the civil court granted custody of all children to Indira.

In May 2014, the civil High Court in Ipoh also issued a committal order for Riduan to be arrested for contempt of court over his failure to return Prasana Diksa to Indira, and also issued a recovery order by directing the police to find the youngest child.

Indira subsequently obtained in the High Court in September 2014 a mandamus order which compelled the IGP to enforce the two court orders, with the Court of Appeal later dismissing the mandamus order and the Federal Court in April 2016 restoring the mandamus order for the arrest of Riduan.

In this lawsuit, Indira's claim was that the IGP had failed to perform a legal duty to enforce the mandamus order by failing to enforce the High Court in Ipoh's two court orders: to arrest her Muslim convert ex-husband Muhammad Riduan Abdullah for contempt of court and to retrieve Prasana Diksa.

Indira claimed that the IGP's conduct had caused her extended separation from Prasana Diksa and enabled her ex-husband to evade capture.

In other words, Indira was claiming that the IGP had committed a tort of misfeasance in public office or failed to perform his legal duties in relation to three court orders (the mandamus order, committal order and recovery order.)

But the High Court in Kuala Lumpur today noted the Federal Court had in its April 29, 2016 decision said the civil High Court could not issue a recovery order for Prasana Diksa. The judge today also said the Federal Court had said the civil High Court in Ipoh could not compel the IGP to execute the recovery order due to the existence of the two conflicting custody orders by the Shariah and civil High Court.

The judge today concluded that the Federal Court's decision had the effect of upholding the Court of Appeal's dismissal of the mandamus order or order to compel the IGP to recover Prasana Diksa: "Thus I find there was no mandamus order issued to the IGP to enforce or execute the recovery order."

The judge today also said the Federal Court's decision had the effect of setting aside the civil High Court's order to recover Prasana Diksa, saying: "This conclusion is based on the fact that the Federal Court found that the civil High Court could not direct the IGP to execute the recovery order."

The judge then agreed with the Attorney-General's Chambers' view that Indira's claim against the IGP for failure to perform his duties by failing to execute the recovery order to find her daughter is "clearly a non-starter and misconceived."

As for Indira's claim that the IGP failed to enforce the committal order to arrest her former husband, the High Court today said the Federal Court in the same April 2016 decision had observed that case was no longer just about the couple's private rights on child custody but has become a matter of challenge to the administration of justice since it involved the ex-husband's wilful disobedience of a court order.

After looking at the Federal Court's decision, the High Court said the issue of the police's enforcement of the order to arrest Riduan does not affect Indira's personal rights as it has become a public law matter involving the administration of justice.

The judge concluded that Indira cannot proceed with her lawsuit against the IGP in relation to the order to arrest Riduan: "As a result of making such findings, I find that the plaintiff is no longer entitled to pursue her claim based on her private rights as a result of the IGP's alleged failure to execute the warrant of committal."

After dismissing Indira's claims against the IGP based on the alleged failure to enforce the orders to arrest Riduan and to recover her child, the High Court today went on to dismiss Indira's claim against the IGP over the alleged failure to enforce the mandamus order.

Noting that Indira had claimed that the police had conducted a fake investigation and that the police had not given evidence of their investigations outside Malaysia in relation to this case, the judge then went on to examine the testimony given by then IGP Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador in February 2024 in this lawsuit.

The judge cited various testimony by Abdul Hamid including that the police had tried to locate Riduan since the High Court in Ipoh's September 2014 mandamus order and had searched for him in parts of Perak and Kelantan.

The judge also noted that Assistant Superintendent Yap Siew Cheng as the senior investigating officer had tried to find Riduan's updated address by asking for information from the Employees Provident Fund (EPF), the Inland Revenue Board (LHDN), the Election Commission, the Perak Education Department and the National Registration Department's Perak branch.

As for Indira's claim that the IGP was aware of Riduan's whereabouts when the police chief in January 2020 said he was looking for a "happy ending" with an amicable settling of the matter for all parties involved, the judge today concluded that the "IGP had the general perception" that the ex-husband "was in southern Thailand based on intelligence reports and that he felt obliged to provide this information to the media" and noted the IGP had clarified that all processes have to be handled through the court system.

The judge said the IGP's testimony showed he was committed to solving the case and felt sympathy to Indira to the point of sending his officers to convince her to meet him, and said he had no doubt in accepting the IGP's testimony that the police had asked for the International Criminal Police Organization's (Interpol) help to find Riduan.

Noting that Indira still has to show malice or bad faith by the police in order to succeed in her claim of the IGP's tort of misfeasance or failure to perform legal duties, the High Court today concluded that "neither the IGP nor the PDRM have any ill-intentions in this matter". This was based on the High Court's acceptance of the testimony by Abdul Hamid and Yap in this lawsuit regarding the entire investigation process.

Among other things, the High Court said it was impossible to conclude that the IGP and the police did not attempt to locate the ex-husband.

The High Court also said this case was not a scenario where the ex-husband was "roaming around Kuala Lumpur or any other area in the presence of the police, without the police taking any action despite noticing his appearance", and that he would have viewed that factor in Indira's favour if that was the case.

Instead, the High Court said the facts indicated that the ex-husband's location was unknown and that there was evidence to suggest he was in Thailand at some point in time.

The High Court then concluded that the evidence suggests all the efforts made by the IGP and the police did not indicate "any neglect of their duties".

"Furthermore, based on the evidence available to me, I conclude that the IGP and PDRM exercised their duties in the manner they considered to be most appropriate. The manner in which they conducted their investigation is within their wide discretion, and I am in no position to second-guess them.

"Essentially, what matters to me is that there is evidence that an investigation has been conducted and is still in progress," the judge said, before concluding that Indira's lawsuit is dismissed.

On October 28, 2020, Indira filed the civil lawsuit against the Inspector-General of Police, the Royal Malaysia Police, the Home Ministry and the Malaysian government.

In this lawsuit, Indira had sought for a declaration that the IGP has committed the tort of nonfeasance in public office, and a declaration that the other three respondents are vicariously liable for the tort of nonfeasance committed by the IGP, and for compensation in the form of general damages, aggravated damages and exemplary damages.

Indira was claiming for general damages for the pain and anxiety she suffered due to constant worry over Prasana’s safety and wellbeing, and exemplary damages against all four respondents for failing to enforce the court orders.

Israeli official admits 9/11 was an Israeli operation?

 

Thanks 'MF':

Post

Conversation

Cynthia McKinney PhD

@cynthiamckinney

Well, well, well . . . Israeli official admits 9/11 was an Israeli operation?

Israeli Official Admits: 'We Orchestrated 9/11 To Sabotage America'

From rumble.com

Readers added context they thought people might want to know

There is no Israeli official mentioned or quoted in this conspiratorial video as the title suggests rumble.com/v53l84i-israel…

Context is written by people who use X, and appears when rated helpful by others. Find out more.

12:07 pm · 27 Jun 2024

·

38.3K

Views

Extracts from Wikipedia:

In September 2001, The New York Times and Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that four hours after the attack, the FBI arrested five Israelis who had been filming the smoking skyline from the roof of a white van in the parking lot of an apartment building, for "puzzling behavior". They were charged with illegally residing in the United States and working there without permits. The Israelis were said to have pulled into the parking lot after the destruction of the first tower and videotaped the remainder of the disaster with what was interpreted as cries of "joy and mockery".^[71][72][73] Police found the van and a search revealed $4,700 in cash hidden, along with foreign passports and a boxcutter which aroused suspicions and led to the detention of the occupants. The men were held in detention for more than 2 months, during which time they were subjected to interrogation and polygraph tests, before being deported back to Israel; one of the men (Paul Kurzberg) refused to take the test for 10 weeks, and then failed it.^[74]

The five men worked at the company Urban Moving Systems Inc, owned and operated by Dominik Suter. After the men were arrested the FBI searched their offices and questioned Suter, however Suter fled to Israel before he could be questioned further. Eventually, Suter's name appeared on the May 2002 FBI Suspect List, along with the Sep 11 hijackers and other suspected extremists.^[75]

According to a former CIA chief of operations for counterterrorism Vince Cannistraro, there was speculation that Urban Moving Systems may have been a front for an intelligence operation investigating fund-raising networks channeling money to Hamas and Islamic Jihad. On March 15, 2002, The Forward claimed that the FBI had concluded that the van's driver, Paul Kurzberg, and his brother Sivan, were indeed Mossad operatives, who were in America "spying on local Arabs".^[76] ABC news cited this report on June 21, 2002, adding that the FBI had concluded that the five Israelis had no foreknowledge of the attacks.^[77]