By Paul Homewood

Britain’s switch to green energy will spark a jobs catastrophe if it is built on imports from China, one of Labour’s biggest union backers has warned.

Gary Smith, the general secretary of the GMB union, said the UK’s progress in cutting carbon emissions so far was largely based on the “decimation” of manufacturing industries such as steelmaking, creating “huge social and economic scars”.

He accused successive governments of failing to deliver tens of thousands of jobs that were promised from the expansion of wind and solar. He argued that goods needed to support new green industries should not be purchased cheaply from China.

In a stark wake-up call for Labour, Mr Smith also warned that Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, risked making the situation worse with a crackdown on North Sea oil and his plans to decarbonise UK power by 2030.

His comments come just weeks after massive job losses were confirmed at the Port Talbot steelworks in South Wales, where owner Tata Steel is transitioning from ageing blast furnaces to cleaner electric arc furnaces.

Mr Smith, who has led the GMB since 2021, said: “Climate change is a huge problem, we accept that. But the UK has essentially reduced its carbon emissions by putting people out of manufacturing jobs and moving the work to countries like China.

“Our renewables infrastructure is being built in state-owned or oil and gas wealth fund-backed yards in China and the Middle East, and China obviously burns a huge amount of coal to produce the steel required for that.

“It is not morally defensible. And so for British politicians to go around the world talking about climate change and the threat it poses, well – we’ve simply embarked on a policy of exporting jobs and importing virtue.

“So I doubt many people in other advanced economies think that approach to decarbonisation has been a sensible one. It has hollowed out our communities, it’s decimated our industrial base and it’s left huge social and economic scars across the UK.”

China as a ‘huge, non-market actor’

Labour ministers are grappling with concerns that the rush towards green energy risks unintentionally damaging British industry.

Since 1990, manufacturing’s share of the economy – which is dominated by services – has decreased from 17pc to 9pc, according to research by the House of Commons library.

And there are fears that the decline could continue. Many companies already complain that UK electricity prices are much higher than in Europe and the US, and they face being clobbered by higher carbon taxes and green levies on power.

This is a particular problem for businesses that rely on gas for most of their energy, as they will soon have to shift to electricity which is far more expensive. In 2019, the cost of industrial electricity was roughly six times that of gas, according to government data, with almost half of the total made up of network charges and taxes.

Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, has repeatedly insisted that “decarbonisation must never mean de-industrialisation”.

But in an interview with The Telegraph, Mr Smith said Labour’s own policies risked accelerating industrial decline.

“This Labour Government has inherited an absolute hospital pass from the Tories, [when] a lot of difficult decisions were kicked down the line,” he said.

“But the problem is Labour’s policy positions are in danger of compounding what is already a very problematic position – they’re going to make things worse if they’re not careful.”

He added: “We’ve got this world view that’s all about clean electricity and the charge towards that. But the truth is, it’s not going to happen in the way that people think it is.

“In areas like wind power, we have been promised tens of thousands of jobs repeatedly by successive governments. Now we hear the same from the Labour Government.

“But these jobs have never materialised because it’s simply a lot cheaper for people to produce the infrastructure in places like China.”

Chinese wind turbine manufacturers still account for a relatively small slice of the European market, which remains dominated by giants such as Denmark’s Vestas and Germany’s Enercon, Nordex and Siemens Gamesa – the latter of which has a factory in Hull.

But amid booming production at home – supported by state aid from Beijing – Chinese companies are seeking to win more projects abroad with ultra-cheap prices. Zhongshan-based Mingyang Smart Energy Group is among the suppliers chosen for a host of wind projects in the North Sea, recently pledging to open a factory in Scotland.

Meanwhile, wind farm developers have privately argued that to hit the Government’s 2030 clean power target, ministers may have to relax – rather than strengthen – rules designed to ensure that turbines are made with “local content” from the UK.

Mr Smith said the GMB did not support tackling Chinese exports through “protectionist” measures such as trade tariffs, such as those applied by Joe Biden, the US president.

But he called for the Government to introduce a carbon border tax which would penalise imports of steel or other products shipped from China that had been produced using carbon-intensive processes.

Mr Smith warned: “Protectionism is not in the interest of workers or our economy. We’re a trading nation. But this is not fair trade and we need to stop pretending it is.

“There is just a fundamental challenge with not having a level playing field and competing against a huge, non-market actor like China.

“There needs to be a debate over a carbon border tax and as a new world order starts to take shape, there has to be a debate about the national security implications of having no industrial base.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/25/milibands-net-zero-plans-risk-jobs-catastrophe-warns-gmb/

Hussein Askary

Washington has maintained control over Iraq’s oil revenues since its illegal 2003 invasion – a financial and economic subjugation that undermines Iraqi sovereignty and denies it access to its own national treasure.

In July, the Iraqi Central Bank halted all foreign transactions in Chinese Yuan, succumbing to intense  pressure  from the US Federal Reserve to do so. The shutdown followed a brief period during which Baghdad had allowed merchants to trade in Yuan, an initiative intended to mitigate excessive US restrictions on Iraq’s access to US dollars.

While this Yuan-based trade excluded Iraq’s oil exports, which remained in US dollars, Washington viewed it as a threat to its financial dominance over the Persian Gulf state. But how has the US managed to exert such total control over Iraqi financial policies?

The answer lies in 2003, with mechanisms established following the illegal US-led invasion of Iraq.

A legacy of ‘Operation Iraqi Freedom’

Since the signing of Executive Order 13303 (EO13303) by President George W Bush on 22 May 2003, all revenues from Iraq’s oil sales have been funneled directly into an account at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

EO13303, titled “Protection of the Development Fund for Iraq and Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest,” has been renewed annually by every US president, including Joe Biden in 2024. This executive order essentially places control over Iraq’s oil revenues under the discretion of the US President, leaving Baghdad with limited control over its resources and earnings.

The roots of Iraq’s financial dependence on the US stretch back to the 1990s. Following Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, UN Security Council Resolution 661 imposed severe economic sanctions to isolate Iraq from international trade. These sanctions, exacerbated by former president Saddam Hussein’s refusal to comply with withdrawal demands, crippled the Iraqi economy.

Control over Iraq’s finances

UNSC Resolution 687, passed in 1991 after the Persian Gulf War, extended these sanctions while introducing the controversial “Oil for Food” program. Although it allowed Iraq to sell oil in exchange for humanitarian goods like food and medicine, the sanctions resulted in immense human suffering, with over one million Iraqis, half of them children, dying during this period. Then-US secretary of state Madeleine Albright infamously defended the sanctions in a 1996 interview, stating that the deaths were “worth the price.”

Following the invasion of Iraq, the US occupation of the country became a reality after the collapse of Saddam’s government. Faced with a fait accompli, the UN Security Council had to accept the new status quo.

According to International Humanitarian Law, occupation forces – in this case, the US and UK – become responsible for the well-being of the populations they occupy. So, UNSC Resolution 1483 was issued on 22 May 2003 to establish the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) as Iraq’s administrator and create the Development Fund for Iraq (DFI) to manage Iraqi oil revenues.

Note that Resolution 1483 did not mention the US Federal Reserve as the depositary of Iraqi funds, nor did it assign a location for the DFI headquarters or account. In fact, the resolution specifically states directed that the DFI should “be held by the Central Bank of Iraq.” It was the CPA, led by Paul Bremer, that decided unilaterally to house the account at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

This decision allowed the US government to maintain tight control over Iraq’s oil revenues. From that point until today, the Iraqi Ministry of Finance has had to submit requests for funds to the US Treasury, which then approves or denies these requests based on its own criteria.

This monthly transfer of US dollars – which are literally flown into Baghdad in pallets of hard cash – determines Iraq and its 40-million-population’s ability to pay for basic needs like salaries, food, and medicine.

Blackmailing Iraq

Whenever Washington feels that Iraq is not compliant with US regional goals, these fund transfers can be delayed or reduced. In January 2020, for instance, after the Iraqi Parliament voted to expel US troops following the assassination of Iranian Quds Force General Qasem Soleimani and Iraqi Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) Deputy Commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the Trump administration threatened to freeze Iraq’s access to its oil revenues.

Today, Iraq’s financial situation remains dire. Despite having oil revenues piling up in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York – estimated today at around $120 billion – Iraq is burdened with a growing debt that matches this amount.

The country’s inability to control its own funds has prevented long-term reconstruction and development, forcing it to rely on international loans. Ironically, Iraq has also become one of the largest holders of US Treasury bills, with investments totaling $41 billion in 2023.

In addition to its economic challenges, Iraq has been drawn into the escalating regional conflict amid the ongoing Gaza war and the intensification of Israel’s aggression against Lebanon. Iraqi resistance forces have actively participated in military strikes against Israeli targets in solidarity with both Palestinian factions and Hezbollah.

The involvement of Iraq in this conflict is not isolated. Iraqi factions have routinely targeted US military bases in Iraq and Syria – viewed as illegal foreign forces subjugating Iraq’s sovereignty – contributing to a broader escalation that has drawn in actors from across West Asia.

These troops have vowed to continue their campaign against both US and Israeli targets, aligning their actions with the region’s Axis of Resistance.

The UN shutters DFI, but the US refuses to comply

Iraq ceased to be under occupation, at least formally, when it signed the “Strategic Cooperation Framework” agreement with the US in 2008, which says that American forces are present in Iraq only at the request of the Iraqi government.

Attempts by the UN to restore Iraq’s control over its finances have largely failed. In 2010, UNSC Resolution 1956 demanded the closure of the DFI by no later than 30 June 2011 and the transfer of all proceeds to the Iraqi government.

Despite these clear legal directives, the DFI account remains under US control at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in defiance of the UN Security Council resolution. Worse yet, enduring US dominance over Iraq’s financial resources has deeply exacerbated the corruption and dysfunction plaguing the country.

Ending the work of the UN International Advisory and Monitoring Board of the DFI was one way of obscuring the massive corruption and theft of resources by American and Iraqi actors.

The unprecedented corruption that was spread throughout Iraq and its institutions can be laid at the doorstep of this policy. The gargantuan amounts of hard cash that are flown into the country monthly, the unaccounted-for astronomical sums that disappear from various ministries, and the dollar exchange shops (banks) set up by political groups that thrived alongside the US occupation forces have turned Iraq into one of the most corrupt countries in the world.

Iraq’s dependence on the US for access to its own oil revenues, combined with its growing debt has significant impacts on its sovereignty, while its involvement in the regional war also will have implications on its relations with the US.

While Iraq may no longer be under formal occupation, the mechanisms of financial control established after the 2003 invasion persist. These controls not only limit Iraq’s economic development but also entangle it in broader geopolitical struggles.

Today, both the US Administration of Joe Biden and the Iraqi government led by Mohammad Shia al-Sudani – which has not taken steps to free Iraq’s sovereign funds – can be considered in violation of United Nations Resolution 1956 issued in 2010.

[…]

Via https://libya360.wordpress.com/2024/09/25/why-does-the-us-still-control-every-penny-of-iraqi-oil-revenues/

By Theara Coleman, The Week US,  24 September 2024

With artificial intelligence putting a damper on its clean energy goals, Microsoft is turning to nuclear power in a first-of-its-kind exclusive deal with a nuclear plant. The massive amount of energy needed to power artificial intelligence has contributed to a resurgence of interest in nuclear power, a turn for an industry on its way out over the last decade. But with Big Tech closing in on nuclear plants, some wonder what will be left for everyone else.

The symbolism of the deal

Three Mile Island, the dormant Pennsylvania nuclear plant at the center of the Microsoft deal, became “shorthand for the risks posed by nuclear energy after one of the plant’s two reactors partly melted down in 1979,” said The New York Times. The other reactor operated safely for years before ultimately closing down for economic reasons five years ago. With the Microsoft deal, a “revival is at hand.” Because of artificial intelligence, the tech giant needs massive amounts of electricity for its growing number of data centers, and the company has agreed to use as much power as possible from the plant over the next 20 years. The plant’s owner, Constellation Energy, promises to spend $1.6 billion refurbishing the reactor, hoping to restart it by 2028 with regulatory approval. The deal marks the first time “Microsoft has secured a dedicated, 100% nuclear facility for its use,” the Times said.

“The symbolism is enormous,” Joseph Dominguez, the chief executive of Constellation, said to the Times. Even though Three Mile Island “was the site of the industry’s greatest failure,” it can now be a “place of rebirth.”

[…]

Unfortunately, tech’s bullish approach to securing nuclear power has some experts worried there will not be enough to go around. The owners of nearly a third of the country’s nuclear power plants were in talks with tech companies to meet the demands of the AI boom, The Wall Street Journal said. These deliberations could potentially “remove stable power generation from the grid while reliability concerns are rising across much of the U.S,” and the electricity demand is driven up by new tech like AI, the outlet said. Instead of helping to add new green energy solutions to meet their “soaring power needs,” tech companies would be “effectively diverting existing electricity resources.” That could raise prices for other customers and “hold back emission-cutting goals,” said the Journal.

Amazon Web Services closed a similar deal earlier this year, acquiring a data center campus connected to Talen Energy Corp.’s nuclear power plant on the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania for $650 million. The arrangement raised concerns among clean energy advocates and regulators, specifically the the state’s consumer advocate, Patrick Cicero, who said he was worried about cost and reliability if big companies snatch up all the plants. “Never before could anyone say to a nuclear-power plant, we’ll take all the energy you can give us,” Cicero said to the Journal.

https://theweek.com/tech/microsoft-three-mile-island-nuclear-power-big-tech

Fluoride Action Network

History has been made. After 7 years of pursuing legal action against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the risk posed to the developing brain by the practice of water fluoridation, the United States District Court of the Northern District of California has just ruled on behalf of the Fluoride Action Network and the plaintiffs in our precedent-setting court case. A U.S. federal court has now deemed fluoridation an “unreasonable risk” to the health of children, and the EPA will be forced to regulate it as such. The decision is written very strongly in our favor.

Below is an excerpt from the introduction of the ruling:

“The issue before this Court is whether the Plaintiffs have established by a preponderance of the evidence that the fluoridation of drinking water at levels typical in the United States poses an unreasonable risk of injury to health of the public within the meaning of Amended TSCA. For the reasons set forth below, the Court so finds. Specifically, the Court finds that fluoridation of water at 0.7 milligrams per liter (“mg/L”) – the level presently considered “optimal” in the United States – poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children..the Court finds there is an unreasonable risk of such injury, a risk sufficient to require the EPA to engage with a regulatory response…One thing the EPA cannot do, however, in the face of this Court’s finding, is to ignore that risk.”

In this moment we want to recognize attorney Michael Connett for pursuing this case and leading the effort every step of the way. He’s a true superhero to all of us here at FAN. Many other amazing team members were also involved in making this a reality and deserve great appreciation and thanks, including our co-plaintiffs and all of you who donated and spread the word about our case. Take a moment to celebrate this momentous occasion, wherever you are. After 7 years, we all deserve it.

[…]

Via https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/fluoride-drinking-water-poses-risk-merit-new-epa-114106787#:~:text=U.S.%20District%20Judge%20Edward%20Chen,risk%20that%20it%20could%20be.

Episode 9 The Crusades Clash of Cultures 1095-1271

The Middle Ages Around the World

Dr Joyce E Salisbury

Film Review

People’s Crusade (1096) – responding to Byzantine emperor Alexius’s request for European mercenaries to defend Byzantium against the Seljek Turks, in 1095 Pope Urban II called for a European crusade to seize Jerusalem from Arabs who had ruled it for centuries. In 1096, thousands of poor people with no military training or weapons set out for Constantinople, raiding villages for food and persecuting Jews along the way. When they arrived in Constantinople, Emperor Alexius transported them across the Bosporus Sea to Asia Minor, where they were killed by Turks.

First Crusade (1096-1099 – The European knights who embarked on crusade a few months later were more successful. After conquering Edessa (a city in southwest Turkey) and Antioch (formerly part of Syria, now part of Turkey), they triumphantly (after a five-week siege) triumphantly entered Jerusalem. After they established four Christian states in the Middle East: the county of Edessa, the Principality of Antioch, the County of Tripoli (in modern day Lebanon) and the Kingdom of Jerusalem. With the advent of Christian control of Jerusalem, the Holy Land became a common destination for European pilgrims. This would lead to the formation of the Knights Templar in 1120, a new religious order in which so-called Christian monks were allowed to carry arms and kill people. The Knights Templar mainly protected pilgrims from bandits and safeguarded their money by allowing them to deposit money prior to departure and withdraw it on reaching Jerusalem (making the Knights Templar fabulously wealthy because many pilgrims died of hunger or disease before reaching Jerusalem.

Second Crusade (1147-1149) – After Zengi from Aleppo attacked Edessa, Pope Eugenius III called for a second crusade led by the European kings. Although Conrad III of Germany, Louis VII and Eleanor of Aquitaine all made preparations, the effort was abandoned in 1149.

Third Crusade (1189-1192) – called after the Kurdish leader Saladin reconquered Jerusalem in 1187. Frederick Barbosa (the Holy Roman Emperor) set out on crusade but drowned and King Richard (the Lionhearted of England) was forced to retreat after losing too many knights. On reaching Jerusalem, Phillip II of France negotiated with Saladin that the Muslims controlling Jerusalem would allow Christian pilgrims to continue to visit holy shrines there.

Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) – was a strange expedition, in which the crusaders, instead of heading for Jerusalem, sacked the cities of Zara and Constantinople at the behest of the doge of Venice. Venice would rule Zara and Constantinople as new colonies for 50 years before the Byzantine empire won them back.

Territory controlled by the city-state of Venice

Children’s Crusade (1212) – consisted of 1000 children age 7-14, who were sold into slavery by unscrupulous ship captains.

Fifth Crusade (1217-1221) – Called by Pope Honorius III to attack Egypt. Capturing one significant city, the Europeans ultimately abandoned it due to heat intolerance and disease.

Sixth Crusade (1228-29) – Led by Emperor Frederick II after the pope communicated him, who successfully negotiated with Sultan al Kalam that Jerusalem, Nazareth and Bethlehem would be free unfortified city open to all religions

Seventh Crusade (1248-1254) – The first of two unsuccessful crusades led by Louis XIX (St Louis) of France, who aimed to reconquer Jerusalem by attacking Egypt, now the eat of Muslim power. He was defeated by the Sultan’s armies.

Eighth Crusade (1270) – The French king Louis XIX’s attempt to besiege Tunisia ended with his death.

Film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/13172786/13172805

In an interview with Sky News Arabia on September 20, 2024, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov expressed skepticism, but was straight to the point about strategic expansion of BRICS, an association comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.

Under Russia’s BRICS presidency which began January 2024, Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates became the second wave of the newest members to join BRICS. South Africa ascended in 2011 under China’s initiative.

Tracking down the history, operations and achievements, Lavrov acknowledged in his interview that the BRICS association is consolidating its positions and cooperating with a number of countries. At the same time, this association is facing certain challenges. It is necessary to promote collaboration based on a balance of interests, and most importantly, BRICS functions on the basis of consensus. The consensus principle primarily aims at finding agreements that reflect the mutual accord of all participants. This is not easy. The more partners, the harder it is to search for accord. It takes more time to finalise any consensus-based agreement than a vote-based solution.

Accrding to Lavrov, this provides a solid foundation for developing a strategic partnership within the association. Currently, BRICS comprises 10 countries; their number has doubled compared to last year. More than 30 countries have already submitted applications for interaction or membership in the association. At the summit to be held in Kazan in October, one of the main items on the agenda will be the consideration of applications from states that wish to interact and partner with BRICS.

BRICS expansion has sparked debates and discussion these several years, long before Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were finally accepted on the condition of “concensus” by BRICS members during the South African summit in August 2023. Lavrov has already indicated and repeated explained the “suspension” of membership into BRICS+. Instead of membership, Lavrov mentioned that potentical countries can only only be accepted as a “partner group” with simple consideration to support and interact with BRICS association. The prescription is very simple – BRICS is an association based on a respectful attitude towards each other and on mutual consideration to promote collaboration based on a balance of interests and strictly adhere to the principle of the sovereign equality of states and non-interference in each other’s domestic affairs.

In practical terms, Russia has suspended BRICS+ expansion, in other words BRICS+ flagship policy of boosting its numerical strength, with unique reports indicating that there were more than 30 countries worldwide – Latin America, Asia and Africa. At South Africa’s 15th Summit held under President Cyril Ramaphosa, several countries had expressed interest in ascending the BRICS association, but only five (5) finally joined. The official documents, as stipulated by the guidelines, set no concrete criteria or rules for admission except using the flexible term “consensus” – a general agreement at the summit which was utilized in the selection process. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian President Vladimir Putin have described (designated) this circle of BRICS+ friends into … what is now referred popularly to as “partner members” which starkly reflected in official documents.

At the Primakov Readings held in June 2024, the extraordinary key point was an announcement by Sergey Lavrov over ‘suspension’ of BRICS new membership. In mid-June 2024, Lavrov hosted the BRICS Foreign Ministers Council in Russia’s Nizhny Novgorod. The BRICS Foreign Ministers decided to suspend admission of new members and this step reflected in the final documents.

Local and foreign media reported Lavrov’s statement:

“By the overwhelming majority, the ten members decided to ‘take a pause’ with new members, to ‘take in’ the new members who have doubled the association. At the same time, we are working of categories of partner countries as stages ahead of a full-fledged membership.”

Lavrov said BRICS would use the pause to draw up a list of categories for BRICS partner countries that would serve as stepping stones toward full membership. Understandably, BRICS+ has decided to “take a pause’ in terms of admitting new members. The partner-country model in line with paragraph 92 of the Johannesburg II Declaration.

In a media release after June 10-11, BRICS foreign ministers meeting, noted prospects for promoting strategic partnership within BRICS, including the establishment of a new category of “partner countries”  and suspension of new members from the Global South and Global East. As per the agreements reached at the BRICS Summit in Johannesburg in 2023, the ministers reviewed the efforts to coordinate the modalities of the new category, BRICS partner countries.

Within the stipulated guidelines, Russia took over the BRICS one-year-long presidency on January 1, 2024. The initial four BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) met in New York City in September 2006 at the margins of the UN Assembly, but held its first full-scale meeting in Yekaterinburg, Russia, on 16 June 2009. BRICS has experienced two phases of expansion. In 2011, South Africa joined the association, which included Brazil, Russia, India, and China.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/brics-expansion-debates/5868547

Al-Ahed News

The “Israeli” media confirmed, commenting on the missile fire executed by the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon on Sunday, September 22, 2024, that Hezbollah has effectively “paralyzed the north”.

Israeli media acknowledged the death of a settler in a “traffic accident” while fleeing from a missile fired by Hezbollah in one of the northern settlements. Four other settlers were reported injured due to Hezbollah’s fire, and “Rambam” Hospital in occupied Haifa announced the arrival of five casualties.

Additionally, two buildings in “Kiryat Bialik” were damaged, and an “Israeli” media platform reported that entire homes in the settlement and surrounding areas were ablaze. The enemy also admitted that a missile fell in the “Krayot” region, north of Haifa, resulting in fires breaking out in the city and its surroundings due to the missile barrages launched by Hezbollah.

“Israeli” media reported that Hezbollah launched over 120 missiles toward the north in recent hours, with approximately 30 of those aimed at the “Krayot” region since morning. Sirens were continuously sounding across the north, particularly in several industrial areas.

“Israeli” Army Radio emphasized that Hezbollah “carefully chose the targets it aimed at and the counter-message it intended to convey.”

Hezbollah Expands Missile Launch Range

In light of recent developments, “Israeli” media confirmed that Hezbollah has “expanded the range of missile launches to 60 km,” putting two million settlers within the range of Resistance fire. “Israeli” Channel 13 noted that areas targeted by Hezbollah missiles, such as Nasiriyah, Afula and “Migdal HaEmek”, were not included in the guidelines provided to settlers as a precaution against Hezbollah strikes. This indicates that “Israel’s” estimates had ruled out those areas as potential targets.

“Israeli” media also reported that the occupation military may impose tighter restrictions on Haifa and its surroundings due to the expanded range of missile barrages from Lebanon. It was announced that school sessions would be suspended in Akka [“Akko”], Tabariyya [“Tiberias”], “Nahariya”, and Safad [“Safed”] following the missile strikes on the north.

These reports followed the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon’s operation, which targeted the “Ramat David” base and airport twice early on Sunday, firing dozens of Fadi 1 and Fadi 2 missiles in support of Gaza and in response to the “Israeli” recurring attacks on various Lebanese regions, which resulted in civilian casualties.

The Resistance also targeted the “Israeli” Rafael military-industrial complex, known for its electronic means and equipment, located in the “Zvolen” region north of the occupied city of Haifa, using dozens of Fadi 1, Fadi 2 and Katyusha rockets.

The Resistance emphasized that this operation was conducted in support of Gaza and as an initial response to the brutal massacre committed by the occupation in various Lebanese regions on Tuesday and Wednesday, targeting pagers and wireless devices.

Field sources confirmed that the “Fadi 1 and Fadi 2 missiles are being used for the first time” since the onset of confrontations on October 8, 2023. Notably, the support front that “Israeli” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seeks to halt “is expanding in terms of range and targets”.

Yemen Warns of “Surprises” Deep Inside Zionist “Settlers’ Den”

Yemen’s Defense Minister, Mohammed Nasser Al-Atafi, announced that the country’s armed forces have prepared surprises for enemy forces, affirming that they will persist in striking targets within “Israeli”-occupied territories using various types of weaponry.

“Military institutions responsible for the preparation, training and renovation of our military-industrial systems in order to create new readiness for changing developments are speedily underway,” he said, speaking on Sunday at the graduation ceremony at officers’ college.

“We are aiming to train a military-defense force capable of imposing its political and military equations [on the enemy] and defend the sovereignty of the Republic of Yemen all across its realm,” He added.

“We are aiming to continuously strike painful blows deep inside the Zionist enemy’s [military formations].”

“This way, before the enemy conducts more strikes, it will think about the many repercussions of its stupidity,” Al-Atafi noted.

He went on to say that Yemenis were monitoring the details of the political, military and geopolitical variables in the region, adding that the armed forces of the country were now ready to face all challenges.

The Yemeni defense minister said the country’s armed forces had already “knocked on the doors of occupied ‘Jaffa’ [Yafa] and Umm al-Rashrash [port of ‘Eilat’]” and were now ready to destroy the Zionists’ “den.”

He also said, “We will not hesitate to attack the enemy with ballistic, hypersonic and cruise missiles, in addition to drones. We are prepared for any sort of confrontation.”

Al-Atafi said, “We vow that more surprises are in store for the criminal Zionist enemy that will cool the hearts of the true believers.”

The minister concluded by warning that “those who have kept the [Yemeni] nation under siege for the 10^th year, and are hostile towards them” that they “must understand that our strategic patience has decreased and this is dangerous for them.”

He called on the enemy aggressors and attackers in Yemen to make plans to exit Yemen without more ado. “We warn them that they will taste the bitterness of our military forces preparations.”

In similar remarks, the head of Yemen’s Supreme Political Council, Field Marshal Mahdi Mohammad Al-Mashat said on Friday that Yemen’s enemies are to be shocked in coming days.

Al-Mashat praised the Yemeni armed forces’ success in striking “Israeli” military targets inside “Tel Aviv”.

He noted the recently launched Palestine 2 hypersonic missile had bypassed and penetrated all layers of American, British and “Israeli” aerial systems.

“Our operations will continue as long as the aggression and siege on Gaza persist,” he said.

Al-Mashat also reiterated Yemen’s unwavering and principled stance in support of the oppressed Palestinian people until the occupied land is liberated from “Israeli” occupation.

“No power in the world will deter us from this decision, regardless of the cost or the challenges,” he added.

Al-Mashat also emphasized Yemen’s full commitment to achieving a just and honorable peace.

“The only solution is to approach peace with sincere intentions,” he concluded.

Yemeni Ansarullah resistance movement’s leader, Sayyed Abdul-Malik Al-Houthi, blamed the United States on Saturday for “Israeli” crimes in Palestine.

He said Washington offers its full support to the “Israeli” entity and is willing to act against any Arab country.

The Yemeni nation has voiced its full support for Palestine’s struggle against the “Israeli” occupation.

[…]

Via https://libya360.wordpress.com/2024/09/24/hezbollah-paralyzes-the-north-two-million-israeli-settlers-in-firing-zone/