IDF suspends entire reserve battalion after CNN crew attack, in unprecedented disciplinary move

An unprecedented decision by the Israel Defense Forces has seen an entire reserve battalion suspended from activity following an incident in which a CNN crew was attacked, sparking international outrage.

The IDF suspended all soldiers from Reserve 941st Battalion, known as “Netzah Yisrael,” whose members are graduates of the Netzah Yehuda framework.

The incident occurred while a CNN team was covering what was described as an illegal settler takeover of nearby land. According to reports, the journalists were confronted by IDF troops who attempted to halt their work, aimed weapons at them, and in one case placed a cameraman in a chokehold, damaging his equipment.

During the confrontation, soldiers reportedly told the journalists that all of the West Bank belongs to Jews and said they were seeking revenge for the killing of Yehuda Sherman, who police said was murdered in a ramming attack last Saturday.

Keep reading

US ‘worked directly’ with terrorists in Syria on Israel’s behalf – Trump’s ex-counterterrorism chief

The US “worked directly with Al-Qaeda” and Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) to topple former President Bashar Assad and destroy Syria, US President Donald Trump’s former counterterrorism chief, Joe Kent, has said.

Kent, who resigned as head of the US National Counterterrorism Center in protest of the US-Israeli war against Iran, made the remarks in an interview with MintPress News on Friday.

The former senior official reiterated his take on the Iran conflict as the latest in a series of wars waged by the US on behalf of Israel, preceded by the Second Iraq War and the Syrian Civil War, in which Washington actively backed terrorist groups, he said.

“We came in and we said: We’re going to work with the Israelis, but we’re also going to have to work heavily with the Sunni population on the ground in Syria to create an uprising,” he added.

“And that’s where ISIS came from. We worked directly with Al-Qaeda; Hillary Clinton’s emails confirm this. The operations that we were doing to support the so-called Free Syrian Army, and there were some moderates there, but the most effective guys initially were Al-Qaeda and then eventually ISIS.”

Keep reading

A month of war has shown the strategic failure of attacking Iran

After one month of war against Iran, one conclusion stands out more clearly than anything declared in all the press briefings: Neither the US nor Israel entered this confrontation with a plan for a long war.

The campaign was conceived as a short and brutal episode, a shock operation designed to break Iran’s will, force Tehran back to the table on humiliating terms, or in the most ambitious fantasies circulating around Donald Trump’s political circle, trigger internal collapse and perhaps even regime change. Israel’s aim was somewhat different, though complementary. It wanted to inflict the maximum possible damage on Iran’s military and strategic infrastructure, weaken it for years, and reshape the regional balance through force. Yet in the first month of fighting, the central assumption behind both approaches began to collapse. Instead of folding and getting coerced into submission, Iran resisted like a state fighting for survival.

What doesn’t kill Iran makes it stronger

American planners appear to have imagined a limited punitive maneuver lasting perhaps a week or two. The logic was familiar and, from their point of view, elegant. Strike hard, generate fear, disrupt command structures, raise the economic cost, and create a moment in which Iran’s leadership would face a stark choice between capitulation and disaster. Some in the Trump camp seem to have believed that Iran’s political system was brittle enough to crack under pressure. That assumption now looks less like strategy and more like projection. Washington entered the war expecting quick leverage rather than a drawn out contest of endurance.

Israel, for its part, appears to have approached the opening phase with fewer illusions about diplomacy and more determination to degrade Iran by force. The strategic instinct in West Jerusalem was not primarily to negotiate with Tehran from a position of strength, but to use the cover of an American-backed offensive to hit as much as possible and to push Iran backward in military, technological, and geopolitical terms. In that sense, Israel’s goals were harsher and more concrete. But even here the first month exposed a contradiction. A state can damage Iran. It can kill, disrupt, sabotage, and bomb. Yet weakening Iran is not the same thing as breaking Iran. A campaign that hurts but does not decisively cripple can still end by strengthening Tehran politically, morally, and strategically if the attacked state manages to survive, retaliate, and turn endurance into legitimacy.

Keep reading

Who’s behind the mysterious ‘Iran-backed terror cell’ haunting Europe?

Claims that an Iran-backed group is carrying out attacks in European cities raise questions about why they’re not targeting countries directly involved in the US-Israeli war, and why they appear to communicate like Israelis.

Strangely, suspects arrested in the attacks have been released on bail.

A specter is haunting Europe – the specter of Ashab al-Yamin. Officially known as “Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamia (HAYI),” or the “Islamic Movement of the Companions of the Right,” the group mysteriously appeared in early March, and, according to mainstream media, it’s taking the continent by storm.

But a closer look at the supposedly Iran-backed terror organization suggests that it does not exist in any concrete form, and may be a confection of Israeli intelligence.

Though the nebulous HAYI claimed credit for torching ambulances belonging to a Jewish community organization in London on March 23, two suspects in the attack have been released on bail, and are not charged with any terror-related crimes. What’s more, London Metropolitan Police have so far refused to release the men’s names, raising questions about their identities. Were they even Muslim? 

HAYI’s first public mention in the West came on March 9, when the previously non-existent organization released a video showing an explosive device detonating outside a synagogue in Liege, Belgium, alongside a statement taking credit for the attack. Within hours, the group had somehow been identified by the “SITE Intelligence Group,” an Israeli-led private intelligence firm founded in the aftermath of Sept. 11 to cash in on the newly-minted Global War on Terror.

The materials HAYI published were promptly circulated on social media by Joe Truzman, a self-described “Senior Research analyst examining Palestinian armed groups and Iranian proxy organizations” at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD), a neoconservative DC-based think tank founded in 2001 with the stated goal of working to “enhance Israel’s image.” As The Grayzone reported, the Trump White House plagiarized its public justification for attacking Iran word-for-word from an FDD paper. 

Though Truzman declined to state where he’d found the materials, he wrote that “Telegram channels linked to the Axis of Resistance… widely disseminated the publications,” using a reference to a variety of resistance factions sympathetic to Iran and Palestine throughout the greater Middle East. The group he linked to, a popular Telegram channel called Sabereen News, made it clear they were reposting the video, which they said was the work of a group calling themselves “the companions.” 

Almost immediately, Truzman began asserting that these “companions” were all but guaranteed to be a Tehran-linked cutout. For starters, he told British media, “their logo with the wording is a sign of a classic Iranian front organization.” And Iran had already threatened to carry out just such a wave of attacks, Truzman claimed. After all, he wrote, “On March 8, Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Iran’s deputy-foreign minister, warned that if a European country joined the US and Israel in the current war against the Islamic Republic, it would be a ‘legitimate’ target ‘for Iranian retaliation.’”

Over the next two weeks, the shadowy group would go on to take credit for burning a vehicle in a Jewish neighborhood in Antwerp, arson at a synagogue in Rotterdam, explosions near a Jewish school and financial office building in Amsterdam, firebombing Jewish-dedicated ambulances in London, and an unspecified attack in Greece. 

So far, the only media outlet to have interviewed a member of HAYI is CBS News, which was recently purchased by David Ellison, the ultra-Zionist billionaire son of the largest individual donor to Israel’s military, Larry Ellison, who happens to be a close friend of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Bari Weiss, the editor-in-chief installed by Ellison at CBS, is a self-described “Zionist fanatic.”

Keep reading

Why Washington needs talks with Tehran more than it admits

In recent days, there has been a noticeable shift in US President Donald Trump’s rhetoric regarding Iran. Less than a week ago, Trump issued a 48-hour ultimatum to Iran, threatening strikes against Iran’s energy infrastructure if it refused to unblock the Strait of Hormuz. Now, Trump has expressed openness to negotiations and even claims that some contact with the Iranian side has taken place. This rhetorical shift may not reflect a genuine diplomatic process but could be part of an information strategy. After it became clear that Tehran was unwilling to make concessions and was unresponsive to Trump’s coercive pressure, the US attempted to make it look like the Iranian side was the one suggesting talks.

Israeli news outlet Ynet claims that Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has agreed to negotiate with the US. However, no credible evidence has surfaced to back this, raising questions about the sources of the information and its purpose. Given the current dynamics, these reports can be seen as propaganda aimed at crafting an image of Iran as vulnerable and eager for urgent dialogue with Washington. These interpretations might serve to reinforce the narrative of Tehran’s weakening position.

In Tehran, this is perceived as an attempt to influence global energy markets. Public signals from the US, particularly from Trump, affect oil and gas price dynamics, especially amid tensions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz – a critical artery for global hydrocarbon supplies. In this context, talk of negotiations can be viewed as a tool for stabilizing expectations and reducing market volatility.

Iranian society and elites remain skeptical about negotiations with the US. Based on past experiences, Iran believes that diplomatic agreements with Washington do not lead to long-term de-escalation and are often followed by increased pressure or an escalation of the conflict. In the current situation, Iran maintains that its position does not necessitate immediate negotiations. Furthermore, within the regional landscape, Iran possesses the capability for asymmetric influence, utilizing allied actors and indirect means of leverage.

Keep reading

AWACS’ Destruction is a Major Loss for US Military – Ex-DoW Analyst

The destruction of a US E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control system (AWACS) aircraft in Saudi Arabia by an Iranian missile strike is a serious blow to the US military, former US Department of War analyst Karen Kwiatkowski tells Sputnik.

The US has a limited number of E-3 aircraft, which are based on aging Boeing 707 airframes, and the next-generation replacement for E-3 is not yet available

The loss of even one of E-3s puts a strain on the remaining aircraft as they are forced to operate longer. It demoralizes the crew, stresses systems, and “increases the consumption rate of surveillance capability and information management”

Other E-3s now have to prioritize their own defense, which may reduce the radar, surveillance, and command effectiveness they supply

With many of the important US long-range radars in the region being knocked out by Iranian strikes, the strain put on E-3 aircraft will only get worse, with further losses among them threatening to “narrow and pressure the information space for theater commanders and US and Israeli forces”

Due to E-3’s distinctive and well-recognized function and appearance, Kwiatkowski adds, its destruction creates concern in the US because it doesn’t look like “winning,” and that claims of Iran losing its fighting capability were premature.

Keep reading

Iran: The test the US cannot afford to fail

The outcome of the war with Iran will determine America’s capabilities on the world stage for years to come. That is what makes the current conflict in West Asia so consequential, far beyond the region itself.

US policy toward Iran has become increasingly erratic. Rather than focus on the president’s shifting rhetoric, it is more useful to examine the logic underpinning the confrontation. Washington appears to have convinced itself that the moment is right to act decisively against Tehran, exploiting what it perceives as a window of vulnerability.

The objective, viewed in isolation, has a certain cold rationality. A single, well-executed strike could, in theory, achieve several long-standing goals at once: Settle the historical grievance of the 1979 embassy crisis, remove a regime seen as hostile to Israel, gain leverage over key energy resources and transport routes, and weaken emerging Eurasian integration projects. Advisers appear to have presented this as a rare opportunity. The president accepted the argument.

But such ambitions rest on a fundamental miscalculation. Iran is not Iraq in 2003, nor Afghanistan in 2001. Its military capabilities are far more substantial than those of any adversary the US has confronted directly in recent decades. It is a large, resilient state with deep strategic depth and a capacity to inflict serious disruption on global trade and energy flows.

This last point is critical. Iran’s geographic position gives it leverage that few countries possess. Even limited escalation can threaten shipping routes and economic stability far beyond the Middle East, directly affecting the interests of the US and its allies. That reality alone complicates any attempt at a quick, clean victory.

Keep reading

2,000 Marines Arrive in Arabian Sea on USS Tripoli Assault Ship as Trump Admin Weighs Deploying Up to 10,000 More Ground Troops to Middle East 

Thousands of Marines and Sailors have arrived in the Arabian Sea on board the USS Tripoli amphibious assault ship, carrying fighter jets, as well as amphibious assault and tactical assets.

CENTCOM announced on X,

U.S. Sailors and Marines aboard USS Tripoli (LHA 7) arrived in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, March 27. The America-class amphibious assault ship serves as the flagship for the Tripoli Amphibious Ready Group / 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit composed of about 3,500 Sailors and Marines in addition to transport and strike fighter aircraft, as well as amphibious assault and tactical assets.

U.S. Sailors and Marines aboard USS Tripoli (LHA 7) arrived in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, March 27. The America-class amphibious assault ship serves as the flagship for the Tripoli Amphibious Ready Group / 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit composed of about… pic.twitter.com/JFWiPBbkd2

— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 28, 2026

Fox reports that “nearly 2,000 Marines” are on the ship with fighter jets and gun ship helicopters. Additionally, the USS George H.W. Bush Aircraft Carrier is expected to depart from Norfolk, Virginia, next week.

Keep reading

US-Iran war live: Donald Trump drops hint that massive escalation is imminent

Donald Trump seemed to drop a hint about his intentions in Iran on Sunday, Australian time, as he directed his followers on social media to tune in for a media appearance by a conservative political commentator, Mark Levin.

“Watch Mark Levin interview of Brilliant Marc Thiessen tonight at 8pm on Fox News. Will discuss the importance of hitting Iran, HARD!!! President DJT,” Mr Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Mr Thiessen, now a columnist and TV panelist, previously worked as a speechwriter for the Republican president George W. Bush. He and Mr Levin are both very much in favour of the Iran war.

The TV segment in question turned out to involve Mr Levin advocating for a dramatic escalation in Iran, which would involve the deployment of US ground troops to the country. He suggested Mr Trump should order the American military to seize the regime’s stores of enriched uranium.

Such an operation would be fraught with danger for US forces.

“Why would we need troops on the ground?” Mr Levin said, before answering the question for his viewers.

“Well there’s a lot of reasons, and we wouldn’t need 300,000 of them,” he said.

“It’s this uranium too. We’ve got to get the uranium.

“If it cannot be destroyed, if it cannot be altered, we’ve gotta get it. For the reason I just said, you can make dirty bombs and over time you can still make sophisticated missiles.

“So you need to get to the uranium. That’s why I’m reading, in the paper, we’re talking about (various troop deployments). It’s not talking abouts ending regular army and infantry in by the hundreds of thousands. The men he’s talking about, they are specialised.

“You know what else? I remember from my days in the Reagan administration. Many of them are trained for a moment like this. To try to secure enriched uranium.”

Keep reading

Failed by the MoD: The wives tortured by Army husbands using brutal battlefield techniques

Military wives and girlfriends who suffer chilling domestic abuse involving ‘battlefield techniques’ at the hands of high-ranking servicemen are being failed by the Ministry of Defence and justice system, a damning report has found.

A dossier of 52 harrowing cases reveals victims have been tortured with military techniques including chokeholds and restraints, have been raped, threatened with combat weapons and even taunted by the maiming of family pets by elite troops who have been ‘kill-trained’ for armed conflicts.

Some were subject to sophisticated tracking involving military resources and equipment.

One woman, diagnosed with PTSD after the abuse, reported that her husband brought home combat knives and a remote transponder to set off an improvised explosive device (IED) after threatening to put one around the front door. 

Another told how she had a stroke after excessive strangulation by a partner in the Special Forces who also used torture tactics, including pressing his thumbs into her eye sockets.

But a significant proportion of the women reported that MoD welfare services and the Royal Military Police ‘closed rank’ when such abuse was reported – and either failed to investigate or dismissed concerns for their safety. Some women were told by welfare staff that their job was to ‘protect our boys’.

The report also claims top brass are prepared to submit glowing character references for alleged abusers whose cases come before the family and criminal courts, which campaigners say is ‘swaying’ judges in their favour and putting families at risk.

The deeply disturbing revelations – described by campaigners as the armed forces’ ‘nasty, big secret’ – are particularly embarrassing for the MoD because it is implementing its Domestic Abuse Action Plan 2024-29. 

Keep reading