“Iran is the most aggressive and dangerous totalitarian force of our time. Its leaders seek to weaken and destroy free society, democracy and human rights with Russian and Chinese support. In Iran, women are systematically oppressed and abused. Homosexuals are murdered. Those who think differently are imprisoned and tortured. In Tehran, the cynical abuse of the civilian population in Gaza as human shields is also cold-bloodedly conceived and financed.
According to official state doctrine, the primary goal of the mullahs in Tehran is the annihilation of the State of Israel. Ayatollah Khamenei has described Israel as a “cancerous tumor.” And clocks in the streets of Tehran celebrate countdowns to the “destruction of Israel.”
But Israel is only the first target. Once Israel falls, Europe and America will be the focus. Radical Sunni and Shiite Islamism has been preparing for this for decades. The fatwa against Salman Rushdie, 9/11, the attacks in Paris, the caliphate of ISIS — each event was a warning sign. Only those who did not want to see the signs are surprised today. The attacks are directed against our values, our way of life.”
“the more tangible potential rupture with at least parts of the conservative legal movement is coming over Trump’s decision to nominate Emil Bove — formerly Trump’s criminal defense lawyer, currently Trump’s enforcer at the Justice Department — to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Prominent members of the conservative legal movement have been publicly speaking out against Bove’s nomination, arguing that he would be more loyal to Trump than the rule of law. That in turn has sparked a backlash against Bove’s critics from Trump allies eager to install a new set of judges who may be less tied to the old guard on the right.”
“At 5:30 a.m. on June 10, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard tweeted a cryptic, three-minute video warning that “political elite and warmongers” are “carelessly fomenting fear and tensions between nuclear powers” — and that the world is “on the brink of nuclear annihilation.”
Trump saw the unauthorized video and became incensed, complaining to associates at the White House that she had spoken out of turn, according to three people familiar with the episode — two of them inside the administration and all granted anonymity to describe sensitive dynamics.”
“The big question, in other words, is whether Netanyahu has not set his sights on regime change. Whether his sights have not been blinkered by a new logic deriving from the manifest results of his own escalation — that Iran’s nuclear program and missile program are one; that given the danger to Israel merely from the missiles, leaving the Ayatollah’s regime in charge itself amounts to an existential threat.
“As we achieve our objective,” Netanyahu addressed Iranians on YouTube last Saturday, “we are also clearing the path for you to achieve your objective, your freedom.” On Monday, he told ABC News that killing Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei would “not escalate the conflict but end the conflict.” How does one retreat from this logic any more than from the demand for total victory in Gaza?
Most vexing of all, why, under these circumstances, should the Iranian regime stop the war? It says it will be prepared to put enrichment back under international monitoring, as under the previous nuclear deal. But, for now, why capitulate?
Why not launch a dozen missiles every night, or every third night, keeping Israeli business depressed, our airspace closed, our sleep foiled — and watch us squirm? Why not tie up virtually the entire Israeli Air Force looking for missile development in a territory the size of Alaska and over four hours away? Why not deplete our reserves of anti-missile missiles that cost a couple of million dollars each?
True enough, the Israeli Air Force has destroyed a great many missile manufacturing sites. More damage will be inflicted. But destroy Iran’s very capacity to produce missiles? Does not the Iranian regime, too, see itself in a war for survival — a “war,” at any rate, according to the Supreme Leader — and does it not have the resources to sustain a war economy?
Finally, will Bibi, of all people, the leader in charge of Gazan carnage, bring Iranians to overthrow their government? Israel has now killed over 200 Iranian citizens by going after human “nuclear infrastructure” in various residential complexes. Just because ordinary people disdain the regime, that does not mean they welcome Israelis buzzing their neighborhoods, blowing up every economic asset from which the regime’s missile program could conceivably profit from. Even some people who may “not agree with the Establishment,” the journalist Abas Aslani told CNN on Monday, agree that Israel must be answered with “a crushing response.””
“Just how mad is Beijing about President Donald Trump’s decision to revoke student visas for Chinese nationals? Not as mad as it says, and not as mad as one might expect. Publicly, China’s leadership will likely complain that Trump’s action is yet another attempt to thwart the country’s rise. But in reality, Beijing would probably just as soon keep its smartest kids at home.”
One aspect of the Israel-Iran war is supply of missiles and missile interceptors. The U.S. and Israel have limited interceptors and build them slowly. Iran has a variety of weapons, but only have two-thirds of their ballistic missiles left (most of the gone one-third being destroyed on the ground).
Israel can’t destroy Iran’s nuclear program. Iran can just rebuild what Israel damages. Then what is the goal of Israel’s attack? Just to set back the nuclear program? Or, to keep killing commanders until a coup happens or someone is in charge who will agree to end the nuclear program?
The U.S. doesn’t have enough ammunition to supply Israel and Ukraine while also having the stocks to defend Taiwan. U.S. military industrial capacity is way too low.
Israel leader Netanyahu has been saying Iran is weeks away from a nuke for over a decade.
Many Republicans called for the violence in LA to be crushed with military force and for Democrats to be removed from office, even though the violence and vandalism were contained and the Los Angeles Police Department had it under control.
When an immigrant kills someone, Republicans want to move and spend Heaven and Earth to limit all immigration and deport all illegals, devastating the lives of many people, but when Americans repeatedly murder, massacre, and assassinate fellow Americans with guns, they offer simple condolences.
“Social media platforms have birthed viral rumors for more than a decade, but in recent years some online platforms have shifted radically away from content moderation and fact-checking while monetarily incentivizing viral posting. After Musk bought Twitter, which he renamed X, the service reinstated many previously banned users, stopped enforcing some rules about hateful content and began sharing revenue with users if they get engagement. This year, Instagram and Facebook’s parent company, Meta, stopped fact-checking in the United States. Meta is rolling out a crowdsourced “community notes” system, like a system on X in which users submit their own addenda to other users’ posts, which other users then vote on. Use of the system on X has plummeted since the beginning of this year, according to an NBC News analysis. X didn’t respond to a request for comment on the conspiracy theories on its app.
Now, the apps are fertile ground for hoaxes and unconfirmed accusations to spread, experts said.
“The design of social media platforms facilitates and even incentivizes this kind of rumoring and political point-scoring in the wake of crisis events,” Kate Starbird, a professor and co-founder at the Center for an Informed Public at the University of Washington, said in an email.
“Some of the most prominent accounts on X gained their audiences by strategically posting breaking news content with a political angle for clicks and follows,” Starbird said.
Even though federal prosecutors filed a criminal complaint against Boelter, Republicans continued to spread the seemingly false narrative Monday.”
…
““There’s this rush to create the first narrative, and this is really crucial if you want to spread misinformation. And it’s not very difficult, because it will always take more time for the real information to come out,” he said.
“Once the narrative takes hold, it’s very, very difficult to debunk,” he said.”