General

Haaretz: Israel escalates hawkish Lebanon stance, vowing no withdrawal even if U.S. demands it

/19 Comments/in /by

Showing who’s boss in the U.S.-Israel relationship.

PM Netanyahu said on Wednesday Israel would not withdraw from its self-declared security zone in southern Lebanon “as long as I am prime minister,” hours after Defense Minister Israel Katz said the IDF would not pull out “even if there is an American demand to do so.” Katz said that previous deployments of Israeli troops in buffer zones resulted in attacks on soldiers, adding that Israel will “not allow that. Solders inside, residents outside,” and vowed that the 200,000 Lebanese residents displaced from the area “will not return.”

At the same time, senior IDF commanders stationed in Lebanon told Haaretz that the reality on the ground contradicts the hawkish rhetoric coming from Netanyahu and Katz. While both leaders continue to speak of maintaining “absolute freedom of action” in Lebanon, commanders say reality on the ground reflects the exact opposite.

According to the commanders, Israeli forces have received clear instructions to halt strikes on Hezbollah targets except in cases of an immediate and tangible threat to soldiers’ lives. The Israeli Air Force, as well as armored and artillery units, are operating under the same directives. As a result, Israeli troops have largely adopted static defensive positions along the front lines, with permission to open fire granted only when facing a direct threat.

Military officials have also expressed concern over a new de-escalation mechanism intended to enforce the cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah announced as part of U.S.-Iran talks. The arrangement would include the Lebanese government alongside the U.S., Iran, Qatar, and Pakistan, but exclude Israel. “Up to this moment, we have not received any official directive or update on this mechanism’s establishment, and we are mainly relying on foreign reports,” an intelligence source said.

Meanwhile, another round of U.S.-mediated talks between Israel and Lebanon are scheduled to take place in Washington on Wednesday, as the IDF said it struck two armed Hezbollah militants who posed a threat to troops in southern Lebanon, while Lebanese media reported a drone strike on a vehicle in the area.

In Israel, the illusion is still being fed that, not only is it possible to win every military campaign, but that through force, it’s possible to wipe away a tragedy produced by geography, ideology and time – as if military force alone can solve historical disputes, writes Zvi Bar’el

 

Nationalism’s Militant Tendency

/5 Comments/in /by

Nationalism’s Militant Tendency

Why Worries Over Rupert Lowe Shouldn’t Stop You Joining Reestore

Nick Griffin

 

I’m thinking seriously of changing the name of this Substack account to “Nick Griffin – I Told You So”. On top of my 22-year head-start on Rupert Lowe’s excellent work on the grooming issue, and my even longer record warning of the coming demographic disaster, predicting the 7/7 attacks, etc, etc, everyone can now see that I was right about Restore as well.

“Nick Griffin – The Most Influential British Political Figure in 30 Years”

Nick Griffin
·
Jun 8
"Nick Griffin - The Most Influential British Political Figure in 30 Years"

The Ayaan Institute is a well-regarded Muslim London-based thinktank, frequently quoted by mainstream and Muslim news outlets. In a post on its X page, the organisation just gave this major reassessment of the impact of the BNP on British politics:

I said months ago that Rupert Lowe was a Tory posing as a nationalist. That in any straight contest with Reform where Lowe does not have a real pre-prepared support base, Restore will do little more than save their deposit. And that the team of young, highly educated (ex)Tory system apparatchiks he has running his head office are manipulative fakes who will turn out to be from the same stable as Douglas Murray and all the other neocon Zionists and homosexual intellectuals.

That last point I will prove to you here fairly soon. But, for now, the last few days have confirmed the first two. All the people who screamed about me for criticising the “Rupert Will Save Us” hysteria have gone strangely quiet. What’s up?

We’ve seen the result in Makerfield, where Mr. Lowe said repeatedly he believed Restore was going to win. Well, the 6.84% they took in the end didn’t even match the percentage or raw number secured by the BNP in the general election of 2010 (in which, let me remind folks, the BNP overall beat UKIP nationwide, despite all the BBC’s promotion of Farage).

We achieved that result with a no-frills campaign costing about £1,000 and with our brave little local team having no outside help, because we had none spare to give. Restore, by contrast, threw a big five-figure sum at Makerfield, plus more than 300 canvassers there every weekend, and a big team knocking doors during the weeks as well.

Their result was, in a word, disappointing. If the seat is fought again in a forthcoming general election, it will be even worse, because now everyone knows that the “we’re here to win” boast was a baseless lie. So most of them will vote Reform next time, in the hope that, now the good people of Makerfield have used Burnham to get rid of Starmer, they can go on to get rid of Burnham.

The Restore faithful’s new cope is that “we beat the Tories, the Lib Dems and the Greens, that’s a huge step forward for a new party”. Sorry, but it isn’t. It’s a sign of the readiness of many electors to vote tactically. LibDems and Greens voted Labour in Makerfield to stop Reform, just as Labour and LibDem voters in Gorton & Denton voted Green to keep out Reform. And Green and Labour voters all over southern England will vote LibDem to keep out Reform at the next general election.

The Tories were obliterated not by Lowe, but by all save their most braindead supporters voting Reform in the hope of beating Burnham. The fact that the Tories took more than half of all the votes cast in Aberdeen South on the same day showed that the Conservative party, while desperately unpopular in most places, is by no means dead yet.

A Labour victory in a snap general election (both entirely possible) would, sadly, put a future Tory revival on the cards. Reform and Restore are both one-man bands and hence inherently unstable and potentially short-lived. The Conservative party, by contrast, is an institution which has dodged and shape-shifted and kept itself alive for hundreds of years; the vile blue creature will not be buried for good for a long time to come.

The only good thing for Restore in Makerfield was that they managed to save their £500 deposit, but anti-immigration nationalists have been saving our deposits in by elections for more than fifty years. In Uxbridge (a West London constituency close to the Indian immigration ground zero of Southall) a by-election back in 1972, saw the then young National Front, fighting under the slogan “Keep Uxbridge White”, win 8.2% of the vote.

This thrashed the Mosleyite Union Movement, which only scraped 1.1%. The UM candidate, by the way, was ‘Big Dan’ Harmston, well-known as the fiery leader of the Smithfield meat porters who marched for Enoch Powell in 1968 after he was sacked by the Tories for his ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech.

More than fifty years – during which time immigration has gone from a local problem affecting a handful of constituencies, which Powell himself described in that speech as a “cloud no bigger than a man’s hand”, to an existential threat set to plunge us into minority status just 30 years from now.

More than fifty years of ceaseless anti-indigenous discrimination, gang rape, anti-white racist murders and repression. And still there are fools who claim that saving a deposit shows that they are on their way to saving the country at the next general election. I really do hate these bastards, and so should you, because their lies are giving good but naïve people false hope and so wasting their time, energy and money.

But for ethnonationalists holding Mr. Lowe out as their Great White Hope, things got even worse 24-hours later, when Rupert gave an interview to American commentator Brett Weinstein last weekend. Keen to display the ‘respectable’ credentials whose absence costs votes, Mr. Lowe told Mr. Weinstein that “I detest far-right ethno-nationalism and neo-Naziism.”

Cue anguished squeals and hysteria in the social media bubble of far-right Restore supporters!

Now, I too have a problem with neo-Nazism. Most of the actual neo-Nazi groups are controlled and funded by the Southern Poverty Law Center, Hope Not Hate and the security services. We see it most plainly in Ukraine, but it is clear that the CIA has spent a great deal of time and money shaping and weaponizing Satanic-influenced neo-Nazism everywhere else too.

Their Azovification trick is out of the same Deep State/neo-con playbook as the weaponisation of Wahhabism. Al Qaeda and ISIS are their controlled and useful idiot Islamists; Azov left-hand path Nazis in Ukraine and online are their controlled and useful idiot white nationalists.

Lowe’s conflation between these bought-and-paid-for neo-Nazi fakes and genuine ethnonationalism may have been an off-the-cuff remark, but the tactic is direct from the liberal/Zionist/Marxist/System playbook. It was first articulated by the British intelligence guru, General Sir Frank Kitson”, whose doctrine for Low Intensity Operations against troublesome nationalist opponents of the British state included the need to “pollute the water in which the fish swim.”

Nor was this the first time that Mr. Lowe’s personal opinions and actions had sent shivers down the spines of the ‘far-right’ commentators who a few months were so angry when I pointed out some of Restore’s most obvious weaknesses and the fact that Rupert may not be the best thing since sliced bread.

In an interview with The Spectator back in May, for example, he bemoaned the fact that “There was this spate of accusations of ethnonationalism and all this sort of rubbish.”

“You know I can’t and won’t audit who supports us,” he continued, “but I can assure you the actual structure of the party has none of that in it.”

Indeed it doesn’t, for the party machine is run by a group of young (ex) Tories with a neocon thinktank background which is fully in favour of mass immigration, just so long as the immigrants provide cheap labour, ‘integrate’, and aren’t mean to gays.

Lowe went on to make it clear that he does not believe in the deportation of “whole communities of British passport holders”. He concluded by telling the Spectator that Restore could win in Makerfield. That didn’t age well, did it?

Many more were angered by the temporary exclusion of the pretty influencer Saskia from Restore’s youth wing launch after she used the forbidden word, W**t* on X.

Then there was the little matter of his son’s wedding, his enthusiasm for his Libyan-heritage daughter-in-law and the halal food served at the reception. Great is the wailing and gnashing of teeth. At least, among those of them who actually have teeth.

To sum up where we are: There is a strong possibility that Any Burnham will call a snap election, in which the Restore vote will be squeezed by even ‘far-right’ voters holding their noses and voting Reform in a desperate attempt to prevent the unmitigated disaster of a far-left Labour-led regime in power until at least 2031, and then introducing a PR system in order to keep the left in control until at least 2036.

Whenever the election is, the nearer it gets the more the left and the MSM will ‘expose’ various ‘far-right’ figures in Restore. Rupert Lowe will respond to this either by expelling the most controversial, or by making statements against the deportation of ‘legal immigrants who pay their way’, and in favour of Israel, in the well-founded hope that many of the reputationally most challenging individuals will resign and save him the trouble of kicking them out.

Griffin’s Militant Tendency

So now I’m going to surprise a lot of people: All ethno-nationalists should join Restore. Those already in the party should not resign, while those who past statements make them potential targets for expulsion should make excuses, take their ‘hardline’ badges off their sleeves and do whatever is necessary to remain inside the tent. … Continues…

Nick Griffin: The Belfast Riots – How the Left Have Got Them Really WRONG

/10 Comments/in /by

The real riots, which are yet to come, in England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Eire, will be blamed on all sorts of ‘fascists’, except those who actually will have played a role, namely the Jewish fascist Zionists pushing us towards civil war. Not to help ‘save Britain’, but in the hope of getting us so fighting mad that we’ll happily fight their sordid wars for their racial supremacy “between the Nile and the Euphrates”…

The Belfast Riots – How the Left Have Got Them Really WRONG

If Riots Are the Language of the Unheard, What Do They Expect Except Riots?
Nick Griffin
Jun 21, 2026

This video, doing the rounds of the left all over the English-speaking world, sums up the way in which the left misunderstand – or deliberately misrepresent – grass-roots working class opposition to the ills of mass immigration.

A left-wing Irish vlogger interviews a Northern Irish Sinn Fein woman, who gives a superficially plausible explanation of the recent riots – which is in fact completely WRONG!

In brief, here’s why:

The leaflet used as proof of the alleged paramilitary organisation is two years old. It didn’t have paramilitary backing the first time around and it certainly didn’t this time. It was circulated either due to excitability or as clickbait, by idiots or grifters.

The loyalist paramilitaries didn’t oppose the trouble, but they took no part in it. If they had done, not one unwelcome foreigner would have remained.

The protests were not restricted to East Belfast as she says. They happened all over loyalist NI, and they were merely a step up from similar protests in working class Dublin over the last couple of years.

While she wants to believe that her precious (and admittedly often left-wing) ‘nationalist’ working class are incapable of racism, the truth is that they are.

In East Belfast, 20 – 30 young ‘Taigs’ from the Short Strand joined their ‘Prod’ neighbours in the first cross-community riot since the 1930s hunger protests. Only a small number compared to either the local Protestants in that riot, or the totally Irish crowds who brought chaos to Dublin with their anti-immigration protests, but they were there.

In Newtownabbey, north of Belfast, the loyalist crowd from Rathcoole was joined by a few Catholic lads from Glengormley.

Overall, though, it was overwhelmingly a wave of loyalist protest, but it came straight from the people, not from any organisation. Elon Musk played a role, the UDA and UVF did not.

We see the same tendency in leftwing (including mainstream media) coverage of anti-immigration trouble on the mainland. The left seem genuinely to believe their ‘multicult Utopia’ propaganda. It’s all wonderful in these places, so if anything goes wrong it is obviously the work of outside agitators winding things up.

There’s an element of old-fashioned snobbery in this too. Quite simply, the overwhelmingly middle-class technocrats of the left look at working class people and see them as brain-dead humanoid robots. They are not people with whom one does things, but people to whom one does things.

Working class people are too stupid to think for themselves. If they object to something which the left elite have done, it can only be because they have been misled by bad people – almost certainly loyalist paramilitaries or white supremacist fascists.

As a matter of fact, if (more accurately, when) serious disturbances break out in England’s ‘enriched’ zones, then it will be possible to speak accurately of malign external forces throwing huge sums of money and amounts of sophisticated organisational effort into making it happen.

But to speak of this truth will be to risk accusations of ‘anti-semitism’, so while some Muslims may be willing to do so, the entire left – with the exception of the most radicalised section of their anti-Zionist movement – will refuse to admit it, or even to talk about it.

The real riots, which are yet to come, in England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Eire, will be blamed on all sorts of ‘fascists’, except those who actually will have played a role, namely the Jewish fascist Zionists pushing us towards civil war. Not to help ‘save Britain’, but in the hope of getting us so fighting mad that we’ll happily fight their sordid wars for their racial supremacy “between the Nile and the Euphrates”..

And the left will certainly NEVER acknowledge the biggest culprits of all: Themselves. For betraying the working class people they were supposed to serve and represent. For forcing a scale of destruction upon their communities which outweights even the assaults of free market globalist liberalism. And for refusing to listen when 17.4 million Brits ordered them to stop.

Riots are the language of the Unheard. It won’t take outside provocateurs to unleash mayhem; the left-liberal elite have refused to hear us. What comes next is the anger which is the inevitable result.

Nick Griffin Beyond the Pale is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Neocrat: How Trump’s Defeat Undermines the Zionist state

/9 Comments/in /by

With America exposed as a paper tiger—willing to bomb but not commit to occupation—Iran’s influence in Baghdad, Damascus, and Beirut has surged. Gulf states, from Riyadh to Abu Dhabi, are hedging their bets. They watched Trump fold and now court Tehran to secure their own energy exports and avoid becoming collateral in the next round.

Even Turkey, that opportunistic player, finds common cause in checking Israeli overreach. Iranian-backed forces now control key chokepoints and can dial up or down pressure on shipping and energy infrastructure at will.

HOW TRUMP’S DEFEAT UNDERMINES THE ZIONIST STATE

    
In the grand theatre of Middle Eastern power politics, few spectacles have been as revealing as Donald Trump’s botched adventure against Iran. What was sold as a decisive strike to “finish the job” and neuter the Islamic Republic has instead emerged as a masterclass in how resilient actors exploit the hubris of declining empires.

Iran didn’t just survive the assault—it emerged stronger, its axis of resistance emboldened, and its leverage over Israel amplified to levels that could force real concessions on the Palestinian question—an existential issue for Israel.Trump, the Neocons, and their increasingly hollow MAGA cheerleaders are pathetically attempting to spin this as a “win,” but the facts on the ground tell a different story: a humiliated America, a bloodied but unbowed Tehran, and a path to Iranian regional hegemony that looks increasingly unstoppable.

Trump’s campaign—launched with Israeli backing—aimed to decapitate Iran’s leadership, smash its nuclear sites, and eben pull off real regime change. Yet Iran absorbed the blows. Its decentralized command structure, hardened by decades of sanctions and proxy warfare, proved far more robust than the fragile house of cards Washington and Tel Aviv imagined.

Proxy forces in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon tied down Israeli and American assets, while Iran’s own retaliatory barrages—carefully calibrated to avoid total escalation—demonstrated its reach and the fragility of the Neo-Gulf Economy. The blockade of Hormuz, even if partial and temporary, sent oil prices skyrocketing and exposed the fragility of global energy flows. Trump, ever “the dealmaker,” blinked first, settling for a ceasefire brokered by Pakistan and others that left Iran’s core capabilities intact.

This victory for Iran, however, isn’t mere survivalism. It’s a force multiplier for Tehran. Iran’s economy, battered but not broken, now benefits from a narrative of “divine resilience.” Domestically, the regime has rallied its population around the flag, quelling internal dissent more effectively than any reformist could. Militarily, the conflict validated its asymmetric doctrine: cheap drones and missiles versus expensive Western air defences.

Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iraqi militias, while suffering some military degradation, have emerged with deeper morale from the fray. Russia and China, meanwhile see a reliable partner in Iran that successfully defied everything that America could throw at it. In the wake of this, expect deeper tech transfers, from hypersonics to air defences, to who knows what to flow Tehran’s way.

The real prize, however, lies in the broader Middle East and to changing attitudes in Europe.

With America exposed as a paper tiger—willing to bomb but not commit to occupation—Iran’s influence in Baghdad, Damascus, and Beirut has surged. Gulf states, from Riyadh to Abu Dhabi, are hedging their bets. They watched Trump fold and now court Tehran to secure their own energy exports and avoid becoming collateral in the next round.

Even Turkey, that opportunistic player, finds common cause in checking Israeli overreach. Iranian-backed forces now control key chokepoints and can dial up or down pressure on shipping and energy infrastructure at will.

This enhanced clout is extremely dangerous to Israel which, in recent years, has gone far beyond the moral parameters usually granted to it by once sympathetic Western nations.

For years, the Jewish state has relied on fragmentation—Hamas versus Fatah, endless “peace processes” that go nowhere—to maintain the status quo of occupation and settlement expansion.

Post-Trump fiasco, Iran can now shift the calculus. In addition to its economic threats and undiminished hard power assets, Tehran can now take the moral high ground and drill into Israel’s growing soft power weakness. Europe, ever eager for cheap oil and genuinely disgusted by what Israel has been doing in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon will tilt towards what is effectively a pro-Iranian agenda, although no one will call it that. They don’t need to when there are words like “human rights” and “democracy” to use instead.

Israel’s options have greatly narrowed. Full-scale war risks regional conflagration that it can’t sustain alone. Technological edges—iron domes and AI targeting—have their limitations (and high costs), especially against what appear as “reasonable demands” backed by the rest of the Middle East and Europe, while America is forced to take a back seat.

Expect to hear more about easing the Gaza blockade, freezing and reversing settlements, and even a Palestinian statelet, especially from European capitals.

The mullahs understand this dynamic perfectly. Victory for them isn’t apocalyptic Armageddon but steady erosion—bleeding Israel demographically, economically, and morally until it yields ground. They also know how weak and fragile Netanyahu’s coalitions have been and how they can fracture and throw up new, more flexible leaders.

Of course, none of this guarantees utopia for the Palestinians or stability for the region. Iranian power brings its own contradictions: sectarian tensions, economic mismanagement, and the risk of overreach. But in the cold logic of geopolitics, Tehran’s post-conflict ascent reshapes the board, a board that now sits squarely on the back of a defeated Donald Trump and his cynical Zionist backers who found the world cannot be so easily manipulated by pulling a few greased strings in Washington.

Blumenthnal on Napolitano: Israel’s panic

/2 Comments/in /by

And the pivot of Turning Point USA toward Israel after the Charlie Kirk assassination and away from Kirk’s increasing disenchantment with Israel. Fits with the narrative of Israeli involvement in the assassination but of course is not proof,

Iran’s FM slams ‘genocidal’ post from top Israeli security official who called for all of Lebanon to burn

/3 Comments/in /by

Iran’s FM slams ‘genocidal’ post from top Israeli security official who called for all of Lebanon to burn

It’s time that we stop acting like Ben-Gvir does not represent the Israeli government

Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s top diplomat, rejected a “genocidal” post by Israel’s Itamar Ben-Gvir and said his comments must not be brushed off as those of some “random genocidal lunatic,” but as the position of the country.

Ben-Gvir posted on Friday for every tear of an Israeli mother, “a thousand Lebanese mothers must weep. All Lebanon must burn.”

He continued: “With all due respect to the Americans, Israel must make it clear to the entire world that the blood of our sons and the security of our citizens are not forfeit. All of Lebanon must burn. Our Supreme Court to protect the citizens of Israel and the soldiers of the IDF, and this commitment takes precedence of consideration.”

He continued: “Enough with the ping-pong. In the Middle East, you don’t win with measured responses and restraint — you need to go berserk. To obliterate to crush the terror.”

Araghchi responded: “This is not a rant by a random genocidal lunatic. It’s a public post by the national security minister of the Israeli regime. The genocidal death cult headquartered in Tel Aviv is a threat to all of humanity. It threatens all humans. Its only interest is permanent war.”

Araghchi, Iran’s top diplomat, said Tuesday that the ceasefire deal between the United States and Tehran hinges on whether Israel continues to attack Lebanon because that war has become “connected to the war with Iran, and the two fronts became intertwined and dependent on one another.”

“The Islamic Republic considered ending the war with Lebanon a requirement for ending the war with Iran from the very beginning,” he said, according to Press TV. He continued: “The end of the war includes the end of occupation. Without the withdrawal of Israeli forces from territories they occupied during this war, the war will have not been fully brought to an end.”

Mike Huckabee, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, said in an X post that the Trump administration made it clear that Iran and Hezbollah are not linked in the deal.

“Israel doesn’t need Iran’s permission to defend itself,” Huckabee posted. “The tether of terror must end.”

President Donald Trump was in France for the G7 summit and told reporters that Israel has been fighting Hezbollah for “too long, and too many people are being killed.”

“You don’t have to knock down an apartment house every time you’re looking for somebody. There are a lot of people in those apartment houses, and they’re not all Hezbollah,” Trump said.

He continued: “I’m not happy with the way Israel has handled themselves with Lebanon, and with Hezbollah. Israel would have been blown up a long time ago, had I not gotten involved.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday that the struggle against Hezbollah has “not ended.”

“I want to make it clear: We will remain in the security zones as long as required in order to defend our country,” Netanyahu said, according to The New York Times. He told reporters that the deal struck between the U.S. and Iran was a decision made by Trump.

“We have our own interests,” he said.

The memorandum of understanding (MOU) that is expected to be signed in Switzerland later this week is not a permanent peace deal, but it ends the fighting to allow for 60 days to come up with a deal suitable for both sides. There are key questions that remain about the future of Iran’s nuclear program, the willingness of the Trump administration to offer sanctions relief, and, of course, the Lebanon issue.

Masoud Pezeshkian, the Iranian president, said Israel’s rejection of the ceasefire deal with the U.S. shows that Tehran emerged from the war victorious.

“The concern and anger of the Zionist regime (Israel) over this process is a clear sign of the success and victory of the Iranian nation. With divine grace, this path will continue with strength,” he said.