“Much turmoil in the Middle East today is attributable to this overlooked fact: Jewish European descendants of people who had freely chosen to leave ancient Judea/Palestine established a project, Zionism, in the late 19th and early 20th century with the intention of displacing the descendants of Judeans who had chosen to stay. This is a dispute, in other words, between Canaanites who remained — from whom the Palestinian Muslims and Christians descended — and the Canaanites who willingly departed — from whom the Ashkenazi Jews descended. … For both Jewish and Christian Zionists, the alleged Roman exile of the Jews from Judea in the first century CE is a key part of the Zionist property claim, on behalf of all Jews the world over, to the land of Israel. But exile did not happen.” (03/20/26)
“To partisans behind Bluesky, it must have seemed like a gift from the gods when Elon Musk bought Twitter. In short order he changed its name to X, shifted its moderation policies sharply to the right and sent millions of internet refugees searching for a new home. But as the ancients knew, gifts of the gods often come with strings attached. In the two years since Bluesky opened to all comers, the social media app has gained 43 million users, an amazing feat for a company with fewer than 50 full-time employees. That growth got a huge boost from Musk’s antics in the lead-up to the 2024 election, which endowed Bluesky with a base of devoted users — users who skewed heavily progressive and brought with them cancel culture tactics that had flourished on X. Those users are now the platform’s biggest barrier to growth.” (03/22/26)
Source: Caitlin Johnstone, Rogue Journalist
by Caitlin Johnstone
“I saw a clip of Fox News war propagandist Sean Hannity solemnly reading a tweet by Atlantic Council fellow Jamie Metzl which said, ‘It is profoundly disturbing that a growing segment of the far left appears to be almost rooting for Hamas, Hezbollah, the Iranian regime, and other forces fundamentally opposed to the US and our allies. This seems to reflect a corrosive strain of anti-Americanism dressed up in post-colonial theory that risks blinding us to the moral realities of our world and the nature of our adversaries.’ These assholes really thought they could commit a genocide in full view of the entire world for years and then expect everyone cheer for them to win. Of course we’re seeing more ‘anti-Americanism.’ You don’t get to commit horrific atrocities year after year and then cry when the world starts to hate you.” (03/21/26)
“Threatening to damage or destroy power generation for the entire country is outrageous. If the U.S. does this, it will be inflicting collective punishment on the civilian population on a massive scale. Attacking Iran’s power plants would be comparable to Russian attacks on Ukraine’s power grid, and it would be just as despicable.” (03/21/26)
“Not a day passes without an official warning of threats to the country’s territorial integrity: code for foreign-funded agitations among the country’s Kurdish, Baluch and Arab minorities. But Iran isn’t in danger of falling apart. It isn’t Afghanistan or Iraq, modern confections of mutually antagonistic groups. Rather, it has a natural coherence based on the supremacy of the Persian language; its geographically logical homeland on the Persian plateau, ringed by seas and mountains; and the Shia Islam to which most Iranians adhere. For centuries, indeed, these strengths have enabled Iran to survive invasions, violent changes of dynasty, famines, tribal uprisings, regicides and years of meddling by imperial Britain and Russia — not to mention the 1979 revolution itself. They will offset the centrifugal forces that Trump seems intent on stimulating. For the true danger to Iran is not disintegration, but implosion.” (03/21/26)
Source: The American Conservative
by Benjamin H Friedman
“The United States is not going to win this war with Iran. The good news is that we do not need to. There was no good reason for the Israeli–U.S. attack in the first place, and American security does not require us to win anything new from Tehran—not the regime change President Donald Trump fantasizes about, not the militarily-crippled Iran his defense secretary describes as the goal, not even the nuclear deal Washington might have had before it chose war. The United States can simply stop. It can declare a phony victory and even call it the ‘unconditional surrender’ Trump demands.” (03/21/26)
“Since Ahmed al-Sharaa came to power in Damascus last January, a question has hovered in the air: Has Syria truly changed, or merely changed hands Seeking sanctions relief, investment and a measure of international legitimacy, the new leadership, despite its past association with Al Qaeda, has signaled moderation. The symbols of the old regime are gone. The suffocating omnipresence of the Assad state has receded. Cafes have reopened, checkpoints have thinned and Syrians speak more freely. Yes, there have been killings of members of the Druze and the formerly dominant Alawite minorities, which the government denies direct involvement in. But even this mixed picture is no small achievement. The Russia- and Iran-backed Assad regime was not simply authoritarian; it was claustrophobic, built on surveillance, coercion and inherited power. Its collapse created space.” (03/21/26)
“His rage at NATO is actually an admission that he needs our allies’ help — and that he wants somebody to blame as his war goes from bad to worse.” (03/21/26)
“The idea that Trump’s war on Iran is a betrayal of ‘True Trumpism’ is the last gasp of people who told themselves that Trumpism was an ideology. And it’s embarrassing. I don’t agree with Trump on much, but he is incandescently, blazingly, irrefutably correct when he says ‘I think that MAGA is Trump.’ … Whether you call it MAGA or America First or Trumpism, he determines what it is. And that has been true from the beginning. If you sincerely thought otherwise, the joke is on you.” (03/20/26)
“Congress should not treat this supplemental as routine. It’s not. A $200 billion request tied to an open-ended conflict demands more than a simple funding vote. It requires a clear endpoint. Without that, lawmakers are writing a blank check for a war without an endgame, financed through additional borrowing at a time of already elevated deficits. And let’s be clear. If this war expands and boots are put on the ground, the fiscal cost will grow beyond $200 billion. Service members will be killed or wounded, adding to the $3 trillion that the federal government will spend on veterans over the next ten years.” (03/21/26)
