‘No middle ground’: Israelis back Iran war, despite taking mounting hits
Itamar Greenberg laughed when asked if he thought he should be afraid. The 19-year-old Israeli antiwar activist had just described being spat on in the street and is the target of an online hate campaign. “Yes!” he finally responded. “If I thought about it, I probably should be. I just don’t have time.” Voices like Greenberg’s are rare in Israel at a time when public clamour for war is growing, and genocidal language already familiar to millions of Palestinians is reemerging, but with a different target – Iran. Officially, 11 Israelis have been killed in Iranian strikes since the US and Israel launched their war on Iran on February 28. What the actual number might be, or how many of Iran’s ballistic missiles may have penetrated the country’s Iron Dome defence shield, is unknown. Speaking at the site of an Iranian missile strike in West Jerusalem, shortly after the start of the US-Israeli attacks on Iran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu returned to the use of apocalyptic language that has characterised the genocide his country has conducted in Gaza. Comparing Iranians with the Jewish people’s biblical foe, Amalek, who the Jews had been divinely ordered to wipe from the face of the planet, Netanyahu told reporters: “In this week’s Torah portion, we read, “‘Remember what Amalek did to you.’ We remember, and we act.” So far, Iran claims to have launched strikes across Israel, saying its missiles and drones hit military sites, symbolic infrastructure, and even Netanyahu’s office. Tehran has described the attacks as precise and strategic, rather than indiscriminate and part of a broader regional response. Iran also claims to have targeted locations such as Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion airport and Haifa. Advertisement However, Israeli officials have denied many of the specific claims. Netanyahu’s office dismissed Iranian assertions about hitting his office, or affecting his condition, as “fake news”, with stringent reporting restrictions on Iranian strikes within Israel making confirmation either way difficult. What is clearer is that against the drumbeat of Iranian strikes, the fervour for war appears to be increasing among the public. A poll carried out last week by the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) suggested overwhelming public support for the war, with 93 percent of Jewish-Israeli respondents expressing support for the strikes on Iran, and 74 percent expressing support for Netanyahu, the country’s historically divisive prime minister. “No one’s talking about opposition to the war,” Greenberg said, describing an environment in which figures from across Israel’s media and political landscape – with the exception of the left-wing Hadash party and antiwar organisations such as Greenberg’s Mesarvot – had lined up behind the war. “It’s also getting increasingly violent,” he said. “We held a protest on Tuesday, where the police were already waiting. They beat and arrested us. I was illegally strip-searched,” he said, describing it as efforts intended to humiliate him. Greenberg is no stranger to such tactics. Six months ago, after being arrested for protesting the genocide in Gaza, prison guards had threatened to carve a Star of David on his face, a permanent reminder of what they thought his priorities should be. It’s not just antiwar activists who have faced the brunt of the Israeli security establishment’s force. “The atmosphere is very violent,“ lawmaker Ofer Cassif of the Hadash party told Al Jazeera. “When I leave the house, I’m more worried by the danger posed by a physical attack by fascists than I am by any missile,” he said. Hadash and lawmakers like Cassif have been targeted by physical threats and attacks throughout the Gaza war. But criticism of the Netanyahu government’s handling of Israeli captives in Gaza meant that opposition to the Gaza war was – comparatively – more socially acceptable. When it comes to Iran, the current climate is toxic, Cassif said. “We’re often accused of supporting the regime in Tehran,” Cassif explained of the attempts to delegitimise their opposition to the war. “We’re unequivocally not. We want to see that regime go, but we’re not going to allow Netanyahu to say he’s doing this for the Iranian people. He isn’t. That’s not just rhetoric, that’s fact. The Israeli leadership was just as supportive of the shah as the US, and he was a murderous dictator no less than the current regime,” Cassif said, referring to Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the leader of Iran before the Islamic revolution. Advertisement For now, analysts and observers in Israel describe a society that believes it is almost engaged in a holy war. “They brought an antiwar activist onto one of the light news programmes,” political analyst Ori Goldberg said from near Tel Aviv, “and she was treated like you would a flat-earther. It’s as if it’s inconceivable that anyone would oppose this war. “Israel has become a society with no middle ground, no capacity for conversation. It’s as if our entire existence is dependent on our ability to do anything we want. And if the world tries to stop that, then the world’s anti-Semitic, and we all burn.” Adblock test (Why?)
Iran war may end ‘pretty quickly’: What Trump told Republicans
Listen to this article Listen to this article | 5 mins info US President Donald Trump has told congressional Republicans that the war with Iran could be over “pretty quickly”, as he defended the military campaign and outlined Washington’s objectives in the conflict. The United States and Israel launched the campaign against Iran on February 28, with large-scale air and missile strikes on Iranian military infrastructure, including air-defence systems, missile launchers and naval assets. The first day of the operation killed Iran’s then supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Recommended Stories list of 1 itemend of list The war has now entered its second week, and in his latest speech, Trump has highlighted what he described as the successes of Operation Epic Fury and suggested that it could end soon. Here are some key takeaways from his remarks. Trump calls Iran’s operation a ‘short-term excursion’ Trump framed the recent military action against Iran as a “little excursion” that was necessary to eliminate “some evil”. He said that due to the incredible capabilities of the US military, this engagement would be strictly a “short-term excursion”. While this action had caused a “little pause” in the economy, he said, it was not a big one, and the economy would quickly surge and “blow it away”. The war will end ‘pretty quickly’ Trump also declared that the war on Iran is “going to be finished pretty quickly”. He explained that such a rapid conclusion would be due to the highly effective and “brilliant work” of the US military, noting the following progress: The military has already wiped out roughly “80 percent” of Iran’s missile launchers, reducing its capabilities to a “trickle”, with the remaining launchers being eliminated very quickly. “The missiles have been largely knocked out… the drones have been knocked out, and we’re hitting where they make the drones,” he said. Advertisement He emphasised that as soon as this operation is finished, it will result in a “much safer world”. Trump also claimed that the US military sank “46 top-of-the-line” Iranian naval ships over three and a half days. Recounting a conversation with a military official, Trump said he had asked why the ships were sunk instead of captured. “’We could have used it. Why did we sink them?’” Trump had apparently asked the official. “He said, ‘It’s more fun to sink them’. “They like sinking them better. They say it’s safer to sink them. I guess it’s probably true.” A screengrab from a video released by US Central Command (CENTCOM), which accompanied a media release describing the US-Israeli operation against Iran, dubbed Epic Fury, shows an unmanned aerial vehicle on a runway at an unknown location [File: Reuters] The US prevented an imminent attack ‘within a week’ on US and allies Trump also asserted that the US had to strike Iran because Tehran had been preparing to attack the US, though neither the US president, nor anyone else in his administration, has presented any evidence to back the claim. “Within a week, they were going to attack us, 100 percent. They were ready,” Trump said. He also claimed that Iran had missiles aimed at neutral Middle Eastern nations, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, which ultimately sided with the US. “I think they were looking to take over the Middle East, because when you look, and we have pretty good proof, all of those missiles were… aimed at Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE,” he added. Trump celebrated the killing of leadership He celebrated the killing of several Iranian leaders, stating that they are “gone” and that “nobody has any idea who the people are that are going to lead that country”. He connected this speech to his first-term operation that assassinated Qassem Soleimani, whom he called the “father of the roadside bomb”. Soleimani was the longtime commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)’s Quds Force, and was widely seen as a key architect of Iran’s regional network of allied groups. ‘We haven’t won enough’ Trump said the US could now declare its military campaign against Iran a success, but the US is going to go further. “We’ve already won in many ways, but we haven’t won enough,” Trump said. “We go forward more determined than ever to achieve ultimate victory that will end this long-running danger once and for all. Forty-seven years, it should have been done a long time ago,” he added. Trump looks from the stage after delivering remarks to members of the Republican Party, at Trump National Doral Miami in Miami [Kevin Lamarque/Reuters] ‘Disappointed’ Mojtaba Khamenei is Iran’s new supreme leader Trump says he is “disappointed” that Iran named Mojtaba Khamenei to succeed his father, Ali Khamenei, as the supreme leader of the country. Advertisement “We think it’s going to lead to just more of the same problem for the country,” Trump said. When asked whether the new leader had a target on his back, Trump said it would be “inappropriate” to say. Israel has said it will attempt to assassinate any new Iranian leader chosen to replace Ali Khamenei. Trump had earlier declined to provide details about his plans for dealing with Mojtaba Khamenei. “Not going to tell you. I’m not happy with him,” he said. Adblock test (Why?)
Trump threatens to hit Iran harder if it blocks energy supplies
NewsFeed US President Donald Trump threatened to escalate attacks on Iran if it disrupted global oil supplies, saying “they’ll get hit at a much, much harder level.” Published On 10 Mar 202610 Mar 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share plus2googleAdd Al Jazeera on Googleinfo Adblock test (Why?)
PM Modi speaks with Balendra Shah, RSP chief Lamichhane after ‘resounding success’ in Nepal election
PM Modi conveyed his best wishes to the leaders for the formation of a new government in Nepal and reiterated India’s willingness to work closely with the incoming leadership. “Congratulated both leaders on their electoral victories and RSP’s resounding success in the Nepal elections,” he said.
Government responds to LPG cylinder shortage affecting Mumbai, Bengaluru eateries
Restaurant owners say commercial LPG supplies have largely stopped since Sunday, while domestic cylinders are facing delivery delays ranging from two to eight days after booking.
Gurugram Tragedy: At least seven workers dead, 5 injured after wall of under-construction building collapses in Sidhrawali area
At least seven labourers were killed, 5 injured after a wall of an under-construction building in a residential society collapsed in Gurugram’s Sidhrawali area. A wall at an under-construction project in Gurugram collapsed on Monday night, while work on a sewage treatment plant (STP) was underway.
Teen mariachis and family from McAllen released from ICE custody
The detention of the family of asylum seekers after a routine check-in with immigration officials had caused an uproar in their community.
Trump reveals top issues GOP should focus on to secure midterms victory: ‘I’ve never been more confident’
President Donald Trump outlined five key items he believes will tip the upcoming midterm elections in the GOP’s favor — if Republicans can muscle them through Congress. “No transgender mutilation surgery for our children,” Trump told an audience at the Republican Members’ Issues Conference. “Voter ID, citizenship [verification], mail-in ballots, we don’t want men playing in women’s sports.” “It’s the best of Trump. Those are the best of Trump. This is the number one priority, it should be, for the House,” Trump said. Trump’s exhortations to Republican lawmakers come as the GOP wages an uphill campaign to hang on to a controlling majority in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. He framed his legislative priorities as a way for Republicans to capitalize on popular demands within the GOP base that would increase their chances of preserving a Republican governing trifecta. HOUSE REPUBLICANS PUSH ELECTION OVERHAUL WITH VOTER ID, MAIL-IN BALLOT CHANGES AHEAD OF MIDTERMS Currently, Republicans hold just four more seats than Democrats in the House of Representatives. The GOP holds six more than Democrats in the Senate. To keep the numbers in their favor, Republicans will need to beat historical trends. In the vast majority of past cases, parties that capture the White House in presidential elections face blowback in the midterms. Notably, the last time a majority party gained seats in both chambers of Congress in the midterms came under the Bush administration in 2002, following devastating attacks on the World Trade Center. REPUBLICANS, TRUMP RUN INTO SENATE ROADBLOCK ON VOTER ID BILL Trump said he believes Republicans have a shot at bucking the trend come November if they focus on his list. “It’ll guarantee the midterms,” Trump said of his legislative priorities. Republicans have already taken strikes towards two of them through the SAVE America Act, a piece of legislation that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and cast a ballot. That bill cleared the House last month for a second time in the 119th Congress. Its future is uncertain in the Senate, where Republicans would need the assistance of seven Democrats to overcome the 60-vote threshold to defeat a filibuster. Democrats, for their part, believe the legislation would disenfranchise voters who cannot readily provide documented proof of citizenship through a passport, REAL ID, or birth certificate. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. has promised a vote on the package despite its long odds. Several members have introduced bills on transgender issues, although none of them have cleared either chamber. “I’ve never been more confident that if we keep these promises and deliver on this popular agenda, the American people will stand with us in overwhelming numbers, just as they did in 2024,” Trump said.
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the ‘talking filibuster’ and the SAVE Act
Passage of the SAVE Act is of paramount importance to President Trump and many congressional Republicans. In his State of the Union speech, the president implored lawmakers “to approve the SAVE America Act to stop illegal aliens and other unpermitted persons from voting in our sacred American elections.” The House approved the plan to require proof of citizenship to vote last month, 218-213. But, as is often the case, the hurdle is the Senate. Specifically the Senate filibuster. So some Republicans are trying to save the SAVE Act. TRUMP PUSHES CONGRESS TO PASS SAVE ACT DURING STATE OF THE UNION; NO MEDDLING WITH TARIFFS It’s important to note that President Trump never called for the Senate to alter the filibuster in his State of the Union address. But in a post last week on Truth Social, President Trump declared that “The Republicans MUST DO, with PASSION, and at the expense of everything else, THE SAVE AMERICA ACT.” Again, the president didn’t wade into questions about overcoming a filibuster. But “MUST DO” and “at the expense of everything else” is a pretty clear directive from the Commander in Chief. That’s why there’s a big push by House Republicans and some GOP senators to alter the filibuster – or handle the filibuster differently in the Senate. TRUMP VOWS BLOCK ON SIGNING NEW LAWS UNTIL SAVE AMERICA ACT PASSES SENATE It’s rare for members of one body of Congress to tell the other how to execute their rules and procedures. But the strongest conservative advocates of the SAVE Act are now condemning Senate Republicans if they don’t do something drastic to change the filibuster to pass the SAVE Act. Some Senate Republicans are ready to push for changes. Or, at the very least, advocate that Senate Republicans insist that Democrats conduct what they’re referring to as a “talking filibuster” and not hold up the legislation from the sidelines. It takes 60 votes to terminate a filibuster. The Senate does that by “invoking cloture.” The Senate first used the cloture provision to halt a filibuster on March 8, 1917. Prior to that vote, the only method to end a filibuster was exhaustion – meaning that senators finally just run out of gas and quit debating. So let’s explore what a filibuster is and isn’t – and dive into what Republicans are talking about when they’re talking about a talking filibuster. The Senate’s leading feature is unlimited debate. But ironically the “debate” which holds up most bills is not debate. It’s simply a group of 60 lawmakers signaling to their leaders offstage that they’ll stymie things. No one has to go to the floor to do anything. Opponents of a bill will require the majority tee up a cloture vote even if legislation has 60 yeas. Each cloture vote takes parts of three to four days to process. So that inherently slows down the process – and is a de facto filibuster. But what about talking filibusters? Yes, senators sometimes take the floor and talk for a really long time. Hence, the “unlimited debate” provision in the Senate. Senators can generally speak as long as they want, unless there’s a time agreement, greenlit by all 100 members. That’s why a “filibuster” is hard to define. You won’t find the word “filibuster” anywhere in the Senate’s rules. And since senators can just talk as long as they want, they might argue that suggesting they are “filibustering” is pejorative. They’re just exercising their Senate rights to speak on the floor. However, a true filibuster is a delay. For instance, the record-breaking 25 hour and 8 minute speech last year by Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., against the Trump administration was technically not a filibuster. Booker began his oratory on the evening of March 31, ending on the night of April 1. Once Booker concluded, the Senate voted to confirm Matt Whittaker as NATO Ambassador. The Senate was supposed to vote on the Whitaker nomination on April 1 anyway. So all Booker’s speech did was delay that confirmation vote by a few hours. But not much. FETTERMAN EXPECTS DHS SHUTDOWN AMID PARTISAN FUNDING FEUD, BREAKS WITH DEMOCRATS ON VOTER ID In 2013, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, held the floor for more than 21 hours, in his quest to defund Obamacare. But despite Cruz’s verbosity (and a recitation of “Green Eggs and Ham” by Dr. Suess), the Senate was already locked in to take a procedural vote around 1 pm the next day. That automatically ended Cruz’s speech. Thus, that truly wasn’t a filibuster either. So, this brings us to the “talking” filibuster which actually gums up the Senate gearboxes. A talking filibuster is what most Americans think of, thanks to the iconic scenes with Jimmy Stewart in the Frank Capra classic, “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” Most senators “filibuster” by forcing the Senate to take two cloture votes – spread out by days – to handle even the simplest of matters. That elongates the process by close to a week. But if advocates of a given bill have the votes to break the filibuster via cloture, the gig is up. But what happens if a senator – or a group of senators – delays things with long speeches? That can only last for so long. And it could potentially truncate the Senate’s need to take ANY cloture vote, needing 60 yeas. Republicans who advocate for passage of the SAVE Act believe they can get around cloture – and thus the need for 60 votes – by making opponents of the SAVE Act talk. And talk. And talk. And once they’re done talking, the Senate can vote – up or down – on the SAVE Act. Passage requires a simple majority. Senate Rule XIX (19) states that “no senator shall speak more than twice upon any one question in debate on the same legislative day.” TRUMP, THUNE CLASH ON VOTER ID ULTIMATUM AS GOP REMAINS DIVIDED ON PATH FORWARD Easy enough, right? Two speeches per day. You speak twice
40+ House Republicans rally behind Markwayne Mullin for DHS, call it a ‘critical moment’ for border security
FIRST ON FOX: Nearly 50 House Republicans are writing to President Donald Trump backing Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., to lead the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) after Kristi Noem’s ouster. The pragmatist GOP Main Street Caucus is taking a formal stance, endorsing Mullin on Monday, as well as backing a targeted crackdown on illegal immigrant criminals in the U.S. It’s a rare formal statement by the House Republican group, led by both Chairman Mike Flood, R-Neb., and Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., and signed by 47 other GOP lawmakers. “Senator Mullin has demonstrated a steadfast commitment to border security. His familiarity with the legislative process and his longstanding support for pro-America policies make him well-suited to lead DHS at this critical moment,” the letter said. “We are confident he will bring the focus and discipline necessary to further our shared priorities.” FETTERMAN BACKS TRUMP’S DHS PICK MULLIN AS ‘NICE UPGRADE’ IN BREAK WITH DEMOCRATS Trump tapped Mullin to lead the department last week while announcing that Noem would no longer serve in his Cabinet. He instead established a new role for her as special envoy at a new Trump-created initiative called Shield of the Americas. The vast majority of Republican lawmakers immediately hailed Mullin’s nomination, particularly as criticism was steadily growing of Noem’s handling of DHS. Among the most volatile chapters in her tenure occurred during Trump’s immigration operation in Minneapolis, which inspired bipartisan calls for restraint amid city-wide protests over the federal agent-involved killing of two U.S. citizens. MULLIN PROMISES TO EARN DEM VOTES AS GOP COLLEAGUES POUNCE ON HIS SEAT Trump responded to the uproar by upending federal leadership there, replacing Noem-empowered Greg Bovino of Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) with border czar Tom Homan. The Main Street Caucus letter revealed that more than two dozen lawmakers in the group met with Trump’s Homan last week while praising his handling of immigration enforcement across the country. “As members of the Republican Main Street Caucus, a group of more than 85 House conservatives focused on governing and producing legislative results, we write to express our strong support for the work of Tom Homan and his efforts to strengthen our nation’s immigration enforcement in his role as White House Border Czar,” the letter said. “Last week, approximately two dozen members of our caucus met with Mr. Homan to discuss the current state of immigration enforcement and the steps necessary to strengthen public safety while restoring confidence in federal immigration law.” Among the agreed-upon initiatives, the letter said, was keeping Trump’s immigration crackdown focused on people who commit crimes within the U.S. “First, enforcement efforts should remain focused on the worst criminal offenders. Prioritizing the removal of individuals who pose the greatest threats to public safety ensures that federal resources are used effectively while protecting American families and communities,” they wrote. TEAMSTERS BOSS PRAISES MULLIN DHS NOMINATION DESPITE PAST HEATED HEARINGS It’s a notable point given past criticism of DHS, from both sides of the aisle, about indiscriminate targeting of undocumented people in places like federal courthouses during routine immigration appointments. They also called for the repeal of policies in sanctuary jurisdictions that “undermine public safety and hinder lawful immigration enforcement” and giving federal authorities “access to local jails before criminal aliens are released.” “Finally, we agreed there should be clear communication from ICE to the American people and to Congress regarding its success in deporting the worst criminal offenders—individuals with records of assault, battery, rape, DUI, and other serious crimes,” the letter said. The lawmakers added that “Homan’s approach reflects those principles, and we believe his leadership will continue to strengthen the federal government’s ability to enforce immigration laws in a targeted and effective manner.”