News

'Boogeyman mullahs': How decades of anti-Iran hysteria set us on the path to war Nura Hossainzadeh on Tue, 03/03/2026 - 08:18 Western portrayals of the Islamic Republic as irrational and one-dimensional, devoid of political complexity, have helped ingrain prejudice and normalise a once-unthinkable war A man sits beside portraits of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei during a burial ceremony for a person killed in recent US-Israeli strikes, in Tehran on 9 March 2026 (Atta Kenare/AFP) Off The unthinkable has happened: the United States and Israel have launched a war on Iran, now in its second week. More than 1,300 people have reportedly been killed by American taxpayer-funded munitions, and some 100,000 displaced, while hospitals, schools, playgrounds and other civilian infrastructure have been destroyed. The assassination of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in the opening US-Israeli strikes on 28 February was intended to decapitate the country's leadership and advance the regime-change goals openly declared by the Trump administration. Instead, large crowds have gathered in squares across Iran to mourn Khamenei and denounce the attack, even as the country continues to come under bombardment. Over the weekend, his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, was named the country's new supreme leader in what officials described as a show of "dignity and strength", despite threats from Israel and the US that any successor would become a target. For many observers, this is simply the latest example of an unhinged Donald Trump leading the US down a dangerous and self-destructive path. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); But the story goes beyond Trump. The road to this war was paved long ago by people who refused to see Iranian politics as anything more than one-dimensional. This flat and uncomplicated picture has persisted in the public imagination for decades. The war feels especially tragic to me because I spent years doing work that I hoped might prevent it. I contended that in Khomeini's vast corpus of writings and statements he was often, put simply, a democrat As a political science graduate student at UC Berkeley, I wrote my dissertation on Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of Iran's 1979 revolution. As a political theorist, I hoped to encourage greater understanding of, and critical engagement with, the political theory of the Islamic Republic's founding father and the political system he shaped. The experience taught me just how deeply ingrained prejudices about Iran are in western discourse, even among many left-leaning academics who pride themselves on open discussion of controversial ideas. My argument was certainly not one they were used to hearing. I contended that in Khomeini's vast corpus of writings and statements he was often, put simply, a democrat. His opposition to the two 20th-century Pahlavi monarchs was based in part on the way they gained political power - by force, through a coup. Rethinking Khomeini In 1979, Khomeini insisted that the legitimacy of Islamic government rested upon the popular referendum in which people voted in favour of creating an Islamic republic. Khomeini made an argument, in other words, for government by the consent of the governed. Indeed, Khomeini envisioned a strong role for Islamic legal scholars in government, ensuring that national law did not violate the shari'a. But he also said that even the most powerful legal scholar in government - the "supreme leader", as it is often rendered in the western press - must be criticised and assessed by ordinary people. Israel planned this war on Iran for 40 years. Everything else is a smoke screen Read More » On 7 November 1979, for example, he said in a speech that the leader "is a person whose ethics, religiousness, devotion to the nation, knowledge, and action, in all of their dimensions, have been established [as commendable] in the view of the people". This principle was incorporated into Iran's constitution. The Assembly of Experts, a popularly elected body with the power to oversee and dismiss the leader, remains in place to this day - although reformists argue it has not exercised this authority forcefully enough. Though Khomeini sought to empower legal scholars, he also described Islamic law as "progressive and evolving" and parliament as the "highest station" in government, responsible for applying Islamic law to contemporary issues. On several occasions after the revolution, he said publicly that elected representatives have a better sense of the country's needs than clerics and can pass necessary laws, even if doing so suspends certain provisions of shari'a law. Often, in his writings, it was unclear who - parliament or legal scholars - had the final word when it came to matters of the law. He spent the rest of his life working out the respective powers of legal scholars and representatives. But for many audiences, even suggesting that Khomeini's thought was more complex than commonly portrayed, and open to different interpretations, provoked hostility. Some listeners seemed unable to see him as anything more than a caricature. I recall the angry questions, raised voices, flushed faces and hysterical denials of Khomeini's human complexity and contradictions, as well as accusations that I must surely have a political agenda.  Their reaction was, in many ways, unsurprising. The English-language literature on Khomeini's thought was itself rife with distortions. One prominent author claimed that Khomeini believed clerics should rule "on behalf of God", while another described his ideas as part of an agenda for "restructuring consciousness". Such portrayals were reinforced by media coverage and in popular culture. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); By accepting this depiction of Khomeini, many academics also misread Iranian politics. They failed to see that reform in Iran might emerge within the broad framework of Islamic republicanism, and that change did not require overturning the political system. In fact, one needed to look no further than the Islamic Republic's own founding father to find arguments for reform. Internalised caricatures The same misrepresentations of Iran are resurfacing in this crucial moment. Even liberals who oppose American and Israeli military aggression can scarcely say a word in opposition to the war without first reminding us that Iranians are also suffering at the hands of their own government. In doing so, they reveal how far caricatures of Iran have been internalised. The result is a discourse that ultimately reinforces the very imperial aggression they claim to want to contain. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); This is not to say that the Islamic Republic - like any state - should not be subject to criticism, that protesters do not have the right to take to the streets, or that the state has not violated legitimate freedoms. But simplified claims that the Iranian people are merely muzzled and oppressed gloss over the ongoing struggles within Iran for political reform. They also erase reformist voices seeking to strengthen the Islamic Republic's democratic credentials - figures such as Ahmad Zeidabadi and Mostafa Tajzadeh - who continue to speak, even if they have faced imprisonment. Reformists are weakened and persecuted, but they have not disappeared. Reducing Iranian politics to a struggle between tyranny and resistance forecloses the possibility that Iranians may resolve their political struggles internally. It also plays directly into the hands of warmongers who claim military intervention is the only solution. Liberals who denounce both the Islamic Republic and imperial aggression in the same breath have helped construct precisely the image of the "boogeyman mullahs" that now underpins the war on Iran. It is no wonder that the Islamic Republic, born out of resistance to American hegemony and to a shah installed by a CIA-backed coup, has long been vilified in the centres of power it opposes. Ayatollah Khamenei maintained his predecessor's anti-imperialist stance until he was killed by the same "bully" powers he had openly condemned for decades. As he said in a speech last October: "Why has the US established all these military bases in various countries throughout West Asia? What are you doing here? What does this region have to do with you?" Opponents of imperialism would do well to remember this defining feature of the Islamic Republic's politics and recognise the connection between the war now being waged on Iran and the country's refusal for nearly half a century to capitulate to hegemonic power. Instead, Iran is once again depicted as nothing more than a force for evil in the world. Preparing the ground The characteristic flattening of Iran's politics was evident in media coverage of the January unrest, when Iranian protesters were killed in large numbers. Even left-leaning outlets often depicted the events in simplistic terms, helping to condition public opinion for confrontation with the Islamic Republic. Another factor largely ignored in western coverage was the intentional role of American sanctions in fuelling economic anger What received far less attention was evidence suggesting the involvement of foreign actors in the unrest.  Israeli media reported that on 29 December 2025, the Mossad Farsi account on X posted that its agents were "literally physically" present with protesters on the ground. Right-wing Israeli television presenter Tamir Morag further proclaimed that Israeli intelligence played a role in the violence, which Israel has yet to deny.  On X, former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo brazenly posted: "Happy New Year to every Iranian in the streets. Also to every Mossad agent walking beside them." That Israeli and American intelligence agencies were sowing chaos with the aim of spilling blood and blaming the Iranian government was hardly secret.  Iranian security forces certainly bear responsibility for the violence, but the situation was far more complex than had been portrayed.  Mainstream news outlets either ignored reports of foreign agents being involved or referred to them only briefly and without serious investigation. Many also repeated an uncorroborated statistic claiming that 30,000 people had been killed, even though those reporting the figure offered no evidence to support it. Meanwhile, estimates cited by groups such as the US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), place the toll far lower, at around 6,000, while the Iranian government puts the death toll closer to 3,000. The president's office even launched a website inviting citizens to report additional casualties. The failure to investigate foreign-instigated violence, combined with the uncritical repetition of unverified death tolls, helped reinforce a simplistic "boogeyman" narrative, preparing hearts and minds for war. An image grab from Iranian state television shows the site of US-Israeli strikes that hit the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls' elementary school in Minab, in Iran's southern Hormozgan province, on 28 February 2026 (IRIB TV/AFP) Another factor largely ignored in western coverage was the intentional role of American sanctions in fuelling economic anger. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated openly that Washington had "engineered a dollar shortage" in order to push Iranians into the streets. Protesters undoubtedly had legitimate grievances about corruption and political freedoms, but many were also reacting to the government's inability to alleviate economic hardship caused by sanctions. Yet coverage of the protests in The New York Times and The Guardian, like that of many other outlets, did not include a single mention of US sanctions. To quote Bob Dylan, "And the newspapers, they all went along for the ride." Journalists who should have the integrity and professionalism to examine issues in all their complexity were unwilling to do so when it came to Iran, just as my academic audiences could not stomach it when discussing Khomeini and the Islamic Republic. Subduing the 'monster' When a country is portrayed as an irrational, raging monster of a regime, what do you do with it? You subdue it. Americans who have been fed this distorted story for decades are unlikely to object. There was no nuclear threat. US-Israeli war on Iran is blind vengeance Read More » Ordinary people are already paying the price for Washington's refusal to pursue dialogue and diplomacy. As usual, American and Israeli bombs care little for civilian life. War Secretary Pete Hegseth even boasted that US forces were delivering "death and destruction from the sky all day long", romanticising the sadistic violence that claims innocent lives. That death and destruction includes 168 girls and boys killed when a strike hit the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls' elementary school in Minab on 28 February - an attack Unicef condemned as a "stark reminder of the brutality of war and violence on children". What is the lesson here? The road to this moment was paved by our own prejudices. When the politics of other countries are reduced to simple narratives, it becomes easier to make the case for war and wage it without meaningful opposition. For decades, Iran has been depicted in popular discourse and academia as a regime of "mullahs" - a term often spoken with Islamophobic disdain. Even the most educated among us struggle to see it any other way. How can it come as a surprise that we are now at war with Iran? Do Americans know that Iran's constitution allows the Assembly of Experts to dismiss the supreme leader? Or do we prefer to drop bombs instead? We often hear that reform candidates are prevented from running for office. But do western audiences know that Iran's constitution does not explicitly grant any institution the authority to vet candidates based solely on their political leanings? When key aspects of Iran's political system - its constitution, reform discourse inside the country and Khomeini's own theory of Islamic government - remain unfamiliar to western audiences, why should it surprise us that we dismiss the possibility of reform and instead seek, in what will almost certainly be a futile effort, to resolve political problems with bombs? Shamefully, in our violent and arrogant attempt to impose political reform in Iran, we stand in the way of homegrown change Shamefully, in our violent and arrogant attempt to impose political reform in Iran, we stand in the way of homegrown change. I say this as an American who wrote about Khomeini in the belief that showing his theory is not one-dimensional might open space for dialogue, including with conservative Iranians whose voices are rarely heard in the media and who still believe in his ideas.  I hoped it could help prevent the horrors we are witnessing today. At this point, all that can be done is to resist the narrative the warmongers will continue to repeat: that America and Israel are doing what needs to be done to rid the earth of an evil regime, and that Iranian and American blood must be shed for this cause. But the truth is rarely so simple. We must oppose this war and advocate for a path forward that recognises the sovereignty of the Iranian nation and the right of its people to determine their own political future. We must sharpen our minds and see through opportunistic portrayals of political systems beyond our borders. Our ability to live at peace - now and in the future - depends on it. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye. War on Iran Opinion Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:29 Update Date Override 0

Yes, many Americans are struggling, but it’s good to know the first family can still afford Earth’s most expensive provisions. Morale is everything, isn’t it? In the absence of any clearly and consistently stated aims from the US administration, maybe each day of the Iran war just needs a moodboard description. In which case, Sunday was a tale of two nepo babies. In Iran, the high-level executive search for the new ayatollah concluded that the old ayatollah’s son was the best man for the position. It’s not for me to assess his job prospects, but you’d hope his supermarket order doesn’t contain any “ripen at home” pears. Meanwhile, across the world, in LA, Donald Trump’s eldest granddaughter posted a YouTube video titled “I Brought My Secret Service to Erewhon”. By way of background, Erewhon is Earth’s most pretentiously extravagant hipster food shop, and, as Kai was at pains to brag, “the most expensive grocery store pretty much out there. Everything’s crazy expensive! So we’re going to get my favourite stuff.” Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist Continue reading...

TEHRAN, Mar. 10 (MNA) – Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani cautioned US President Donald Trump about his potential elimination, stressing that the resilient Iranian nation is unafraid of hollow threats.

Iran’s solitary Paralympic athlete was forced to withdraw due to being unable to travel safely to Italy

Israel launches violent strikes on Beirut's southern suburbs Israeli warplanes launched violent attacks on Beirut's southern suburbs, the Lebanese state-owned news agency reported.  This comes after expulsion orders were issued by the Israeli army early in the afternoon.

Iranians in Tehran and Karaj tel the BBC they are exhausted and struggling to sleep after 10 days of Israeli and US attacks.

A Worst-Case Scenario for the War with Iran  War on the Rocks

Israeli strikes in Lebanon's Nabatieh kill eight family members Israeli attacks on the town of al-Numairiyah, located in the southern Lebanese city of Nabatieh, have killed eight members of the same family.  Muhammad Ahmad Hamdan reportedly succumbed to his wounds in the Sheikh Ragheb Hospital, joining his father, mother, three sisters and one of their children.  In another incident, the state-owned National News Agency reported the killing of two after Israel targeted a car in al-Qlailah, Tyre.

UAE, an oasis for business and partying, faces war  The Washington Post

Sudan's RSF waged starvation campaign in siege of el-Fasher Oscar Rickett on Tue, 03/10/2026 - 12:12 New report from Yale's Humanitarian Research Lab finds deliberate targeting of North Darfur agricultural communities Satellite imagery shows destruction to farming communities outside el-Fasher, North Darfur, by the Rapid Support Forces, between March and June 2024 (Yale HRL/Vantor) Off Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) waged a campaign of starvation against the people of el-Fasher, razing dozens of farming villages and devastating crop production around the city, according to a major new report corroborating UN allegations of genocide.  The report, produced by Yale’s Humanitarian Research Lab (HRL) with Nasa’s Harvest programme, used satellite imagery and other data to identify 41 agricultural communities attacked between March and June 2024, the first months of a siege that went on for more than 500 days. Over the following months, two-thirds of those communities showed “no visible pattern of life”, suggesting residents had been displaced or killed. During the same period, the area of land being farmed declined by more than 80 percent. Forensic analysis of the patterns of damage to the buildings based on remote sensing data showed that the communities were attacked deliberately, Yale’s HRL said. Ten of the 41 communities attacked were razed more than once, the report found, with at least six communities targeted for burning three or more times. One of these was razed to the ground at least seven times.  (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Twenty-eight of the communities appear to have no visible pattern of life. These findings, the report said, suggest the attacks displaced or killed residents of the farming communities, which led to decreased food production in the region.  The communities around el-Fasher razed by the RSF (Yale HRL) The Yale HRL report follows one last month from the UN Fact-Finding Mission on Sudan, which found that the RSF’s takeover of el-Fasher bore all the “hallmarks of genocide”, including the destruction of the means of survival.  The UN’s report found that the RSF had “deliberately imposed conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction of non-Arab communities, in particular the Zaghawa and the Fur”, two Black African groups that have been targeted by the RSF throughout the war.  Yale’s HRL said that the intentional razing of agricultural communities corroborated these findings. The report is the first study of its kind to use remotely sensed data to assess food insecurity in conflict settings to corroborate an alleged campaign of intentional starvation. UAE backing for RSF in Darfur El-Fasher, the capital of North Darfur in western Sudan, was finally taken from the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) by the RSF in October 2025, following a lengthy siege that saw the paramilitary construct a network of earth walls around the city, trapping hundreds of thousands of residents inside a “kill box”. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); While the United Arab Emirates continues to deny the allegations, Middle East Eye has reported extensively on its support for the RSF, citing evidence including satellite imagery, flight logs, weapons serial numbers and multiple sources. Thermal scarring showing the razed communities (Yale HRL/Vantor) Once the RSF stormed into el-Fasher, its fighters raped, executed and extorted residents in large numbers, according to extensive interviews conducted by Middle East Eye and later reports from the UN and Yale’s HRL. Civilians fleeing the city were also apprehended by the RSF and taken to makeshift detention centres, where they had blood taken from them. The war in Sudan, between the RSF and SAF, began in April 2023. More than 11 million people are currently displaced from their homes as a result of the war.  While the UAE and its regional allies, including Ethiopia, Kenya, Chad and eastern Libyan general Khalifa Haftar, back the RSF, the SAF is backed by Egypt, Turkey and now Saudi Arabia, which is embroiled in an ongoing feud with its neighbour and erstwhile ally, the UAE.  Sudan war News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0

US, Israel seem to have 'no common plan', German chancellor says German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has voiced concern that the US and Israel appear to have "no common plan" for ending the war against Iran. "The United States and Israel have been waging war against Iran for over a week. We share many of these goals, but with each day of the war, more questions arise," Merz said on Tuesday. "We are particularly concerned that there is apparently no common plan for how this war can be brought to a swift and convincing end."

TEHRAN, Mar. 10 (MNA) – In a phone call with his Turkish counterpart Hakan Fidan, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stressed that the missiles directed toward Turkish airspace "did not originate from Iran."

Antonio Costa says Russia benefits from soaring global energy prices and attention being diverted from war in Ukraine.

‘Beware lest you be the ones to vanish’: Iran's Larijani hits back after Trump threat Rayhan Uddin on Tue, 03/10/2026 - 11:59 Security chief warns US after Trump vowed to hit Iran 'twenty times harder' if Hormuz strait remains closed Ali Larijani, senior adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, delivers a statement after meeting with Lebanon’s parliament speaker in Beirut on 15 November 2024 (AFP) Off Ali Larijani, the head of the Iranian National Security Council, has issued a strong warning to Donald Trump, after the US president threatened “death, fire and fury” on Iran.  Trump posted on Truth Social late on Monday, threatening to strike Iran hard if it continued to keep the Strait of Hormuz closed.  “They will be hit by the United States of America TWENTY TIMES HARDER than they have been hit thus far,” he wrote.  Trump said the US would take out targets that would “make it virtually impossible for Iran to ever be built back, as a Nation, again”.  “Death, Fire, and Fury will reign upon them – But I hope, and pray, that it does not happen!” he said, adding that it would be a gift to China and nations dependent on the strait.  (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Larijani responded on X, in both Persian and Arabic.  He wrote: “The Ashura-loving Iranian people do not fear your hollow threats; for those greater than you have failed to erase it… “So beware lest you be the ones to vanish.” The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow maritime channel, around 33km at its narrowest point, between the Musandam peninsula in Oman and Iran. It is described as the most significant oil chokepoint in the world, with around a fifth of global oil output passing through it, and a third of global liquified natural gas (LNG).  Roughly 20 million barrels of oil pass through the strait every day, of which around 14 million barrels are crude oil and six million are petroleum products.  (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Much of Asia receives gas and oil from hydrocarbon-rich countries in the Gulf via the strait. South Korea receives around 70 percent of its crude oil from the Middle East, while Japan imports around 90 percent from the region, and India around 50 percent.  Asian market indices tumbled on Monday, largely driven by the closure of the waterway.  Larijani reiterated on Monday that the strait would continue to be closed by Iran if the US and Israel continued their attacks on the country.  Responding to a news post on X about France sending two frigates to the Red Sea to reopen the waterway, the security chief said: “It is unlikely that any security can be achieved in the Strait of Hormuz amid the fires ignited by the United States and Israel in the region.” “Especially if that is by the design of parties that were not far removed from supporting this war and contributing to its fanning,” he added.  War on Iran News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0

'Realities of war': UK minister refuses to call US massacre at Iranian school a war crime Imran Mulla on Tue, 03/10/2026 - 10:45 Sarah Sackman criticised 'those who target civilians, in particular the Iranian regime' but did not single out US atrocities Sarah Sackman is the UK's courts minister (Screengrab/X) Off A British minister has refused to declare the school massacre in Iran, which killed 165 people, many of them children, a war crime, labelling it the "realities of war". On 28 February, the day the US and Israel launched their attack on Iran, a double-tap strike targeted the Shajareh Tayyebeh School, a girls' primary school in the city of Minab. US investigators probing the attack said last week they believe the US military was likely responsible for the attack. And newly released footage this week suggests a US Tomahawk missile hit the school. In an interview with Sky News on Tuesday morning, Courts Minister Sarah Sackman was asked for her "reflections on the evidence that has come to light". (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); She replied: "You watch footage like that and what you see is the realities of war, and in particular the way that civilians right across the region, not just in Iran but the wider region, are caught up in military conflict." 'I'm not going to speculate on whether this is a war crime, but what it is is a war, and in that context devastating things can happen' - Sarah Sackman, UK minister Sackman added: "And it's pretty devastating. You think of a school, my own children are at primary school. You know, this is the realities of war." She then specifically criticised Iran, saying: "And those who target civilians, in particular the Iranian regime, that kind of action is appalling. "And I think it's right we hear the American administration saying that it's going to investigate what's happened there." Asked whether "strikes on schools in this way" could be war crimes, Sackman refused to give a judgement, saying "any view on that needs to be backed up by evidence.  "I'm not going to speculate on whether this is a war crime, but what it is is a war, and in that context devastating things can happen. "And the way in which one treats civilians, that is vital. And I call on all parties in this conflict to abide by international law and the laws of war." 'Can't condemn bombing schoolchildren' Sackman's comments have drawn strong criticism online. Baroness Meral Hussein-Ece, a Liberal Democrat peer, said that the US and Israel were "in clear violation of international law". She added that Sackman "can't bring herself to condemn bombing schoolchildren, only to condemn Iran. Not good enough." Journalist and commentator Mehdi Hasan said: "The US bombed a school, the US and Israel are killing 100s of civilians in Iran right now, the US and Israel are in clear violation of international law, but UK minister Sackman can't bring herself to condemn any of that, only to condemn Iran. How convenient." US bombers land in Britain as Pentagon prepares 'surge' in Iran strikes Read More » Sackman's comments come as the US is using British military bases for bombers en route to targeting Iranian missile sites. Over the past few days, numerous US B-1 Lancer bombers have taken off from the Royal Air Force (RAF) Fairford base in Gloucestershire in southern England to carry out strikes on Iran. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has resisted calls from opposition politicians for the RAF to join in with strikes on Iran but has not condemned the US-Israeli attack.  Relations are also strained with the US over Britain’s initial refusal to allow the US to use the joint UK-US base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean to launch strikes on Iran. Starmer held a phone call with US President Donald Trump on Sunday to discuss "the latest situation in the Middle East and the military cooperation between the UK and US through the use of RAF bases in support of the collective self-defence of partners in the region", according to Downing Street. Trump had repeatedly attacked Starmer, calling him "unhelpful" and "no Winston Churchill", and accusing the prime minister of seeking to "join wars after we've already won". UK Politics News Post Date Override 0 Update Date Mon, 05/04/2020 - 21:19 Update Date Override 0

Tuesday 'most intense day' of US attacks on Iran, Pentagon chief says US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said strikes on Iran will ramp up on Tuesday. "Today will be yet again our most intense day of strikes inside Iran," Hegseth told a news conference at the Pentagon.

submitted by /u/theipaper to r/geopolitics [link] [comments]

US study reveals more than 25,300 Islamophobic posts on X since war began and intensifying hate speech against Muslims.

This is the aftermath of a street in the Harat Hreik suburb of Beirut after it was hit by Israeli bombing.