Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Sunday, June 15, 2025

06/15 Links: Sharansky: We're Witnessing a Historic Test of Assumptions about Israel; 11 killed, 200 injured, 3 missing as Iranian missiles pound Israel

From Ian:

Yair Rosenberg: The War Israel Was Ready to Fight

On October 7, 2023, Israel suffered the most catastrophic assault in its history when Hamas terrorists killed more than 1,000 people and took hundreds of others hostage. Almost a year later, Israel assassinated Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, the most powerful militia in the world, along with the entire leadership of his organization. Last night, it did the same to the rulers of Iran, eliminating the heads of the regime’s armed forces, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, and regional proxies.

How could the same country that was bested by a ragtag militia in its own backyard turn around and ravage multiple regional powers with devastating decapitation strikes? The dissonance between these events has fomented confusion and conspiracy theories. But Israel’s successes and failures in the past 20 months stem from a single source. A very specific plan to stop Iran led to both the disaster of October 7 and the triumphs since.

For decades, Iran’s theocratic leaders have called for Israel’s destruction, denying the Nazi Holocaust while urging another one. The regime funneled millions of dollars and thousands of missiles to proxies on Israel’s borders and beyond: Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen. Iran’s authorities constructed monuments to their predicted victory, displaying missiles emblazoned with the words Death to Israel and even erecting a countdown clock to Israel’s end.

Israel, a nation born out of the ashes of an attempted Jewish genocide, took these threats seriously. Just as Iran labeled America “the Great Satan” and Israel “the Little Satan,” Israel’s security establishment conceived of its adversaries in tiers: Iran was the biggest threat, its fearsome proxy Hezbollah ranked next, and the smaller Hamas posed the least danger. The Israelis prioritized their resources accordingly. Their best people—and best exploding beepers—were put to work countering Iran and Hezbollah, which had formidable arsenals of advanced weapons. Hamas, by contrast, was treated as an afterthought, contained behind a blockade of Gaza that was maintained less by manpower than by advanced security technology.

October 7 exposed this folly, as Hamas and its allies disabled that technology and stormed across the border on land, meeting little resistance as they rampaged through civilian communities. This was a war Israel did not expect and was not prepared to fight. That fact was evident not only in the casualties and hostage-taking during the massacre, but in the grinding, brutal, and haphazard war in Gaza that has followed. Simply put, Israel was flying without radar. It did not know Hamas’s capabilities, had not infiltrated its leadership, did not have widespread intelligence sources on the ground, and was largely ignorant of the group’s sprawling underground infrastructure in Gaza. This operational ignorance has resulted in a horrific meat grinder of a war with thousands of civilian casualties and still no end in sight. It’s also why Israel’s military took more than a year after October 7 to find and kill the Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.

By the time that happened, Israel had already taken out Hezbollah’s Nasrallah, a far more protected and high-value target, after neutralizing many of his elite forces via exploding beepers and walkie-talkies and blowing up many of the group’s missiles while they were still in storage. The very resources that had not been brought to bear on Hamas, thus enabling the disaster of October 7, achieved the neutralization of Hezbollah within weeks.

Hezbollah had joined in the attacks on Israel after the assault on October 7, apparently believing that Israel was too hobbled to respond beyond token tit-for-tat strikes. Likewise, the group’s patrons in Iran may have misread the events of October 7 as evidence of fundamental Israeli weakness, rather than a terrible but isolated error. For months, Tehran continued to supply its proxies in Lebanon and Yemen with advanced missiles to fire at Israel, seemingly under the belief that it would be immune from similar incoming in response. That mistake, like Israel’s on October 7, proved costly.

Natan Sharansky: We're Witnessing a Historic Test of Assumptions about Israel

The Israeli government has launched a targeted military assault against the Islamic Republic of Iran, striking its military facilities, nuclear sites and top military leadership. We are witnessing the historic test of the assumption that Israel cannot eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat without active U.S. involvement.

As successive U.S. governments chose the path of diplomacy, Tehran inched closer and closer to obtaining nuclear weapons. And so, after decades of failed international negotiations, Israel decided to wage its battle without America's direct participation. The Jewish state's very existence hangs in the balance.

In conversations I had with Iranians over the past few months, two narratives emerged. Those closer to the government predicted that a war would rally citizens around the regime and thereby strengthen its grip. Dissidents, on the other hand, insisted that an attack limited to nuclear and military targets, and even extending to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps but sparing civilians and ordinary soldiers, would help their cause by exposing and deepening the regime's fragility.

Iran’s Target Isn’t Just Israel. It’s Us

Israel has struck a blow to prevent Iran from developing nuclear bombs - weapons that it might credibly use toward its stated goal of removing Israel from the planet. This is not simply a matter of regional security. This conflict is a central front in a global contest in which the forces of tyranny and violence in recent years have been gaining ground against the forces of freedom, which too often are demoralized and divided.

In a world full of bad actors, 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. According to official state doctrine, the primary goal of the mullahs in Tehran is the annihilation of the State of Israel. Clocks in the streets of Tehran count down 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. Their attacks are directed against our values, our way of life.

It is therefore surprising that Israel is not being celebrated worldwide for its historic, extremely precise and necessary strike against Iranian nuclear weapons facilities and for the targeted killing of leading terrorists. America and Europe, in their own interests alone, must stand united with Israel.

Jake Wallis Simons: Israel Can See what Europe Can't: the Devil

Ayatollah Khamenei's pet theology lusts after the apocalypse. Triggered by the obliteration of Israel, this cataclysm will supposedly herald the arrival of the "Mahdi" to lead Shia forces to global victory. These are the convictions that drive actual Iranian foreign policy. When Jerusalem was forced to act, you'd have thought the West would rally. But no. Israel was the bad guy.

We have seen this movie before. When Jerusalem destroyed Saddam Hussein's nuclear program in 1981, the world was appalled. Two decades later, the White House quietly acknowledged that the Jews had done everybody a favor.

The countries that will thrive will be those with conviction in their values and the courage and resilience to defend them. As Menachem Begin observed, "The world may not necessarily like the fighting Jew, but the world will have to take account of him." The Devil exists. It makes no sense to appease him.

Israel has a free press, filled with people who love to passionately debate each other, and as transparent a government as possible for a nation always under attack.

As a result, Israel haters have tons of sources for their assertions that Israel is on the brink, that Israelis are turning against each other, and that it cannot survive.

They've been saying this consistently for 77 years, even as Israel has built itself up from nothing int a regional superpower with an economy that has been growing at rates that most countries can only dream of.

Israel's enemies, on the other hand, see self-criticism as a weakness - it is a source of shame to have anyone publicly contradict what the government says. So their confident assertions of strength and unity are rarely challenged.

Antisemites naturally love hearing that Israel's enemies are strong, steadfast and solid, while Israel is fractious and weak,

But it is precisely Israel's willingness to self-criticize that makes it strong. It shows a willingness to debate ideas that are frightening, to imagine nightmare scenarios and make contingency plans on top of other contingency plans.

And too often, Israel's neighbors believe their own lies.

Everyone was shocked at the rapid fall of Bashar Assad's regime in Syria. That is because Syria would not let anyone from the West see anything but how powerful the regime was.

Hezbollah's strength was concentrated on the brilliance and charisma of Hassan Nasrallah. Once he was eliminated, the entire organization - which was reeling but still largely whole after the pager attacks - unraveled.

Iran is no different. It is somewhat more willing to admit setbacks than Hamas, for example, but as we are seeing, it cannot defend itself from a nation that is a thousand miles away. Perhaps its army is still effective, but it is sidelined.

More importantly, the constant emphasis that Iran was invincible and Israel was weak and that has the "curse of the eighth decade" has been believed by their own leadership. Since they do not allow dissent, they cannot have serious debate - and debate and self-criticism is what makes a nation strong.

There are reports that rich Iranians are chartering private jets and leaving despite commercial aviation being shut down. This is what happened in the "nakba" - prominent Palestinian Arabs left first, leaving the rest without role models and leaders and collapsing self-confidence. It also happened very quickly in Syria as soldiers abandoned their posts rather than face a real enemy, Israel's incredible military gains in so short a time is having a profound psychological effect.

But the psychological effect is twofold. It is more than a simple military setback - it is a realization that the belief system that propped up the regime was all an illusion. When that happens, self-preservation starts to trump patriotism.

When Iran accuses Israel of being weaker than a spider's web, they were really projecting their own deep fears about themselves. Their responses to Israel's attacks - claiming shooting down planes and capturing pilots and that apartment buildings in Israel are military targets - show that their main remaining weapons are lies.

Iranians are seeing that their leaders couldn't even protect themselves. How can they be expected to take care of their own people?

Maybe I'm wrong, but unless the West successfully pressures Israel to stop the campaign before it is done, and if the people of Iran start to organize and protest, I think that regime change can happen sooner than people think.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The difficulty of Israel destroying the underground Iranian nuclear facilities in Fordow and Natanz is well known.

But perhaps for the purposes of the war, complete destruction is not necessary.

Every underground enrichment facility requires ventilation, both for workers to breathe and to air-condition the sensitive centrifuges. Ventilation must have access to outside air.

The ventilation shafts might be hidden and difficult to find, but by now Israel probably knows exactly where they are. If they are heavily damaged, it would take months to repair, and no enrichment can take place until they are fixed.

But Israel has total air dominance over Iranian airspace. Which means that the facilities can be monitored, and any repair equipment could be bombed relatively easily. The idea of Iran digging a new secret ventilation shaft seems highly unlikely while Israeli planes and satellites are monitoring the facilities.

So in theory, Israel can keep these facilities inactive for a very long time - perhaps until regime change.

It might not be as good as a 30,000 lb. GBU-57A/B MOP, but the effect can be almost as good, at least for a significant amount of time.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

From journalist Doron Kadosh (translated):

We published in this morning's journal on Galei Tzahal with @efitriger:

Intelligence assessment presented to the political echelon: Iran is weeks away from a bomb if it decides to do so - this is the "golden intelligence" that was received before the outbreak of the attack

Intelligence assessment presented to the political echelon before launching the operation: Iran is one decision away from a bomb - and if it decides - it might be able to assemble a first nuclear bomb within weeks only.

In recent months, "golden [irrefutable] intelligence" was compiled, as security sources define it to us - this was a warning of war. And this is the intelligence: a covert operation that Iran led to develop one of the critical components for a nuclear bomb - what is called the "weapons group." And here it needs to be explained: to reach a nuclear bomb, several components are required:

The first is the enriched uranium known to us, which Iran has enriched at an accelerated pace in recent years, and has reached a level where it holds enough enriched uranium for 15 bombs, days away from enrichment to a high military level.

And the additional component, the weapons group, is the components that supposedly the Iranians did not develop in a declared manner - because it necessarily indicates a desire for nuclear weapons. The IDF succeeded in uncovering the covert Iranian program, which was at a high classification level - and its purpose was to develop the components of the weapons group.

The Iranians recruited the best scientists for the covert program - whom they divided into several working groups. Each working group received a different project to work on, which is one of the components of the weapons group. These are scientific, technological projects, whose engagement leaves no doubt: whoever deals with these specific subjects - is not looking for anything other than nuclear weapons.

The scientists' working groups began working about a year and a half ago - at the end of 2023-beginning of 2024, meaning: after October 7th. The conclusion reached in Israel: the Iranians made the decision to reach nuclear bomb components after Hamas's attack in the Gaza envelope.

In recent months, there was a significant development in the covert program, which was exposed throughout to Israeli intelligence sources. The scientists reached the testing phase and began conducting successful experiments on the components they were entrusted with. In Israel they understood: reaching the testing phase is critical, and the fact that the tests are defined as successful - brings the Iranians significantly closer to the point where they are one decision away from the ability to assemble a bomb.

Intelligence sources clarified to the political echelon: we are entering the dangerous space where Iran is one breakthrough away from a bomb. If it decides - there is a probability that it will succeed in reaching a bomb within weeks only, and another warning that was voiced in closed rooms: it's possible that we don't know everything, and Iran is in an even more advanced state than we think.

This was the intelligence that the State of Israel could not live with peacefully - and the decision was made: launching a preemptive attack.

Almost certainly the "weapons group" referred to here are the components needed to weaponize a nuclear device that have absolutely no civilian purpose. These are:

The implosion system - precisely timed explosive charges that compress the fissile material to achieve critical mass

Detonators and timing mechanisms - the complex electronics needed to trigger the explosives simultaneously

Engineering components - the mechanical design that holds everything together and ensures proper function

These are often considered the most technically challenging aspects of nuclear weapons development, requiring sophisticated expertise in explosives, timing, and precision engineering.

Iran looked at October 7 as the incentive to finally fulfill its promises to destroy Israel.

Israel didn't have merely the "right" to attack Iran. It had the moral obligation to do so, now.

UPDATE: Also read this:

[IAEA chief] Grossi started warning everyone that Iran would soon become a nuclear power, one ruled by religious fanatics pursuing the Shi’a vendetta against the world’s Sunnis for killing the last descendant of Muhammad at Karbala back in 680 AD, and for whom the destruction of Israel is key to supremacy over the entire Middle East.

When the Israelis realised that European leaders — but also Russia and China, and indeed the Biden administration — ignored Grossi’s increasingly alarmed warnings that a nuclear Iran was only months away, they waited for Trump to intervene. In this, they were immediately reassured when the US sent B2 bombers to its Diego Garcia base, each capable of destroying even Natanz.

But then Trump met resistance from the isolationists in his own administration, while he himself evidently did not want to begin his tenure with a war. Instead, he appointed a New York lawyer with no Iran or nuclear expertise to negotiate with the Islamic Republic. Unfortunately, Steve Witkoff was so poorly informed that he immediately accepted the enrichment level that Obama had negotiated, and which Trump had vehemently attacked as much too dangerous.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

06/14 Links: The Return of Peace Through Strength; IDF: We control the sky over Tehran and western Iran; Five Arab Christians killed, at least 23 wounded Haifa

From Ian:

The Return of Peace Through Strength

This uniparty of Obama administration veterans, other left-wingers, and self-proclaimed MAGA leaders shrieked in horror at the blow Israel administered to the "death to America" crowd. Tucker Carlson whined that Trump was "complicit in the act of war." Failed vice-presidential candidate Tim Walz plaintively hoped on Friday that "it might be the Chinese" who could "negotiate some type of agreement … and hold the moral authority."

This smooth-brained bigotry masquerading as strategic analysis led the United States into a dilemma where its biggest enemy in the region, which has attacked Americans at home and abroad continuously for nearly half a century, was within days of getting the bomb.

Trump is not nearly such a fool. Unlike those ideologues, he is a shrewd judge of power and knows that his base loves allies who fight their own battles and defeat America’s enemies. "I told Iran they should settle," he told the Washington Free Beacon Friday. "If I were them, I would want to settle." In the past few weeks, Trump and Netanyahu initiated a textbook deception campaign that caught Iran’s leadership completely by surprise. "I always knew the date," Trump assured the New York Post, "because I know everything."

Most of Iran’s senior leaders did not survive long enough to discover their blunder, and the initial Iranian attempt at retaliation was a pathetic failure: Israel crippled the ayatollah’s ballistic missile force while Iran’s Lebanese lackey, Hezbollah, practically begged Israel to let it stay out of the fight. As of this writing, another wave of Israeli aircraft is above Iran again.

This is but the latest battle in the war that Iran began on Oct. 7, and the going could get tougher as Iranian forces reorganize. Israel has reportedly sent many of Iran’s top nuclear scientists to their eternal reward, but the nuclear facilities are still intact.

"Let me be clear," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Thursday night. "Iran should not target U.S. interests or personnel." Two American destroyers that can intercept Iranian missiles sailed toward Israel on Friday. These are good first steps. He and his subordinates should give the Israelis the time they need to finish the job. Encouraging British prime minister Keir Starmer to borrow a spine from French president Emmanuel Macron would be good.

Removing Iran’s nuclear arsenal is also a priority. It is possible that Israel will not be able to reach some of the more fortified Iranian facilities using conventional explosives. Since this is an existential battle for Israel, it would be prudent to resolve that problem by either convincing what remains of Iran’s leadership to surrender its entire nuclear program or by offering Israel some of our much larger bunker busters.

"I think it's been excellent," Trump told ABC. "We gave them a chance [to negotiate] and they didn't take it. They got hit hard, very hard ... And there's more to come. A lot more." During Trump’s first campaign, many observed that the best way to understand the future president was to take him seriously, not literally. It turns out that when he said he wanted peace through strength, he meant it both ways.

How Israel’s Operation Rising Lion Dismantled Iran from Within: A Case Study in the Art of Deception

IV. Iran’s Response: Operational Weakness with Long-Term Costs
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei vowed that Israel would face a “bitter and painful” fate. As part of its initial response, Tehran launched over 100 drones toward Israeli territory. Israel’s Home Front Command promptly issued a nationwide alert, instructing civilians to remain near bomb shelters. Yet within a few hours, Israel’s air defenses had neutralized Iran’s drone swarm.

The level of Israeli infiltration exposed during Operation Rising Lion has immediate and long-term consequences for the Iranian regime. Penetration of Iran’s air defense systems, intelligence networks, and internal military infrastructure indicates a loss of control at the core of the state. This not only compromises operational security but also undermines institutional trust within the IRGC, Quds Force, and the broader intelligence establishment. When command structures can no longer distinguish between internal loyalty and external manipulation, decision-making slows, risk tolerance narrows, and factionalism grows. Over time, this environment fosters paranoia, internal purges, and bureaucratic paralysis—conditions that steadily degrade the regime’s capacity to project power, manage crises, and maintain cohesion. First, despite its threats of a forceful response, Tehran has failed to impose meaningful costs on a technologically and operationally superior adversary. What was billed as a major reprisal has largely amounted to symbolic gestures aimed at domestic audiences rather than tangible battlefield outcomes.

Second, the limitations of Iran’s response are raising doubts among its regional partners—particularly the Houthis and Hezbollah—about Tehran’s reliability as the core of the anti-Israel axis. If Iran cannot effectively retaliate when directly targeted, its credibility as a deterrent umbrella weakens across the region.

Third, the growing disconnect between Khamenei’s rhetoric and Iran’s operational reality is eroding internal cohesion. In a regime where legitimacy depends heavily on projecting strength, visible failure—especially in the face of Israeli dominance—risks deepening public skepticism and unsettling elite consensus.

If these trends continue, a deeper strategic unraveling is possible. The erosion of deterrence abroad and legitimacy at home could trigger fragmentation within Iran’s security institutions, elite defection, and increased pressure from peripheral regions. What begins as a military failure may evolve into political instability—and, over time, the disintegration of the centralized system that has held the Islamic Republic together for over four decades.

Israel, by contrast, has demonstrated control over both the military and psychological dimensions of the conflict. It has absorbed Iranian strikes with minimal disruption, maintained national composure, and reinforced its dominance in both the air and information domains. The broader message is unmistakable: Israel sets the tempo and terms. Iran is reacting—and falling behind.

V. Lessons for the United States
As the US continues to lead diplomatic efforts to contain Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Operation Rising Lion provides a concrete demonstration of what effective counterproliferation requires. The operation serves as a reminder that diplomacy needs to be backed by credible power, intelligence superiority, and close coordination with trusted partners. Below are seven lessons the operation offers on counterproliferation, escalation control, and the enduring value of US–Israel cooperation.

1. Counterproliferation requires covert penetration, not just monitoring.
Israel did not rely on external enforcement bodies or treaty frameworks. Instead, it embedded operatives, pre-positioned strike assets, and built a parallel intelligence architecture capable of degrading Iran’s nuclear infrastructure from within. This highlights (a) the limitations of verification regimes for dealing with a regime committed to concealment and (b) the importance of backing passive oversight with the threat of active disruption.

2. Eliminating strategic human capital halts weaponization at its source.
Rather than only targeting facilities, Israel removed the intellectual and operational drivers of Iran’s nuclear program. Scientists, engineers, and senior planners with years of accumulated expertise were taken out of the equation. This approach addresses the roots of the problem in a way that no air strike on a centrifuge site could.

3. Strategic surprise prevents escalatory cascades.
The strike achieved total surprise—Iran received no warnings, distributed no alerts, and had no time for defensive repositioning. This prevented Tehran from activating contingency plans or engaging in calibrated escalation. Adversaries often expect a slow, bureaucratic Western response. But Israel showed that speed and surprise can shift the initiative and contain conflict escalation.

4. Hard power enforcement is essential when norms break down.
Israel acted while international institutions faltered. The Islamic Republic had repeatedly breached enrichment thresholds and obstructed inspections. Rather than wait for diplomatic consensus, Israel imposed a hard ceiling on Iran’s capabilities. This demonstrates that in certain cases, decisive action is not an alternative to diplomacy—it is a necessary mechanism to enforce negotiated terms.

5. Israel functions as a regional nonproliferation anchor.
Multilateral efforts often collapse under political pressure. Israel has proven willing and able to act when others are not. By destroying components of Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure, Israel preserved regional stability and enforced red lines that others had only articulated. This establishes Israel as a frontline actor in global nonproliferation.

6. Negotiation leverage is built on the battlefield, not at the table.
The US entered nuclear talks with Iran hoping to restrain enrichment through diplomacy. Israel countered by altering the facts on the ground. By eliminating Iran’s top nuclear scientists and strategic planners, it dramatically weakened Tehran’s position in negotiations. The lesson: diplomatic strength is a function of prior operational advantage.

7. Intelligence without enforcement undermines deterrence.
US intelligence has long tracked Iran’s violations. But it has rarely translated that into meaningful action. Israel showed what happens when intelligence is fused with political will. Washington should recognize that delaying enforcement for fear of escalation undermines the credibility of US commitments.

VI. The Triumph of Strategic Vision
Operation Rising Lion demonstrated how modern warfare is shaped by perception, disruption, and initiative. Israel dismantled core elements of Iran’s command structure, eliminated key personnel tied to nuclear development, and exposed the gaps in Iran’s internal defenses. More critically, it disrupted the strategic logic that underpins Iran’s regional posture. Tehran had assumed that escalation could be delayed, that its territorial depth provided insulation, and that Israel would remain constrained by political and diplomatic pressures. On June 13 those assumptions collapsed.

The consequences extend beyond Iran’s borders. The regime’s ability to coordinate and direct its regional proxy network—Hezbollah, the Houthis, and various Iraqi and Syrian militias—relies on centralized guidance and perceived strength. By targeting senior IRGC figures and degrading logistical hubs, Israel introduced friction and fragmentation across this network. What appeared to be an integrated deterrence structure now faces a leadership vacuum and a credibility crisis.

For policymakers in Washington, the operation underscores a broader reality: dominance in modern conflict depends on the ability to preempt, conceal, and control tempo. Israel acted without delay, executed with precision, and achieved its objectives before Iran could respond. In this environment, military advantage is no longer defined by scale, but by the capacity to identify vulnerabilities and exploit them without warning.

This Is What ‘Never Again’ Means By Abe Greenwald

Via Commentary Magazine Newsletter sign up here.
None of it ultimately was enough. As of 2x4 hours ago, Iran was months away from having a nuclear weapon. So Operation Rising Lion was a necessity. What we saw last night, and what will continue in the coming weeks, is what “never again” means. It doesn’t mean convincing the masses that Israel is a nice country full of nice people. It doesn’t mean “winning the PR war.” It doesn’t mean showing bottomless restraint against enemies. And it doesn’t mean pleading for protection from others. It means Jews destroying those who are trying to kill them.

Golda Meir described Israel’s nuclear capacity as varenye, a fruit preserve that Eastern European Jews had kept close at hand in the event of a pogrom. The pogrom came to Israel on October 7, 2023. It turns out, Israel didn’t need to respond with nuclear weapons. Rather, it launched a fierce military campaign and multiple ingenious operations to destroy the surrounding Iran-backed armies that sought to snuff out the Jewish people.

Almost two years after Hamas’s attack, October 7 is starting to look a lot like December 7. The Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor set in motion a war that would level imperial Japan like no country has been leveled in the history of man. Similarly, it seems that Iran and its terrorist proxies sealed their own fate when they decided to wage a multifront war on Israel.

Jew-hatred has swelled into a popular global campaign since October 7. But despite the pro-terrorist mobs and shootings and fire bombings and international bullying of Jews and Israel, I’ve looked on at events with a sense of equipoise. I’ve been enraged and saddened and perplexed like every other Jew during this period. But there has always been something counterbalancing the negative. This was my faith—my certainty—that Israel understood with exquisite clarity what “never again” means, and it would go to any length required to ensure the survival of Am Yisrael. It does, and it is. And that’s all that matters.

06/13 Links Pt2: Walking Through a Supernova; Douglas Murray on death cults, Joe Rogan, and profoundly unserious people; Macron's conference touting Palestinian statehood postponed

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Walking Through a Supernova

In the weeks after Palestinian terrorists killed nearly 400 people at an Israeli music festival on Oct. 7, 2023, a growing corps of citizen-volunteers trekked to the site of the massacre to collect the personal items left behind. The group warehoused the items and organized and tagged them so survivors and the relatives of victims could retrieve them. The police saw the effort as helpful to their investigation: Once they’d studied and recorded the scene, the items could bring forward witnesses or others with information.

When I saw some of these items on display in Washington DC on Thursday, at a pre-opening walkthrough of the Nova Exhibition at Gallery Place, where it will be open to the public from June 14 through July 6, they conjured a different image entirely. I found myself staring at a pile of shoes collected from the site of the massacre and thought of the only place I’d seen its kind before: at a Holocaust memorial.

It also helped me understand why the survivors of the Nova massacre who serve as guides to the exhibition kept asking me how I felt about what I was seeing and experiencing. That these various scenes would hit people differently was taken for granted.

However it hits you, it does so immediately. The first staging area is a recreated Nova campground. The twist is that almost everything you see was actually at the 2023 Nova festival. These tents aren’t replicas. Only the people who lived in them for the weekend are missing.

In and around the tents are people’s clothing, shoes, board games, even a burned up cigarette butt and the occasional can of deodorant. Cellphones are plugged into wall chargers and strewn throughout the campground; they are playing loops of videos from Oct. 7—some survivors’ videos, some taken by Hamas terrorists themselves. The campsites attest to the joyful atmosphere of the festival—one has a tree sign hanging next to it that says “HAPPY PLACE”; another has a simple pair of wings hanging from a pole.

The dark irony of the scene is that the Nova festival itself isn’t seen merely as a music event but also as a healing one. The setting—breathtaking open fields in the desert—combined with the trance music that dominates the festival draws many who are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, for example. As survivor Maya Izoutcheev pointed out, concertgoers dance through the night and don’t see their fellow dancers around them until the sun rises, giving them a sense of privacy and of a close-knit shared experience at the same time.

The Right Way to Sanction the Muslim Brotherhood

While the Iranian regime’s ideology is Shiite, its founders were inspired by the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood. The original Islamist group, the Brotherhood is the root from which Hamas, al-Qaeda, and Islamic State sprang; its motto declares that “jihad is our way and dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope” and anti-Semitism is a cornerstone of its ideology. At the same time, it is not a single organization, but consists of disparate groups in countries across the globe—some actively engaged in terrorism, others dedicated to spreading their hateful ideology peacefully. This reality is a complication for the Trump administration, which is considering sanctions on the Brotherhood.

Jonathan Schanzer explains that rather than simply issue an executive order that the next administration could appeal, the White House should instruct the Treasury Department to level anti-terrorism sanctions against specific branches of the Brotherhood as the evidence dictates:

The Brotherhood in Yemen (the Islah Party, which partners with the Houthis) and Jordan (where a violent Brotherhood plot was recently broken up by the government) are very likely to meet [Treasury Department] criteria. From there, the Treasury could begin to expand the network to other affiliates that meet [these] criteria.

The Treasury Department’s process offers the opportunity, over time, to designate the entire Muslim Brotherhood. When evidence points to certain branches or individuals from the Brotherhood’s disparate branches providing financial, technical, or material support to groups already under sanctions, they themselves become targets for designation.

Macron-backed U.N. conference touting Palestinian statehood postponed

French President Emmanuel Macron announced on Friday that his upcoming United Nations conference with Saudi Arabia promoting international recognition of a Palestinian state has been postponed following Israel’s attack on Iran.

Speaking to reporters from Paris, Macron said that the conference would need to be rescheduled for logistical purposes, citing the inability of Palestinian Authority officials to travel to U.N. headquarters in New York next week to participate.

The Trump administration was opposed to the conference, titled “The High Level International Conference for the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution,” and urged U.N. member states against participating. Pro-Israel Republicans on Capitol Hill also criticized the gathering, which was scheduled to take place June 17-20, as a distraction from U.S. efforts to secure peace in the region.

Despite his campaign for Palestinian statehood recognition, Macron was quick to defend Israel’s strikes on Iran, releasing a statement early Friday criticizing Tehran for its nuclear program and supporting Israel’s right to self-defense. At his press conference later Friday, he argued that Iran was heavily responsible for the current unrest in the Middle East by building its nuclear program against the requests of the West and other actors in the region.

06/13 Links Pt1: Zionism Has Been Vindicated; A surgical strike against Islamist tyranny; Israeli woman killed in Iranian missile strike

From Ian:

John Podhoretz: Zionism Has Been Vindicated

Twenty-four years ago, Iran’s president, the Ayatollah Rafsanjani—a supposed “moderate”—spoke these words only months after September 11 made the world aware of the mass-murdering nature of the Islamist threat to the West: “If one day, the Islamic world is also equipped with weapons like those that Israel possesses now, then the imperialists’ strategy will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything. However, it will only harm the Islamic world.” In other words, damage might be done outside Israel if there were to be a nuclear exchange, but that would be worth it, because Israel would cease to exist.

In 2005, Rafsanjani was succeeded by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who began to make even more explicit what Rafsanjani had implied: “Thanks to people’s wishes and God’s will, the trend for the existence of the Zionist regime is downwards….The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon.” For decades, Iranian mullahs and leaders had chanted “Death to America” and “Death to Israel,” but this was something different. Iran’s nuclear ambitions were real and the purpose of going nuclear was millenarian and apocalyptic and aimed at the Jews.

In the days, weeks, months, and years to come, we will learn some, if not all, of what Israel determined it needed to do to slow down, halt, and destroy Iran’s apocalyptic ambitions. The nature of the operation, or operations, is likely to dwarf any such military/intelligence effort ever before seen on this earth. And it happened because it had to happen. Because Israel is real. Because Israel is a nation of 9 million and was not going to allow itself to be destroyed.

More important, the execution of this plan followed Israel’s greatest military and intelligence failure—the failure to keep track of Hamas’s evildoing, under the assumption that Israel had had Hamas contained and without the ability to strike catastrophically. Perhaps we can surmise that Israel’s desire to believe it had neutralized the Hamas threat using missile and rocket defenses had something to do with the depth of focus and the amount of energy its leaders were expending to watch and plan and develop weaponry and countermeasures against Iran. Perhaps they just didn’t have (as we say these days) enough “bandwidth” for both.

But the catastrophe of October 7 also revealed just how determined Iran was to put its plan to destroy Israel into action, and thereby triggered Israel’s own ultimate countermeasures—the war in Gaza, the destruction of Hezbollah in Lebanon, the elimination of Iran’s air defenses, and now the determination to rid the world of Iran’s nuclear sites, its ambitions for nuclearization, and perhaps even the destruction of the Iranian regime.

One stands mute at the audacity of the planning and the magnificence (thus far) of the execution. And one wonders, yet again, if what is happening here is once more a sign not just of Israel finding its own salvation in Jewish self-rule–but of God’s providence.

Melanie Phillips: The nightmare scenario arrives

The final chapter in the Iran nuclear crisis may now be upon us.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told Congress that there were “plenty of indications” that Iran was actively moving toward a nuclear weapon.

There have been numerous reports that Israel is preparing to strike Iran’s nuclear sites in the coming days. Washington has withdrawn non-essential staff from its Baghdad embassy and has approved a voluntary evacuation from U.S. embassies and locations throughout the region.

The expectation of imminent attack may or may not be premature. We may be watching another episode of brinkmanship as yet another negotiating ploy.

What does seem certain is that Iran has now reached the nightmare point that has been feared for so long—that it is about to assemble a nuclear weapon.

Israel can’t tolerate that. If President Donald Trump decides that the United States won’t join an attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, then Israel is preparing to go it alone, even though that would restrict it to damaging the nuclear sites rather than totally destroying them.

Since the Hamas-led atrocities in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, the West has refused to acknowledge that Israel has been subjected to a seven-front war of extermination waged by Iran and its proxies.

This denial goes back decades. Even though the Iranian regime declared war against America and the West from the moment it came to power in 1979, political and media discussion of the Iranian issue has remained wholly inadequate and infested by disinformation spread by the regime through all-too gullible policy elites.

The fact that Iran insists that it won’t abandon its right to uranium enrichment, or that the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog has now declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in 20 years, will probably make precious little difference to such people.

This is because the narrative upon which the West is fixated holds that Israel is the driver of events in the Middle East, and that its war against the Palestinian Arabs is the principal cause of instability and violence in the region.

Why Israeli Strikes on Iran Make America Safer

Noah Rothman provides a worthwhile reminder of why a nuclear Iran is a threat not just to Israel, but to the United States:
For one, Iran is the foremost state sponsor of terrorism on earth. It exports terrorists and arms throughout the region and beyond, and there are no guarantees that it won’t play a similarly reckless game with nuclear material. At minimum, the terrorist elements in Iran’s orbit would be emboldened by Iran’s new nuclear might. Their numbers would surely grow, as would their willingness to court risk.

Iran maintains the largest arsenal of ballistic missiles in the region. It can certainly deliver a warhead to targets inside the Middle East, and it’s fast-tracking the development of space-launch vehicles that can threaten the U.S. mainland. Even if Tehran were a rational actor that could be reliably deterred, an acknowledged Iranian bomb would kick-start a race toward nuclear proliferation in the region. The Saudis, the Turks, the Egyptians, and others would probably be compelled to seek their own nuclear deterrents, leading to an infinitely more complex security environment.

In the meantime, Iran would be able to blackmail the West, allowing it occasionally to choke off the trade and energy exports that transit the Persian Gulf and to engage in far more reckless acts of international terrorism.

As for the possible consequences, Rothman observes:
Iranian retaliation might be measured with the understanding that if it’s not properly calibrated, the U.S. and Israel could begin taking out Iranian command-and-control targets next. If the symbols of the regime begin crumbling, the oppressed Iranian people might find the courage to finish the job. If there’s anything the mullahs fear more than the U.S. military, it’s their own citizens.

Examining how PressTV twists the truth shows how mainstream journalists do the same

Here's a fun exercise. Find the lies in this PressTV report:

Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Bagheri and commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Major General Hossein Salami have been martyred in Israeli aggression that also targeted scientists and civilians.

Videos circulating on social media show widespread destruction in residential areas of Tehran and other regions, the result of what has been described as indiscriminate Israeli aggression.

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, in a statement, condemned the aggression and vowed Iran's severe retaliation against the Tel Aviv regime.

“In the early hours of today, the Zionist regime once again revealed its evil and bloodstained hand by committing a crime on our beloved soil, further exposing its malicious nature through attacks on residential areas. The regime must now await a harsh punishment,” read the statement.

There aren't any in the article itself, except for the word "martyred."

The scientists working on a nuclear weapon probably were technically civilians. The article doesn't say the attacks were indiscriminate - just that they were described that way. And the Khamenei quote is accurate, even if he is lying - but the article quotes him.

There was no violation of journalistic standards while giving an altogether false impression.

Similarly, this headline: "Israeli ‘barbaric’ aggression against Iran draws global condemnation."

The article quotes a Turkish official as calling it "barbaric" and the condemnations were around the world.

This shows how Iranian journalists can lie while adhering to journalistic standards. But it also shows how supposedly Western media can do the same thing.

Quote people selectively. Frame facts selectively. Couch the reporter's opinion as an "expert" opinion. Omit any facts that contradict the thesis. Make implications without directly making accusations.

It is obvious when it is done by PressTV. But the exact same thing is done by the New York Times using the same methods. (Although the NYT will pretend to quote the Israeli side, but bury it way down in the story and then have a friendly anti-Israel voice counter it immediately.)

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The responses from the international community to Israel's brilliant and audacious attack on Iran's nuclear program are predictable.

The French Foreign Minister said, "We call on all parties to exercise restraint and avoid any escalation that could compromise regional stability."

Keir Starmer, UK PM, said, "Escalation serves no one in the region. Stability in the Middle East must be the priority and we are engaging partners to de-escalate. Now is the time for restraint, calm and a return to diplomacy."

The Australian Foreign Minister said, "This risks further destabilising a region that is already volatile. We call on all parties to refrain from actions and rhetoric that will further exacerbate tensions."

New Zealand's Prime Minister said, "It's a really unwelcome development in the Middle East. The risk of miscalculation is high. That region does not need any more military action, and risk associated with that."

Japan's Foreign Minister said, "The government strongly condemns this action, which escalates the situation."

Plus the unanimous Arab condemnations of Israel.

The only people who are authorized to speak on behalf of a nation are diplomats. Diplomats are trained to always prioritize diplomacy and to only support purely defensive military action against a current or imminent threat.

Diplomacy is ill equipped to deal with a nation that is weaponizing diplomacy itself as a cover to create a clandestine nuclear weapons program.

Iran's threat to Israel and the world is something that diplomacy simply cannot and never can fix. It can delay it at best. But without an inspections regime that violates Iranian sovereignty, with unlimited inspections in every inch of the regime, which no nation would ever tolerate, diplomacy and negotiations can never avert the threat.

Few can seriously doubt that Iran has a clandestine nuclear weapons program, plus an advanced ballistic missile program which can deliver the bombs to Israel and potentially much of Europe.

Everyone agrees that this is unacceptable. But diplomats are hardwired to seek to avoid military action.

Moreover, they cannot recognize long term catastrophic military threats as triggering the need for a military response before they actualize - and it is too late. Their knee-jerk response is that a state has the right to defend itself after it is attacked, which is cold comfort to a nation attacked by a nuclear bomb.

Diplomacy is not the only lens through which to view the world. But it is usually the only one that generally gets a public platform, by the very nature of international politics.

Most national leaders understand this. This is why they have their own armies and their own intelligence agencies - as alternatives and adjuncts to diplomacy and its limitations. The fact that diplomacy is only one leg of the stool of keeping the international order stable is rarely mentioned in public.

There can be little doubt that the heads of the world's militaries and intelligence agencies are celebrating Israel's astonishing attack this morning. But they can only hint at this in public - because a nation needs a consistent position on the world stage, and that position is written by diplomats.

Israel, as the intended target of an Iranian nuclear bomb, cannot and must not depend on diplomacy to protect itself - especially diplomacy from third parties who do not have as much skin in the game.

No nations wanted Iran to have a nuclear bomb. But most don't have the tools to stop it, because diplomacy cannot and they would never deploy their militaries to defend Israel.

As a result, Israel plays a unique role on the world stage: the designated bad guy. It is often the only nation that will do what is necessary and is willing to withstand international condemnation. This allows other nations to publicly condemn Israel while privately breathe a sigh of relief - which was their reaction when Israel destroyed Iraq's and Syria's own clandestine nuclear weapons programs, and when Israel decapitated Hezbollah and paved the path for the Syrian regime to fall.

But Israel pays a heavy price for this thankless role. The constant diplomatic criticism has real world effects that spill into the economic and other fields. But if Israel wouldn't do it, and nations like the US wouldn't show that diplomacy without a credible military threat is meaningless, the world would now be facing not only Iranian nukes but also Iraqi, Syrian and Libyan nukes under extremist regimes.

Israel is literally saving the world, in public, and the way the world is set up means that it will remain a thankless and risky job.

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

The Developing Picture As Israel Preemptively Attacks Iran (Daled Amos)

It is Thursday night, and Israel has attacked Iran.Joe Truzman, FDD senior research analyst, posted on X:

The goal of the operation is to neutralize the nuclear threat from Iran to the degree that such a thing is possible. But in order to accomplish this, more than just the infrastructure is being targeted. Already, Iran has announced the names of various military leaders killed in Israel's initial attack.

Iran had crossed the line from the theoretical to a genuine threat:

Intelligence assessments showed the regime had enriched enough uranium to produce approximately 15 nuclear warheads and was actively conducting tests. The pace, the scope, and the intent had changed. What had once been described in abstract terms—potential, capability, intent—had now become operational reality.

This is only the beginning. There is more to come. But already there are hints--or hopes--for what may be coming.

Israel's goal is not to bring down the Iranian regime and free its people, but some have already expressed that hope.

(read the whole thing)

An Iranian Jew and advocate for the restoration of the Iranian monarchy posted

And there may be some basis to that:

On the other hand, there will be backlash on the streets in support of Iran, just as we saw after the massacre on October 7th.

Already, Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut has come out condemning Israel:

Israel’s attack on Iran, clearly intended to scuttle the Trump administration’s negotiations with Iran, risks a regional war that will likely be catastrophic for America.

Similarly, Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a member of the Armed Services Committee, criticized Israel.

Israel’s alarming decision to launch airstrikes on Iran is a reckless escalation that risks igniting regional violence. These strikes threaten not only the lives of innocent civilians, but the stability of the entire Middle East.

It is only a matter of time before the more radical members of the Democratic Party follow suit and claim that Israel is the one creating tensions in the region.

We will have to wait to see what Trump's response will be and if he will take a position similar to Biden, helping Israel shoot down the rockets Iran will continue to fire in retaliation.

It is too early to say whether Israel has actually accomplished against Iran a strike comparable to what it did against Hezbollah, taking them out of the picture to a large degree, or comparable to Syria, where Israel weakened Assad to the point that he could be overthrown.

In the meantime, not the entire Arab world will be supporting Israel:

The focus should be on neutralizing Iran, not on a further redrawing of the Middle East.
/>

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Iranian English language media trying to use Gaza playbook: "Israel attacked civilians!"

Iran's PressTV tweeted this:

Notice how they are trying to accuse Israel of attacking a "residential building," implying civilians, because that slander has been so successful against Israel in Gaza.

Of course, the "residential building" is almost certainly one that housed Iranian Revolutionary Guard members - or perhaps Iran's nuclear scientists. So it was a valid military target.

It is pretty clear that Israel is not sending planes 1,500 kilometers to attack civilians.

Would it be too much to ask that people seeing Israel being careful to only bomb legitimate military targets in Iran to realize that they do the same in Gaza? That targeting civilians anywhere would not further Israel's military strategy and in fact would weaken it?

And that terrorists have every incentive to lie about it?

Buy EoZ's books on Amazon!

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

06/12 Links Pt2: Federal judge: Trump can’t deport Mahmoud Khalil; Will BBC Verify apologise for spreading disinformation?; Why privileged Israelophobes can’t handle Azealia Banks

From Ian:

Gerald Steinberg: From Durban to Geneva: How the global human rights industry turned on Israel

When Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch were founded in 1961 and 1978 respectively – both by Jews and Zionists – they quickly earned reputations as principled defenders of universal human rights. Yet over time, both organisations have drifted from their original mission of confronting the world’s most brutal regimes. Today, they are increasingly politicised, with a marked and obsessive hostility towards Israel.

The hostile takeover became clearly visible in August 2001, when the NGO Forum of the UN’s Conference on Racism brought 5,000 activists from self-proclaimed human rights groups to Durban, South Africa. The orchestrated assemblage declared Israel to be guilty of apartheid, genocide, colonialism, among similar propaganda labels.

This was the beginning of NGO-led lawfare, boycott campaigns and other forms of demonisation based on exploiting the principles and frameworks of human rights. Twenty-two years later, immediately after the October 7 atrocities, the world-wide propaganda attacks (“the 8th front” of the war) highlighted the same slogans in much more virulent form, feeding blood libels, antisemitic violence and intimidation.

The failure of the Israeli government, including the IDF, as well as the leaders of major Jewish organisations, to recognise and prioritise systematic responses to NGO warfare allowed this danger to fester and expand. The malign political influence of groups such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and their numerous allies increased continuously. But the IDF and various ministries paid little attention to their propaganda reports, parroted in headline articles by prominent journalists around the world, which labelled every response to mass terror as a “war crime”.

In 2009, the Goldstone report (the UN “Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict”) accused Israel of “possible crimes against humanity”, with recommendations for possible action by the newly created International Criminal Court. Amnesty International wrote the list of alleged war crimes, and the majority of the more than 500 citations of “evidence” in the final document were sourced to 50 anti-Israel NGOs. Months later, after Judge Richard Goldstone met with critics (including myself), he acknowledged that his document was deeply biased and inaccurate, but the damage was done.

The threat of international legal action against soldiers got the attention of the IDF, government lawyers and other officials, but the responses were ad hoc. The counter-strategy consisted of claims that the IDF was “the world’s most moral army”, that Israel investigated all allegations of violations, as well as numerous learned legal briefs arguing that the ICC and other international frameworks lacked jurisdiction.

This approach had little to no impact on the lawfare and propaganda campaigns that singled out Israel for demonisation. On the contrary, the advocacy NGOs and their allies in the media, UN, and university campuses (particularly under the headings of human rights and international law programmes) amplified the highly disproportionate attacks, and their influence increased with every round of the Gaza conflict.

Why privileged Israelophobes can’t handle Azealia Banks

We live in an age of grotesque double standards and cloying fakery from celebs. The overwhelming majority seem to think that their job is not to entertain us, but to strike fashionable poses and shove hypocrisies down our throats.

And then there’s Azealia Banks. She is, as the kids say, a real one.

The 34-year-old rapper from Harlem has been controversial for quite some time, sounding off on social media on a variety of topics. But last week she outdid herself by bluntly standing up for Israel at a time when pretty much all of the luvvie class has gone the other way.

‘I’m a Zionist’, she posted last Wednesday. Unsurprisingly, this unleashed a torrent of largely hostile commentary. Many young, privileged Westerners now unthinkingly loathe Israel. For them, a black rapper’s refusal to toe the ‘progressive’ line just doesn’t make sense.

It’s been particularly difficult for woke, finger-snapping white girls. They’re normally only too eager to shout ‘yaaas queen!’ when a black woman speaks. But on this occasion, they’re struggling, as Banks has not stuck to the script.

It should be said that, at points, Banks’s Israel commentary has veered off into dodgier, identitarian territory. ‘BITCH DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY FUCKING BLACK CHILDREN HAVE BEEN MURDERED AT THE HANDS OF ARABS?’, she tweeted last week. Then there was this: ‘I do not support the expansion of genocide of any more peoples of the world at the hands of Arab Muslims.’ Banks, it seems, was referring to the the centuries-long Arab slave trade, which involved the enslavement of millions of Africans right up until the 20th century.

No wonder Banks got progressives’ knickers in a twist. We know that blaming anyone other than the bad white / Jewish man for slavery and genocide is enough to trigger a mass-casualty event at Columbia University.

We live in an age where female celebrity takes mainly two forms: Meghan Markle’s grandiose self-delusion and manufactured virtue, or hectoring harpies with pronouns in their bios. But here comes Banks to shred her opponents openly, and with the most inventive use of swear words I have ever heard. And I grew up in Brooklyn!

06/12 Links Pt1: Israel launches preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear sites, military targets; U.N. Fudges the Data on West Bank Violence

From Ian:

Seth Mandel: Pick a Side

Again, there are two sides here: The U.S. is on one, and an Iranian proxy waging a hot war against America is on the other. There is no way to describe those who pressured BCG and who engaged in a massive media campaign to discredit GHF other than saying they are objectively pro-Hamas.

Though in fairness to the anti-American side of the conflict, the terror coalition is led by Hamas, but there are other groups involved. One of them is the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, an extremely popular terror group among the American left and especially on college campuses. I have written about their seeming ubiquity and their long history of violence against innocents a fair amount over the course of the current conflict because the PFLP continues to set up front groups, forcing the U.S. government to play Whack-a-Mole to stop Americans from funding them.

One such group is Addameer, which the U.S. just sanctioned as a cutout for the PFLP. In response, the UN’s high-profile Mideast rapporteur and virulent anti-Semite Francesca Albanese declared her “full solidarity” with the PFLP-linked organization.

The PFLP has been involved in the post-Oct. 7 terror war against Israeli civilians, has pledged its fealty to Hamas in that war, and has participated in the kidnapping of innocents including, reportedly, the young Bibas children who were subsequently and brutally executed by Palestinians. Just so we’re clear on who and what Francesca Albanese lends her “full solidarity” to.

Again, there are only two sides in this war. The UN has repeatedly chosen to side with Hamas (and the PFLP). Employees of American firms are pressuring their bosses to do the same. All the while, actual Palestinian civilians are murdered in the streets by Hamas but fed by U.S.- and Israel-backed humanitarian coordinators. You can’t be on the side of the UN and Hamas and also be on the side of Gazan civilians and American hostages. So pick one.

Col. Richard Kemp: 'GHF is a turning point in the war, critical in removing Hamas'

Colonel Richard Kemp, the former commander of the British military forces in Afghanistan, spoke to Israel National News - Arutz Sheva about the work of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) and its impact on the course of the war in Gaza.

"The establishment of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is a turning point in the war," Col. Kemp stated. "It is a critical step towards eliminating Hamas from control in Gaza. Their most important means of controlling the population was dominating supply of aid, which was enabled by UNWRA and other humanitarian agencies who could not prevent supplies from being seized by Hamas. Aid was also a vital money-making machine for Hamas which has lost pretty much all other sources of funding to recruit and pay its terrorists. Hamas would take freely supplied aid and sell it to the civilian population at a heavy premium."

"So far, the GHF has delivered a remarkable 19 million meals, including nearly 2.6 million today alone. Some Gazans have commented that this is the first free aid they have received since the war began," he stated. He further noted that the GHF constitutes a "unique and innovative project. It is specifically tailored to deal with the unparalleled challenges that Gaza."

Last night, Hamas terrorists attacked a bus carrying GHF workers, killing eight Gazans who participated in the organization's humanitarian aid efforts. Col. Kemp believes that Hamas decided to attack aid workers because effective humanitarian aid undermines its rule in Gaza. "The effectiveness already of the GHF is demonstrated by Hamas’s threats and attacks against civilians seeking to make use of the system. We also recently saw Hamas murder eight local civilians working for the GHF, and wound and kidnap others. Hamas killing Gaza civilians is nothing new but this is a mark of their desperation. They know just how much the GHF system undermines their control in Gaza. We have seen some limited uprisings against Hamas in recent weeks and there is likely to be more of that as much of the population realises that the terrorists no longer have this stranglehold over them."

Andrew Fox: Aid in Gaza: What is Israel’s New Approach to Humanitarian Aid?

Does this contractor-led aid model have a legal and moral basis? A supportive analysis can indeed find justification, rooted in the same IHL principles discussed earlier. Legally, nothing in the Geneva Conventions mandates that the UN or any specific entity oversee humanitarian relief; what matters is that aid be delivered impartially and effectively to civilians. An occupying power has the right to supervise and control relief efforts for legitimate security reasons, such as searching shipments for weapons or preventing aid from being diverted to enemy fighters.

Israel can argue that excluding UN agencies is a non-arbitrary decision driven by concrete security concerns, namely Hamas’ demonstrated attempts to exploit UN aid. If Hamas has a history of commandeering relief goods, then requiring a new distribution mechanism that excludes Hamas could be seen as a “valid, non-arbitrary reason” to replace the old UNRWA-led system.

The Israeli-US contractor plan rests on the imperative of protecting humanitarian aid from abuse. This considers not only the quantity of aid but also its distribution. By directly provisioning families under close monitoring, Israel aims to cut out the “middleman,” Hamas. In Somalia, only the deployment of US military escorts and later UN peacekeepers ensured that aid could bypass the warlords’ stranglehold. Likewise, in Gaza, a more muscular and controlled delivery system could be seen as the only realistic way to guarantee that food is not weaponised.

UNRWA and others have struggled to prevent corruption or militant interference in Gaza’s aid over the years. From that perspective, it is morally defensible to seek an alternative if the established system is being manipulated. The new model’s emphasis on “rigorous audits” and the involvement of experienced logisticians, including a former World Food Programme director as an advisor, is intended to lend credibility to the assurance that aid will reach its intended recipients.

At the same time, humanitarian organisations warn that “aid operations must remain neutral, independent, and civilian in nature,” and that “treating humanitarian relief as a militarised mission” violates those principles. The new Gaza aid scheme blurs the line between humanitarian and military spheres. Private security firms and Israeli forces securing aid stations directly link relief to one belligerent’s control. This raises legitimate concerns under the humanitarian principles of neutrality and independence. Civilians may perceive aid distribution as an arm of Israeli policy, potentially eroding trust and putting beneficiaries at risk of retribution.

International law does not itself ban an aid mechanism operated by a belligerent, provided that assistance is offered “without any adverse distinction” and not as a reward or coercive tool. Critics are concerned that the contractor model might prioritise aid for civilians who comply with Israeli directives, leaving others out. To genuinely meet IHL’s requirement for impartial aid, Israel and the US must demonstrate that all civilians in need across all of Gaza will receive assistance. If currently only half the population is covered, the plan must urgently expand or risk breaching the principle of impartiality.

So far, the UN has outright refused to participate in the new scheme, with the Secretary-General’s team stating that the proposed model “violates humanitarian principles” and UN agencies will not lend it legitimacy. The lack of established humanitarian actors poses a vulnerability to the plan’s credibility.

Israel’s contractor-driven aid model in Gaza represents a bold recalibration of humanitarian operations in conflict. It challenges the orthodox notion that only UN agencies can deliver aid, positing that when those structures fail, a controlled alternative may be warranted. A conditional, security-conscious aid delivery can save lives without empowering Hamas. Legally, Israel walks a fine line: it must demonstrate that this new mechanism better upholds its obligations to care for Gaza’s civilians under IHL.

Supporting this model does not require a blind endorsement of every aspect; rather, it calls for a nuanced perspective that, in extreme cases, may allow imperfect solutions to outperform dysfunctional ones. The moral litmus test will be whether Gaza’s civilians are better off and more secure in their access to food and medicine under the new scheme.