Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: Hassan Nasrallah

Showing posts with label Hassan Nasrallah. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 09, 2024

Iranian general targeted in Damascus was also a member of Hezbollah's Shura Council

Naharnet adds a crucial detail to the assassination of Iranian Revolutionary Guards general Mohammad Reza Zahedi last week.

An Iranian general killed in a strike in Syria's capital was a member of Hezbollah's Shura Council, the powerful Lebanese group's decision-making body, a source close to the movement said.

The April 1 air strike levelled the Iranian embassy's consular annex in Damascus, killing seven Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) members, including two generals.

One of them was Mohammad Reza Zahedi, a senior commander in the Quds Force, the Guards' foreign operations arm.

Zahedi was the only non-Lebanese on Hezbollah's eight-member Shura Council, the equivalent of the powerful Shiite Muslim movement's political bureau, led by secretary general Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the source said, requesting anonymity because the matter is sensitive.

Nasrallah in a speech Monday paid homage to Zahedi and his colleagues killed in the strike, which Tehran and Damascus have blamed on Israel.

Zahedi "lived with us for long years, away from the spotlight, and provided important services to the resistance in Lebanon and the whole region," Nasrallah said Friday during a televised address.

Zahedi was essentially a top member of Hezbollah, not merely an adviser. That might have tipped the decision to kill him in the Iranian embassy compound. It appears to have been a legal strike anyway, but this strengthens Israel's legal case, as they were attacking a member of a group that they are actively engaged in hostilities against.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Nasrallah threatens to kill tens of thousands of Israeli civilians. No one condemns him.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah threatened Israel on Monday evening in an address marking the 17th anniversary of the 2006 Lebanon war.

During the speech, he said that Hezbollah needed "a few precision missiles" to destroy a list of targets in Israel that included civilian airports, electricity generation and distribution stations, water distribution, main communication centers, infrastructure, oil and gasoline refineries, ammonia depots and the Dimona nuclear reactor.

His mention of the ammonia plants echo a 2016 threat he made where he said that a rocket strike on Haifa's ammonia storage tanks would cause tens of thousands of deaths. “This would be exactly as a nuclear bomb, and we can say that Lebanon today has a nuclear bomb, seeing as any rocket that might hit these tanks is capable of creating a nuclear bomb effect,” Nasrallah said then.

Think about this for a moment. A person who has some 150,000 missiles, including thousands of precision missiles, and who answers to Iran, is directly threatening to attack Israeli civilians and civilian infrastructure and murdering tens of thousands. His threats check all the boxes of what terrorism is.

Yet (as of this writing) there has not been a word of condemnation from human rights groups over a direct, credible threat to millions of Israeli civilians. And when Nasrallah threatened Haifa with tens of thousands of casualties in 2016, neither Human Rights Watch nor Amnesty International even mentioned it in their press releases.

Their interest in human rights always ends when the humans are Jewish.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

A cringy woke apology for complaining about Hezbollah T-shirt at a gay pride event

Two weeks ago, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said that anyone who engaged in a homosexual act should be killed.

A week later, at the Berlin Whole LGBTQ festival, a person was seen wearing a Hezbollah T-shirt on the stage, which upset a Lebanese citizen at the event, who complained about seeing someone wear a symbol of oppression to gays.

He then apologized for complaining!

This apology is truly remarkable.

The hezbollah t-shirt on beach stage

@Chris on #general -

@Chris on July 31, 2023:

To the person who was wearing a Hezbollah t shirt on the beach stage, I'm sorry if my complaint caused you upset. I unfortunately felt triggered by the t-shirt because the party leader recently encouraged the killing of queer people. I understand that wearing the t-shirt was used as a trendy fuck you to the hypocrisy of what is called terrorist vs what is not, and I understand being told that it's not ok to wear it by a white man can be triggering - however, given that whole is about celebrating queerness, I feel that perhaps there are other symbols to wear that are less complicated politically and more inclusive to the different experiences of people. I'm sorry again that it happened this way, I hope you are ok now. To the security people who listened to me and talked to the person, thank you. I wish you let me speak to him directly, it would have been validating and perhaps he would have understood the nuances of my views given that I'm Lebanese myself, but I also understand you wanted to make sure we are both heard.

Needless to say, we don't have any similar apology from the Hezbollah T-shirt person.

A week earlier, at a different Berlin gay festival, someone was seen wearing a gay version of a Lion's Den terrorist group T-shirt, with pink submachine guns.

At these same demonstrations, anti-Israel posters and rhetoric are commonplace.

There must be a name of the psychosis where one loudly supports those who would murder them and opposes those who fight for their rights.

We could apply that same terminology to the small set of "progressive" Jews as well who avidly support those who want to destroy Jews.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Why do Palestinians always declare victory when they lose?

If this is what victory looks like....

Hussain Abdul-Hussain, an analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, tweeted a criticism of Arabs who keep declaring "victory" over Israel:

The Arabs have a chronic and permanent feeling that they are on the verge of victory over Israel, and that the passage of time is in their interest. This is how Nasrallah appeared yesterday saying that Israel does not dare to remove his border tent because Israel's deterrence capacity has diminished, and because Israel is no longer as strong as in the past, and Lebanon is also not weak as in the past.

This feeling that Nasrallah transmits regarding the Arab struggle against Israel is improving in favor of the Arabs, is not born yesterday. "Israel is weaker than a spider’s web.”

Like Nasrallah, Arab Americans feel that anti-Israelism in America and the world is expanding, and that times are changing in favor of the Arabs. Of course, these feelings are not based on facts. Rather, they are from the core of the Arab heritage that replaces truth with poetry, empty pride, and bragging about imaginary heroism and victories.

This Arab non-reality is passed down through the generations. For example, in the closing statement of the Arab League summit held in Tunis in 1979, when Nasrallah was still a teenager, it was stated that the conferees expressed their relief that the world had begun to turn against Israel: Noting with satisfaction the increasing isolation of Israel in the world arena, the shrinking of its international relations, and the growing awareness of the justness of the Palestinian cause and all occupied Arab lands among the world public opinion, it warns against all attempts aimed at restoring the relations of some countries with the Zionist enemy or recognizing Jerusalem as its capital, and declares that the Arab countries will take the necessary measures to protect Arab rights.

Decades, even centuries, of Arab statements made of pure excrement. Statements aimed at masking the complete Arab collapse (with a few exceptions in the Gulf), often by attempting to divert Arab attention by blaming Israel. Arabs who live in illusions and feelings, there is no measurement of the truth, no appreciation of reality, no comparison between what was in the past and what is today (performance indicators), nor how the future can be, nor how can we deflect its path to our advantage. Only drums and honking, and woe to whoever comes out with a different point of view because he departs from the consensus, and that is treason.

Unlike Hussain, Saudi analyst Abdullah bin Bakhit hates Israel. But he also criticizes the Palestinians for declaring victory, specifically in Jenin, from a completely different angle (which includes a dose of classic antisemitism):

Well-known Palestinian journalist Abdel Bari Atwan wrote the following text on Twitter: "The resistance battalions did not leave Jenin until after the enemy withdrew in defeat. The battalions are entrenched, preparing for the next round, and celebrating the great victory politically and militarily despite their limited capabilities and the failure of the authority and Arab governments to them.. The march of honor, redemption, and resistance continues."

However, all that we saw, heard, and expected was that the Israelis destroyed, killed, displaced, arrested, and accomplished everything they came for, and that day will not be late when they will return to do it again. When Israel uses the most powerful warplanes to bomb Gaza and destroy the already worn-out infrastructure, we hear Palestinian officials and journalists celebrate the great victory achieved by the resistance.

In fact, this is free propaganda for the Israelis, as all their crimes are blotted out by this false victory in front of the world. Thanks to these celebrations, the Palestinian situation worsens, the Palestinian cause recedes from the forefront, and Israel moves closer to the Arab street.

The conflict between Palestinians and Israelis is a struggle between absolute power and absolute weakness. The defenseless Palestinian is fighting against all the forces available in the twenty-first century, tanks, planes, intelligence and unlimited global media support. The Palestinian celebration of the delusional victory misleads not only the Palestinians, but also misleads everyone who wants to extend a helping hand to them.

...
The calamity of the Palestinians began when Yasser Arafat stood at the United Nations platform in the 1970s. Instead of explaining to the world the catastrophe of his people and their pain, he began threatening the world, saying, "Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand." The world thought that the man was hiding a mighty force waiting for a signal from him. .

Arafat's speech at the United Nations was the prevailing discourse in the Arab world at the time, and this discourse continued in the conscience of the Palestinian man, who did not want to abandon him. At a time when the Jews continued to weep to this day over the tragedy of their people, and they are the victorious occupiers who own everything in the world of the West. You will hear the representative of Israel at any conference in which he participates, asking those present, with tears welling in his eyes, to pause for the souls of the Jews.

It is clear that the Palestinian mind is still imprisoned in the revolutionary discourse of the sixties, when the process of liberating Palestine was at the door, and it only needed the Nasserite, Baathist and nationalist drums that would accompany the fighters upon entering Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem.

While Hussain's criticisms are reality based, Abdullah bin Bakhit still wants to propagate lies, but his preferred lie is the opposite one. Knowing that the West favors the underdog, he wants to paint the Palestinians as the ultimate losers - who need billions of dollars and political aid.

To my mind, the Palestinian desire to always declare victory - whether in Gaza or Jenin - is mostly a result of honor/shame culture. Losing is ignominious. The only losses that the Arab world admits are those that are too obvious to lie about: 1948 and 1967. Otherwise, everything is a victory - and Israel is always on its last legs.

This denial of reality serves another purpose: it helps Palestinians avoid the compromises necessary for any kind of peace. If they only need to wait until Israel implodes in the next few years to get everything they always wanted, the thinking goes, then they won't have to make any hard choices now. This denial of reality helps fuel intransigence and terror.

Yet no Western leader (with the possible exception of Donald Trump) has been willing to say, publicly, that the Palestinians are wrong and have always been wrong, and their decisions and self-deception ultimately hurt their own people more than they hurt Israel. Instead, they play into the lie, which leads directly to more terror attacks and more Palestinian enthusiasm that they are winning - which recruits far more into the terrorist camp than losing does.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

What are Israel's options on Hezbollah's clear aggression on Israeli territory?

From The Cradle:

Washington is urging the Lebanese government to pressure Hezbollah into removing an outpost erected in the occupied Shebaa Farms, Israeli media reported on 29 June.

Walla news outlet cited anonymous Israeli and US officials as saying that the outpost represents a “miscalculation on Hezbollah’s part, which does not take into account the potential Israeli response. Therefore, this incident has the potential for serious escalation.”

“Our goal is for the outpost not to be there. We prefer Hezbollah evacuate its people itself over us bombing them. We have made this clear to the US, and the Americans made it clear to the Lebanese,” the report cites an Israeli official as saying.

According to Walla, Hezbollah began erecting the first tent in April. The Israeli army reportedly did not realize this until a second tent had been set up.

Israel tried to handle the situation “under the radar in quiet talks” with UNIFIL for weeks.

Other Israeli media outlets say Tel Aviv set a deadline to remove the tents, and that it would deal with the resistance group “on its own,” sparking fears of a wider confrontation.

Beirut has acknowledged that the outpost is south of the UN-recognized Blue Line, separating Lebanese and Israeli territories.

Last week I wrote, "Israeli territory is being stolen by a terrorist group. It seems unbelievable that Israel would outsource the solution to the impotent UN."

It appears that Israel is treading carefully, not wanting to start a war over this but not willing to back down.

It first gave UNIFIL a chance to get involved and do its job to ensure that all of Southern Lebanon, let alone Israeli territory, is not occupied by an Iranian militia. Israel informed UNIFIL of the tents in April, but they have proven to be worthless:

According to Kan news, which originally reported on the Iranian proxy’s armed presence inside Israel proper, the IDF approached UNIFIL regarding the matter some time ago, but the watchdog only came to the site following diplomatic pressure from Israel at UN Headquarters.
Upon inspection, UNIFIL confirmed that tents set up and manned by Hezbollah have indeed been established on the Israeli side of the internationally recognized Blue Line in the contested Mount Dov region, an area claimed by Israel, Lebanon and Syria and also known as the Shebaa Farms.
In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and the UN Security Council, Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Gilad Erdan wrote that Hezbollah’s actions constitute a violation of UN Resolution 1701, enacted following the end of the Second Lebanon War in 2006 and ratified by both countries. The resolution calls for armed groups besides the official Lebanese military and UNIFIL to remain north of the country’s Litani River.
The letter also contained photographs of the Lebanese position in Israel.
Furthermore, the former public security minister noted that Hezbollah has built 27 outposts along the Blue Line over the past year, and that he expects the UN to take action on the matter, as these positions also violate Resolution 1701.

So now Israel is asking France and the US demand that the Lebanese government get involved.

Israel is trying to allow Hezbollah to "climb down the tree" quietly without being shamed, but patience is running out:

“Our goal is for the outpost not to be there,” an Israeli official was quoted as saying. “We prefer Hezbollah evacuate its people itself over us bombing them. We have made this clear to the US and the Americans made it clear to the Lebanese.”

According to the Ynet news site, Israeli officials believe UN peacekeepers will not be able to act against the post and are looking to the US and France instead. The outlet claimed Israeli officials had set a deadline for the position to be removed, after which it will get rid of the tents itself, a move that could spark a wider conflagration.

Alma Research, which watches Hezbollah closely, believes that the terror group wants a war.

In our assessment, Hezbollah intends to reach an escalation that will lead to a broad military conflict with Israel, out of an internal interest in strengthening its power in Lebanon. Hezbollah is trying to escalate with a defiant presence on the border, the Megiddo attack, firing rockets, and now the placing of tents on Israeli territory. Israel for the time being is not dragged in. Last summer, Nasrallah gave ideological and religious approval for a military conflict and as far as Hezbollah is concerned, he has carried out significant power-building in recent years and is ready for a conflict. Continued provocations or a broad conflict is a win-win for Hezbollah.

The strategy is Iranian, not Lebanese

I believe that Israel's best card to play is the Lebanese people itself. While they hate Israel, they hate Hezbollah and Iran as well, and they do not want to be dragged into a new conflict that only benefits Iran.

The Lebanese media has been muted in this issue. I believe that unless Hezbollah dismantles the tents quickly, Israel should publicly say - but with the intent that the Lebanese hear - that the situation is intolerable and that Israel will bomb the tents on Israeli territory.

Israel should make a public deadline, announce the date that the tents would be bombed, emphasize that these are on Israeli territory, and then bomb them if they are not removed.

Israel must emphasize that it has no intention of attacking Lebanon - unless attacked first. If Hezbollah responds with rockets, the gloves will come off.

The UN agrees where the Blue Line is so Hezbollah's claim that the territory is Lebanese will not impress more residents.

If the Lebanese people publicly call for Hezbollah to withdraw, it would have a hard time pretending that it is defending Lebanese interests.

The entire Shebaa Farms issue is just an excuse by Hezbollah to maintain its massive arsenal for the pretense of "defending Lebanon." Everyone knows it is a joke. But Lebanese lives are in the balance, and it must be made clear to the world that Iran and its Hezbollah proxy are trying to start a war that would only hurt the Lebanese people.

It is clear that Israel cannot allow an enemy to wantonly grab its land. No state would. Israel's patience so far has been somewhere between heroic and foolhardy.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Hezbollah says that the maritime border dispute is not over - and never will be

The maritime border agreement (indirectly) signed between Lebanon and Israel last week is not really a final agreement, according to Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

In a speech he gave last night, Nasrallah showed a map of the various positions and said that there was still an area of about 2.5 square kilometers - demarcated by a line of buoys that Israel had insisted would be their border - that are still claimed as Lebanese by Hezbollah.

He still claims the additional 876 square kilometers "liberated" as a great victory, but says that the total should be closer to 879 square kilometers.

This is practically the same tack that Hezbollah too after the UN drew the Blue Line between Israel and Lebanon. Even though Israel withdrew behind that line, Hezbollah still claims small areas that the agreement gave to the Israeli side, and uses that as justification for maintaining a huge arsenal of weapons and rockets.

Not only that, but Nasrallah, in his speech, encouraged the Lebanese to pressure their government to re-assert their rights to Line 29, the current maximal position they made up during the negotiations that has no legal basis. He says if Lebanon decides that Line 29 really is the border, then Hezbollah will "struggle" to achieve that.

Nasrallah also claims that Lebanon - meaning Hezbollah - was on the verge of declaring war against Israel when it was about to start working in the Karish field that is within the Line 29 area, and that this threat is what forced Israel to back down and accept the Lebanese position.

In short, while Hezbollah is happy about the agreement, it does not accept the agreement. This was predictable. The agreement might allow Israel to freely work on the Karish field for now, but to pretend that the maritime border issue with Lebanon has been peacefully resolved when the most powerful army in Lebanon insists that it hasn't is foolhardy.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

The "If-Then" fallacy comes back in full force for Lebanon

Amir Tibon writes in Haaretz that the maritime border agreement between Israel and Lebanon are as important as the Abraham Accords:

The Abraham Accords, for all the optimism and economic benefits they created, did not save the life of one Israeli soldier. After all, Israel had never gone to war with Bahrain, the UAE or Morocco. The Lebanon deal mediated by Biden’s point man, Amos Hochstein, on the other hand, has the potential to avert a disastrous confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah.

Such a war would play out very differently than Israel’s periodic clashes with Hamas in Gaza: Conservative estimates include tens of thousands of rockets falling on Israeli cities, hundreds of casualties, and widespread destruction. If the agreement holds, this nightmare scenario will be prevented. It doesn’t mean peace will blossom between Israel and Lebanon, but securing quiet on Israel’s northern border is more important at the moment.

The assumption that the agreement will prevent war is part of an old tradition held by "experts" that I have called the "if-then" fallacy: If Israel does X, then others will do Y.

An early example was Michael Kramer in Time magazine who said, in 1988, that if Israel would give a serious peace offer to Palestinians and the Palestinians reject it, then the world wouldn't blame Israel for there not being peace.

Since then, Israel indeed did offer many serious peace offers, Palestinians rejected them all, and the world keeps blaming Israel.

Another example is ironically listed in Tibon's peace. In 2003, the conventional wisdom was that if Israel would just withdraw from Gaza, then Gaza would no longer be a problem for Israel, because there would be no incentive for Gaza groups to start wars.

Israel withdrew from Gaza - and Gaza groups continue to start wars every year or two.

What about Hezbollah, though? Aren't they a more rational actor than Hamas and Islamic Jihad? Couldn't they be trusted to react logically when Israel does what they want?

Well, in 2000, Israel withdrew from Lebanon - the entire raison d'etre of Hezbollah, it seemed. The UN certified Israel's full withdrawal. Certainly, the experts said, if Israel made a full withdrawal from southern Lebanon, then Hezbollah would have no claim on Israel and there would be peace. Yet Hezbollah continues to claim lands south of the UN-demarcated line, and it violate the Blue Line when kidnapping Israeli soldiers that sparked the 2006 Lebanon war.

Now, we are told that if Israel concedes the entire disputed area with Lebanon at sea, then Hezbollah will not do anything to jeopardize Lebanese sovereignty and will respect the border. Yet Lebanon and Hezbollah created a new "border" during the negotiations. What is stopping Hezbollah from claiming, whether this year or in five years, that Israel is extracting gas in Lebanese territorial waters and that it must "defend" the area?

Indeed, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah is taking partial credit for the agreement, saying that Israel knuckled under to his threats to attack the Karish gas platform. This was parroted by Hezbollah's deputy, saying it was Hezbollah strength that forced Israel to humiliate itself. They regard the agreement as a capitulation by Israel to Hezbollah threats.

This is not exactly the same "if-then" formula that the optimists are claiming.

The Shebaa Farms dispute, over a tiny amount of land, has been enough of an excuse for Hezbollah to continue claiming Israel is the aggressor and that it is protecting Lebanon with an army and arsenal that rivals those of many nations. Why would it act any differently over a maritime border?

Moreover, Hezbollah is not an independent player. It follows what Iran's supreme leader wants. If Iran tells Hezbollah to shoot a thousand rockets into Israel , Hezbollah will not listen to the "experts" about how pragmatic it is. It would do what terror groups always do: create a pretext that will mollify Leftist antisemitic allies ("we are protecting Jerusalem from Judaization!") and shoot the rockets.

There is no doubt that in the short term, this maritime agreement will cool tensions on the Lebanese border. But the hundreds of square kilometers Israel gave up are not only for the short term, but forever. Giving up something so valuable in exchange for an assumption of how a terror group will act far into the future, without a single Hezbollah pledge or signature, is taking the if-then fallacy to new lengths.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Is Iran preparing for a proxy war with Israel as soon as JCPOA is signed?

Haaretz is perplexed:

In addition to dealing with the progress toward a new nuclear agreement with Iran and the talks aimed at preventing a teachers’ strike September 1, Israeli decision makers had another matter to ponder this week. Much time and other resources were devoted to trying to figure out what Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah is up to. The answers, so far, have been very partial.

There seems to be no logic to Nasrallah’s frequent threats to strike Israeli drilling platforms in the Mediterranean, risking war, if a final agreement is not reached on the Israel-Lebanon maritime border. Lebanon is in the midst of a severe economic and political crisis, and if war were to break out Hezbollah would likely be widely blamed for embroiling the country in an unnecessary and very costly military adventure.

Nevertheless, throughout the summer Nasrallah has spoken out the dispute over natural-gas drilling rights, growing increasingly extreme in his statements. What’s worrisome, especially to Military Intelligence, is the difficulty of analyzing his views and intentions. Despite the high likelihood of an eventual agreement, with U.S. mediation, there is still genuine apprehension about possible surprises from Hezbollah.

It still amazes me that serious analysts think that Hezbollah leader Nasrallah makes any real decisions on his own. His loyalty is to Iranian leaders, and no one else. The well-being of Lebanon is not one of his goals, it is an impediment to his goals.

Even UNIFIL, which is reluctant to publicly criticize Hezbollah, has called out its increased militarization and violations of the buffer zone in southern Lebanon.

Nasrallah's increasing bellicosity must be seen in context of what is happening with other Iranian proxies. For example, this story today says that Syria asked Iran and its proxies not to conduct attacks against Israel from its territory - which means that Syria is aware of such plans.

Not to mention the Islamic Jihad mini-war earlier in August, which was prompted by an attempt for a major terror attack against Israel. That was all orchestrated by Iran, seemingly against Hamas wishes for stability in Gaza.

See a pattern?

There was also an intriguing story of a possible Israeli strike at a Houthi camp in Yemen on August 7, during the Gaza fighting, where six Iranian and Lebanese advisers were killed. The Houthis, using Iranian technology, have been increasing their ballistic missile and cruise missile ranges to reach Israel and have directly threatened Israel as well.

From all indications, Iran is gearing up for a major escalation of fighting against Israel, but it is not ready to directly attack. It wants its proxies in Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and seemingly Yemen (maybe even Iraq) to overwhelm Israeli missile defenses with thousands of rockets from all directions. (One must also assume that Iran is working with some Israeli Arabs to create a fifth column of terror attacks within Israel itself in the case of any war.)

The escalation of threats by Iran and its proxies is almost certainly linked with the nuclear negotiations. The billions of dollars that Iran would gain from an agreement would help fund these proxies, a basic fact that the West is consciously overlooking in its zeal to close out a bad deal with Iran. Iran understands the West much better than the West understands Iran, and the mullahs have already proven that they can gain far more leverage with militancy than with confidence building measures.

And they know quite well that the West, after finally sighing with relief at an agreement, will not have the will or desire to threaten new sanctions in response to an Iranian-directed proxy war against Israel.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Cults of personality are funny

Here is a screenshot of part of the English edition of Lebanon's Al Manar newspaper:

That's five photos of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah on five separate stories.

All of them fawn over him.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

EU drafting deal to obtain natural gas from Israel and Egypt instead of Russia

From EUObserver:

The European Union is negotiating a gas supply agreement with Egypt and Israel, according to internal documents dated 7 June and seen by EUobserver.

A draft memorandum of understanding with the two countries, still subject to changes, is part of its efforts to reduce its dependence on Russian fossil fuels in the wake of Moscow's invasion of Ukraine.

"Security of gas supply is a common major concern. Egypt and the EU will work together on the stable delivery of gas to the EU," reads another internal document mentioning the trilateral collaboration deal.

The proposed agreement highlights that natural gas will be shipped to the EU from Egypt, Israel or any other source in the East Mediterranean region, including EU member states in the region.

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen is due to travel to Cairo next week, but it is currently unclear whether the memorandum will be signed during her visit.

Egypt has increasingly become a regional gas hub, with its two liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. But Israel has also become a key regional gas supplier in recent years.

Under the draft deal, imports from Israel would involve gas being processed at Egypt's liquefaction plants before being shipped to Europe as LNG.

Mediterranean natural gas has been a game changer for Israel - not as earthshaking as the Abraham Accords, but it is redrawing the regional balance in ways that couldn't have been predicted.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah is threatening Israel - and a Greek ship - for exploring in gas fields that the UN said belongs to Israel but Lebanon disputes:

Lebanon should block Israel from extracting gas from the disputed offshore field, Hezbollah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said Thursday, warning a hydrocarbon exploration company hired by Israel against proceeding with its activities.
"The immediate objective should be to prevent the enemy from extracting oil and gas from the Karish gas field," part of which is claimed by Lebanon, Nasrallah said in a televised speech.
Hizbullah will not "stand by and do nothing in the face of (Israel's) looting of Lebanon's natural wealth... which is the only hope for the salvation of the Lebanese people," he warned.
The company "should pull out its ship immediately and avoid getting involved in this aggression and provocation against Lebanon," the head of the powerful Iran-backed movement said, adding that Energean must assume "full responsibility" for its involvement.
“The resistance has the technical ability to prevent the enemy from extracting gas from Karish and I will not say how,” Nasrallah added.
“All of the enemy's measures will not be able to protect the Greek ship or the Karish field,” he warned.

If Lebanon had crafted a maritime border agreement with Israel years ago, it could have been selling gas to Europe by now. Instead it is a country on the verge of failure, in large part because of people like Nasrallah.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.

Read all about it here!

Nasrallah hits back at Arab demands for Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah

Last month, Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Sheikh Ahmad Nasser al-Mohammad al-Sabah visited Beirut and told the Lebanese government the “Kuwaiti, Gulf, Arab and international message for Lebanon to not be a platform for any aggression, and for all borders to be controlled by the state.”

The Arab coalition he represented also insisted on setting a time frame for implementing UN Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 1559 from 2004 which calls for the disarmament of non-state militias in Lebanon, meaning Hezbollah.

The Arab countries pretty much told Lebanon that they won't help it through its financial crisis as long as a separate Muslim extremist movement was allowed to operate with impunity within its borders.

The weak Lebanese government mostly ignored the demands. Lebanese Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib told Al Jazeera, "I am not going to hand over Hezbollah's weapons. I am not going to end Hezbollah's existence, it is out of the question in Lebanon. "

A response letter from Beirut pointedly changed the language of the Arab demand for Lebanon not to be a platform for any aggression to saying that Lebanon will not be "a launchpad for activities that violate Arab countries," meaning that it might be a launchpad to attack Israel.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah yesterday dismissed the demands for his group to disarm, and - as is typical in the Arab world - he couched his refusal in terms of honor.

Nasrallah stressed that "if you remain silent and surrender your weapons, you tell your opponent that you are crushed, humiliated and weak."

"The enemy will not pity you, it will humiliate you even more," Nasrallah added.

"Let them give us one example of peoples who resisted, surrendered their weapons, and kept their dignity," Nasrallah said.

Nasrallah isn't even pretending that Hezbollah cares about the future of Lebanon. Hezbollah's "dignity" of maintaining over 100,000 missiles is more important than the country of Lebanon and the dignity of the Lebanese people themselves.

And when Lebanon implodes, Hezbollah will militarily take over the entire country as millions of Lebanese could become refugees to not live under an Iranian regime.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Lebanese make fun of Nasrallah's speech

Lebanon's English-language news site Naharnet is one of the few that allow readers to comment freely, and most of them really hate Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

Here are some quotes from Nasrallah's Wednesday speech and some Lebanese responses:

Nasrallah: Israel is in retreat and it is heading to demise.
Response: Had to laugh at this;)! Sure Israel's economy is in shambles, its national debt exceeds $150 billion, it defaulted on its sovereign debts, its currency depreciated more than 20 times, it is isolated, and has no friends.

Nasrallah: We encourage the Israelis to leave Palestine and we’re ready to pay for their travel tickets.
Response: Uffff.... why not use the money to keep the Lebanese in their country instead.

Nasrallah: Hizbullah Making Precision Missiles, Drones inside Lebanon
Response 1: Great.... and the Lebanese people are starving! Take your missiles and drones and shove them where the sun don't shine.
Response 2: Can we cook the missiles and drones to eat them? Has Hezbollah created a tech industry around this. Or is Nasrallah just yapping to get the pay check from Khamanei?
The aim of politics is to bring about peace and prosperity to a majority of people while Hezbollah’s aim is to serve the interests of its paymasters in Teheran.
What a monstrous circus!

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

Iran isn't very subtle about its antisemitism by naming its missile "Khaybar-buster"

From the Washington Institute for Near East Policy:

On February 9, just as the nuclear talks in Vienna reached a critical stage, Iran unveiled its “Khaybar Sheikan” (Khaybar Buster) missile, which has a purported range of 1,450 kilometers. This significant development demonstrates, more than anything, the increasing size and range of Iran’s slant-firing solid-motor missiles. The Khaybar reference, meanwhile, points to a seventh-century battle between Muhammad’s army and Jewish communities near Medina whose members refused to convert to Islam and were defeated after their hardened fortresses were overrun.

This isn't exactly subtle. The primary target for such a missile is Israel and they name it after a battle where Muslims massacred Jews.

Anti-Israel protests are often punctuated with chants of "Khaybar, Khaybar ya Yahud, Jaish Muhammad, sa yahud,” which means, “Khaybar, Khaybar oh Jews, the army of Muhammad is returning.” No one can miss the symbolism.

Yet no one is calling Iran out for its obvious antisemitism in naming the missile as a weapon built specifically to attack Jews. The supposed experts on antisemitism from the Left have been silent about their Iranian allies naming a weapon to evoke killing Jews.

It isn't even like this is the first missile named after Khaybar. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah introduced the Khaybar-1 rocket in 2006 and it was used in the 2006 Lebanon war against Israel, hitting Haifa.

Iran and its apologists love to insist that the country has no problems with Jews, only Zionists. They can't explain this Khaibar Sheikan away, so they simply ignore it.

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon!

ESCWA fallout continues as we can see exactly who the Jew-haters are

If you single out Israel as an apartheid state, the only one in the world with that appellation, you are an antisemite.

After UN ESCWA head Rima Khalaf resigned, she has been praised as "brave" for her stand. Of course, her term was up within two weeks, so there was no bravery involved whatsoever.

Who has praised the report and Rima Khalaf?

Mahmoud Abbas, who says he will give Khalaf the Palestinians' highest honor. (Maybe a bronzed suicide belt?)

Hanan Ashrawi, whose NGO website has included numerous examples of naked antisemitism.

The Euro-Mediterranian Human Rights Monitor, which has engaged in antisemitic tropes numerous times.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

Ben White, hypocritical "pro-Palestinian" activist.

Islamic Jihad.

Ali Abunimah and Electronic Intifada.

Hamas.

The BDS movement.

David Duke.

By the criteria of the report, we can safely declare most nations on the planet to be "apartheid states" where all people under the regimes are denied equal rights. But only one seems to get that label. And that proves, as well as anything can, that the critics of Israel are not interested in "human rights" but they simply cannot stomach the idea of the Jewish people having any national rights.

Yes, this is a list of antisemites.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Another outrageous Reuters caption

A student stands behind a podium as a video of Hezbollah's Leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah plays during a pro-Palestinian meeting at a cultural centre in Tehran March 9, 2008. Students agreed on a one-million dollar reward for the murder of three Israeli commanders, Ehud Barak, Amos Yadlin and Meir Dagan. REUTERS/Morteza Nikoubazl (IRAN)

A "pro-Palestinian" meeting? Let's see what we know about this meeting:

1) The video being shown is of Hassan Nasrallah, a Lebanese-born terrorist who has never been in Israel or Palestine in his life. His goal, nonetheless, is the destruction of Israel - not the building of a Palestinian Arab state.

2) At this meeting, students agreed it would be a good idea to murder three Israelis. Not to help Palestinian Arabs, but to murder Israelis.

3) On the podium it helpfully says "Israel must be wiped off the map."

So, is this a "pro-Palestinian" meeting - or an anti-Israel meeting? Is anything being discussed that would help the Palestinian Arabs' lives - any fund raising for medical equipment for Gaza, for example? Apparently not.

So if Reuters is labeling this a "pro-Palestinian meeting" that means that Reuters does not distinguish between "pro-Palestinian" and "anti-Zionist."

Reuters apparently does not believe in a peace process that would result in a Palestinian Arab and Zionist state side-by-side, and it believes that the mainstream of "pro-Palestinian" opinion is similar to the sentiments being displayed here in Iran. So either Reuters does not believe that the "peace process" is "pro-Palestinian," - or they believe that even the "moderate" Palestinian Arabs view the "peace process" as being an anti-Israel movement, with the same goals as shown here.

Which is it?