Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News: Iranian proxies

Showing posts with label Iranian proxies. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 26, 2024

John Kirby sneers at a woman for using the word “fungible” (Judean Rose)

Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

John Kirby, though someone I don’t like, is a darned sight better at presiding over a White House presser than is, for instance, KJP. That’s about the best I have to say about him. But the way he sneered at Fox News Chief Legal Correspondent, Journalist Shannon Bream, in an April interview, literally turned my stomach.

Ugh. It was like he was saying, “Listen little Lady, you stay in your corner, and let the big boys handle this.”

Well, like I said, this was back in April, but the subject of that interview, covert US support for Iran, remains relevant to our current news cycle, with Israel looking at a face-off with the evil Iranian proxy, Hezbollah. Biden’s support of Iran was relevant too, in November, when I wrote about the money trail that led to October 7. It irritated me, the way the Biden administration kept saying that Iran can’t possibly use its own money to fund its war machine. I hear that stuff and say out loud, squinting my eyes at my computer screen, “You know darned well that money is fungible, you blankety blank blank.”

Fungible. It’s not that difficult a concept. When one anticipates money coming in, they risk taking it from somewhere else. Some not of my religion might call this “robbing Peter to pay Paul.”

You don’t need to be a lawyer to understand any of this, right? Yet here was Shannon Bream, a lawyer, polite, refined, asking a reasonable question, and all John Kirby does is sneer and leer at her. You can practically hear Kirby rolling his eyes.

Here's how the conversation went:

Shannon Bream: There are a number of critics, most of them on the GOP side of the Hill, who say, “We shouldn’t be in this position.”
That there are things that were done by this administration, that let Iran think it had an opening here, or others that want to go after Israel. Senator Marsha Blackburn among those, posting on X last night, she says,
“Under President Trump, Iran was broke.
“President Biden gifted them billions of dollars and then naively said, ‘Don’t.’
“‘Don’t.’ is not a foreign policy.”

Under President Trump, Iran was broke.

President Biden gifted them billions of dollars and then naively said “don’t.”

“Don’t” is not a foreign policy.
— Sen. Marsha Blackburn (@MarshaBlackburn) April 13, 2024

Shannon Bream: You know the conversations about unfreezing assets, about waivers on sanctions . . .

John Kirby: Yeah, Yeah. (laughs)

Shannon Bream: Could this administration [have been] tougher on Iran?

John Kirby: (shakes head) It’s hard to look at what President Biden has done with respect to Iran and . . .

Shannon Bream: (interrupts) but we’re also leaving sanctions.

John Kirby: . . . say that he hasn’t been tough on Iran, that we haven’t put pressure on them, that we haven’t—an additional 500 sanctions, additional resources in the region and let’s take a look at that ballistic missiles—okay, so they launched more than 100 ballistic missiles, and how many got through? And the reason they didn’t get through is because President Biden made sure that we pre-position forces in the region to help Israel—will shoot them down—so this vaunted ballistic missile program of theirs, last night (stutters) didn’t turn out to be so vaunted last night.

Shannon Bream: (interrupts) But why not support something that would have stopped that program or at least contained it in some way, so it’s not launching at Israel, so that we aren’t having to get involved defensively?

John Kirby: Again, Shannon, let’s look at the sanctions we put in place with Iran, the resources in the region ... it’s hard to take a look at what President Biden has done and say that we’ve somehow gone soft on Iran. It was the previous administration that promised, that promised to get us out of the Iran Deal and now Iran is so much dramatically closer to a potential nuclear weapon capability than they were before, uh, before, uh, before Mr. Trump was elected. (sneers)

Shannon Bream: Is it not fair to say though, that there have been moves by this administration that have opened up cash and other opportunities for them which we know are fungible, in ways that are not helping the Iranian people (Kirby laughs) but are benefitting the elites and people there who chant “Death to America.” And “Death to Israel.”

John Kirby: You and I have had this fungibility argument, eh, (stutters) before em, um, I obviously take a different issue, uh, take an issue with that characterization. The (gestures), the sanctions relief that has come about. . . or it’s not even sanctions relief, but eh, (stutters) the eh, eh, additional funds which have been made available to Iran, due to the sanctions relief program that the Trump administration put in place. (shakes head) It can only be used for humanitarian goods; it doesn’t go to the regime. And the idea that the regime was somehow . . . felt like they were freed up to support these proxies because of that it just doesn’t comport with the facts that they have been supporting these proxies for many, many years.

Shannon Bream: And it comports with their language though, saying, we will use this money in the way that we want to use it.

John Kirby: They can’t (shakes head, laughs, sneers). They can’t! They physically can’t do that.

It’s upsetting. Bream is pretty, but that doesn’t mean she is empty-headed. Rather she is fiercely smart, and a lawyer to boot, and should not be treated with so little regard. I was sickened by his insulting manner toward a lady, and an intelligent one, at that.

Aside from this, Kirby never answered her question—never managed to explain why the fact that money is fungible is something to dismiss. Why would Iran not take advantage the fact that money is fungible to build its war machine? Bream has a good question, and deserves a good answer from this administration. We all do.

But there is no good answer. The Biden administration knowingly assisted Iran in building up its nuclear arsenal, and also gave Iran the power to fuel the October 7 massacre, and the volcano about to erupt in Northern Israel and Lebanon. Shannon Bream knows this, and so does Kirby—every time he stutters, you know he’s concealing something. In spite of this, John Kirby treats Shannon Bream as though she were a simpleton. This was profoundly disturbing to me, both as a woman and as a human being.

The silky words tripping off Kirby’s tongue, brought to my mind nothing so much as the snake who used cunning words to goad Eve on to eat the apple.

In this case the snake was just another Biden hack who’d sold his soul to the highest bidder.

I think Bream did a great job of exposing Kirby for what he is, for anyone who saw the interview and noted his demeaning manner toward his host, Bream. I cannot see how any woman, Democrat or Republican, can sit through that interview and not see how slimy he is.

And now, as June comes to a close, the United States has let slip, by way of US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Charles Brown, that America will not be helping Israel fight Iran/Hezbollah this time around, not necessarily because America doesn’t want to, but because, it claims, the US doesn’t have the capability.

“From our perspective,” said Charles Brown, “based on where our forces are, the short-range between Lebanon and Israel, it’s harder for us to be able to support them in the same way we did back in April.”

In other words, those over 100 ballistic missiles Kirby referenced back in April were one thing, but not this. “Sorry,” says America to Israel. “We can’t help you with this one. Now, you’re on your own.”

Here is the logical—the only—answer to Bream’s question, solid proof that money is always fungible, even in the case of Iran. The lifting of sanctions by the Biden administration has directly led to the current existential threat to Israel and, one might add, to Lebanon.

The Biden administration has enabled Iran, all the while doing what it can to stymie Israel. The president feeds the enemy with fungible funds while starving his ally of promised weaponry and other assistance.

Some speak of a coming world war, while people like Kirby, continue to sneer and laugh and lie to intelligent people like Shannon Bream, who see right through them. At some point, John Kirby’s act will grow old—he was never meant to be anything but mid-level management. Not to worry—they’ll find a use for Kirby somewhere. Like I said, he gives a mean White House presser.

Or perhaps they can bury him in mounds of paperwork behind a desk, hidden away from public view.

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!

Again, it is all about honor. If you don't get that, you don't get anything about the Middle East.

Downed Iranian missile in the Dead Sea

From Naharnet:

Hezbollah has congratulated Tehran on its attack on Israel, saying it "achieved" its military objectives.

"Hezbollah presents its congratulations... to the leadership" of Iran and its people for the "unprecedented" attack on Israel, the powerful Lebanese group said in a statement.

Hezbollah also praised Tehran's "brave and wise decision to respond firmly to the Zionist attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus".

The Islamic republic launched more than 300 drones and missiles towards Israel from late Saturday, Israel's military said.

It achieved military objectives? How, exactly?

The answer is the same as the answer to this question posed by a supposed expert, Richard Haass, on Twitter/X (and later in a more extensive interview in Politico):

At first glance reported Iranian attacks on Israel violate Napoleon's dictum "Never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake." This will change the narrative and create new support for Israel. All of which raises the question: Why did Iran widen the war at this moment?

People, even supposed "experts," still think that Middle Easterners think like Westerners. They project their own logic onto people whom they have little in common with.

Iran's objective wasn't military. It was psychic. It needed to restore its "honor."

Just reading Iranian media shows this. They are congratulating themselves on the few missiles that made it through Israel's defenses. And now they are bragging that Israel's defenses are not "impenetrable," which no one ever said.

Honor is the coin of the realm in the Middle East. And honor, almost by definition, includes lying in order to avoid shame.

Iran has to claim victory. Even if Israel has stopped 100% of the projectiles, today's headlines in Iranian media would be about the amount of effort and time and money Israel spent, how it relied on other allies and couldn't defend itself alone, how this was one of the biggest attacks in history. They would be trying to ascribe honor to themselves and shame to Israel.

Facts don't matter. The results were of little importance, as long as Iran can twist facts to claim victory.

Just like Egypt in 1973. Just like Hamas in all previous Gaza wars. The facts don't matter because honor is the point, military victory is secondary.

The entire Middle East conflict is an attempt by Middle Eastern Muslims to erase the shame of a small number of weak, dhimmi Jews defeating them in 1948 and 1967. If you want a root cause, that's it.

People who do not understand the importance of honor and shame to Israel's enemies cannot possibly be Middle East experts.

Once you understand the honor/shame dynamic, you realize that the only real solution is Israeli victory that cannot be denied. This is why Muslims are deferential to Christian-majority Europe - because they lost to them, definitively. That is the reason Bahrain and the UAE wanted peace - they realized Israel isn't going anywhere.

Undisputed Israeli strength is the only peace plan that makes sense. Unless you want another Holocaust.

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!

Latest EoZ memes, posters, cartoons....

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!

Hezbollah, which occupies southern Lebanon, accuses UNIFIL of occupying southern Lebanon

From Naharnet:

A Hezbollah official on Friday sounded the alarm over the latest U.N. Security Council resolution that extended the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).

“What are officials doing regarding the Security Council resolution that granted UNIFIL freedom of movement… without needing a permission from the army for its declared and undeclared patrols?” Sheikh Mohammed Yazbek said.

“This contradicts with the previous agreements and this is a dangerous development that turns the (UNIFIL) forces into occupation forces whose role would be to protect the Israeli enemy through pursuing the people and the resistance,” Yazbek added.

..."The decision is a conspiracy against Lebanon and its sovereignty,” the Hezbollah official went on to say.

But it isn't only Hezbollah. The government of Lebanon seems to agree!

The Foreign Ministry on Wednesday noted that the resolution “contained a text that does not conform with what was mentioned in the framework agreement signed by Lebanon with the U.N.,” adding that “Lebanon has objected against the introduction of this wording.”

“Accordingly, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants has requested to meet with the head of the UNIFIL mission to stress the importance of continuing permanent cooperation and coordination with the Lebanese Army in order to secure the success of the mission of U.N. forces in Lebanon,” the Ministry said.

The Nidaa al-Watan newspaper reported Wednesday that Lebanon had requested the removal of “two phrases mentioned in clauses 15 and 16 in the extension resolution, which stipulate UNIFIL’s freedom of movement and the condemnation of any restriction of this freedom in the area south of the Litani River.”

The phrases in question (clauses 16 and 17) say:

16. Urges all parties to cooperate fully with the Head of Mission and UNIFIL in the implementation of resolution 1701, as well as to ensure that the freedom of movement of UNIFIL in all its operations and UNIFIL’s access to the Blue Line in all its parts is fully respected and unimpeded, in conformity with its mandate and its rules of engagement, including by avoiding any course of action which endangers United Nations personnel, reaffirms that, pursuant to the Agreement on the Status of the United Nations Interim Forces in Lebanon (SOFA) between the Government of Lebanon and the United Nations, UNIFIL does not require prior authorization or permission to undertake its mandated tasks and that UNIFIL is authorized to conduct its operation independently, condemns in the strongest terms all attempts to deny access or restrict the freedom of movement of UNIFIL’s personnel and all attacks on UNIFIL personnel and equipment as well as acts of harassment and intimidation of UNIFIL personnel and disinformation campaigns against UNIFIL; calls on the Government of Lebanon to facilitate UNIFIL’s prompt and full access to sites requested by UNIFIL for the purpose of swift investigation, including all relevant locations north of the Blue Line related to the discovery of tunnels crossing the Blue Line which UNIFIL reported as a violation of resolution 1701 (2006), in line with resolution 1701, while respecting the Lebanese Sovereignty;
17. Demands the parties cease any restrictions and hindrances to the movement of UNIFIL personnel and guarantee the freedom of movement of UNIFIL, including by allowing announced and unannounced patrols;

This is nothing new - UNIFIL's independence was always part of its mandate. And the Lebanese government's objection to this sounds like they are run by Hezbollah.

UNIFIL issued its own statement today:

UNIFIL has always had the mandate to undertake patrols in its area of operations, with or without the Lebanese Armed Forces. Nevertheless, our operational activities, including patrols, continue to be coordinated with the Lebanese Army, even when they don't accompany us.
Our freedom of movement has been reiterated in Security Council resolutions renewing UNIFIL’s mandate, including Resolution 1701 in 2006, and UNIFIL’s Status of Forces Agreement, signed in 1995.

UNIFIL seems to be getting more and more impatient with Hezbollah lately, and as I have noted, the latest UN Security Council resolution on southern Lebanon condemned Hezbollah although it didn't mention their name. Hezbollah is interfering with UNIFIL's already weak enforcement of UN resolutions to keep southern Lebanon free of non-army weapons.

This seems to be part of Hezbollah's increased threats against Israel in recent months. The group, almost certainly at Iran's request, seems intent on starting a new war with Israel, the rest of Lebanon be damned.

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!

UN Security Council condemns Hezbollah - but refuses to mention Hezbollah

From UNIFIL:

(Resolution 2650 of) the Security Council requests the LAF and the UN Secretary General set out precise benchmarks and timelines for the effective and durable deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces in southern Lebanon and in the country’s territorial waters. ...

The Council reiterates that UNIFIL does not require prior authorization or permission from anyone to undertake its mandated tasks, and that it is allowed to conduct its operations independently. It calls on the parties to guarantee UNIFIL’s freedom of movement, including by allowing announced and unannounced patrols. The Council condemns the harassment and intimidation of UNIFIL personnel, as well as the use of disinformation campaigns against peacekeepers. It further requests the mission to take measures to monitor and counter disinformation.

The Council also expresses concern in the resolution about some developments along the Blue Line. It notes the recent installation of containers that restrict peacekeepers’ access to, or ability to see, parts of the line. It also condemns the presence of unauthorized weapons controlled by armed groups in UNIFIL’s area of operations.

That last sentence is a condemnation of Hezbollah by the UN Security Council. But it refuses to name Hezbollah!

That is cowardly. While it is obvious that this resolution is meant to condemn Hezbollah, by not saying their name, they are letting them off the hook.

The resolution actually condemns two unnamed groups - both of which are Hezbollah.

The "containers" it mentions are from an NGO called "Green Without Borders" that is a Hezbollah front. Its leader is aligned with Hezbollah, outposts they build are used by Hezbollah, and these "containers" just happen to be right on the Blue Line, which seems awfully coincidental and political for an environmental group.

Palestinians use "human rights" NGOs to hide terror activity. Hezbollah uses "environmental" NGOs to do the same.

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!

What does UNIFIL do in Lebanon? A TikTok video indicates, not too much.

UNIFIL, the UN peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon, released a TikTok video to show what a typical day looks like for one of its soldiers.

The answer is...outside marching down the Blue Line, not much.

Of course, this is not entirely fair. Their regular reports to the UN show that UNIFIL does do lots of things, mostly to support the Lebanese Armed Forces, although they do nothing to help disarm Hezbollah. Every report includes a paragraph like this:

No progress was achieved with regard to the disarmament of armed groups. Hizbullah continued to acknowledge publicly that it maintained military capabilities. The maintenance of arms outside the control of the State by Hizbullah and other groups in violation of resolution 1701 (2006) continued to restrict the State’s ability to exercise full sovereignty and authority over its territory.

One thing I didn't know is that the Trump administration made some efforts to turn UNIFIL into a more useful organization. The Congressional Research Service notes:

U.S. Administrations have disagreed over the mission and size of UNIFIL. Some U.S. officials have described UNIFIL as a stabilizing presence in southern Lebanon, stating that Hezbollah strikes across the Blue Line have significantly decreased since UNSCR 1701 (2006) increased UNIFIL’s troop ceiling from 2,000 to 15,000. A former U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon has noted that “UNIFIL’s value in constraining Hezbollah comes down to its size. Through sheer numbers, it essentially saturates the south. Even if it can evade UNIFIL scrutiny at times, as the tunnels show, Hezbollah does not have the almost complete freedom of movement in the south that it enjoyed under ‘old’UNIFIL.”

In contrast, the Trump Administration asserted that UNIFIL “patrols and checkpoints are of plainly limited use when offending parties can simply hide weapons and tunnel entrances on so-called ‘private property.’” The United States and Israel accused Hezbollah of hiding weapons in violation of UNSCR 1701, and pushed for the addition of language to UNIFIL’s mandate that would allow UNIFIL to access and search private property for illicit Hezbollah weapons. Trump Administration officials criticized the government of Lebanon for not facilitating UNIFIL access to key sites, such as the Lebanese origin points of Hezbollah underground tunnels that cross into Israel.

In response to U.S. pressure, additional provisions were added to annual resolutions reauthorizing UNIFIL’s mandate. In 2017, U.S. officials successfully advocated for language requiring UNIFIL to notify the Security Council whenever it encountered roadblocks or other obstacles; these incidents are now noted in regular U.N. Secretary General reports on the implementation of UNSCR 1701. In 2019, the Security Council approved U.S.-proposed language calling for the Secretary-General to assess the effectiveness of UNIFIL; the resulting report highlighted several structural weaknesses. In August 2020 the Security Council voted to reauthorize UNIFIL but also reduced UNIFIL’s maximum force strength from 15,000 to 13,000 troops. Then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft stated, “The reduction of the ceiling from 15,000 troops to 13,000 is an important step toward right-sizing a mission that has for years been over-resourced given the limits on its freedom of movement and access.”

The private property issue is serious, and it is not all UNIFIL's fault. The Lebanese Armed Forces do not let UNIFIL enter private roads or property, although it appears that UNIFIL does do some aerial reconnaissance of some private property.

Hezbollah, meanwhile, boasts of over 100,000 missiles, many of them high-precision, and UNIFIL cannot or will not do anything about those.

UNIFIL does have a band, though.

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!

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!

The @NYTimes writes about Lebanon's economic crisis - without mentioning Hezbollah's role once

Lebanon is suffering from an economic meltdown, that has become a looming catastrophe because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The New York Times covers it...with a curious omission.

Lebanon’s economic problems have been building for years. A nation of 5.4 million on the Mediterranean with a variety of religious sects and large groups of Syrian and Palestinian refugees, Lebanon has long suffered from internal conflict and spillover from the wars afflicting its neighbors. Its historically weak government has relied on increasing amounts of debt to pay its bills, while failing to carry out reforms that could have bolstered its economy or unlocked international aid. That has made it the third most indebted state in the world, and rampant corruption has further siphoned funds from state coffers.

Not once in the article does it mention Hezbollah's strangehold on the country and its fealty not to Lebanon but to Iran.

Lebanese media covers this angle:

The government led by Hassan Diab will not succeed in rescuing the Lebanese economy as long as its touted reforms are tailored to suit the needs of Hezbollah and its regional allies – and as long as the Prime Minister’s No 1 priority is to remain in power at any cost. This government is essentially a fig leaf for a coalition of political parties led by Hezbollah, an entity that is loyal to the Iranian regime in Tehran.

With Hezbollah being an important weapon in its arsenal, Tehran has two objectives that it is determined to achieve in Lebanon. First, it intends to help consolidate Hezbollah’s dominance over the country by overturning its banking system, market economy, political system and the constitution. Second, it hopes to eliminate all possibilities of a popular uprising demanding reform and accountability, as this could not only topple the corrupt ruling class in Beirut but also expose Hezbollah’s power structure to major risks – a red line for Tehran.

It is clear to all sides that there is no way to rescue Lebanon from collapse except through serious negotiations with the IMF, which would unlock external funds conditioned on serious reforms.

Hezbollah has rejected Beirut’s co-operation with the organisation except on its own terms, endorsed by President Aoun and Mr Bassil; the latter is known to hold the keys to Lebanon’s energy sector. In other words, this axis is bent on cherry-picking only that part of the IMF’s advice which suits it, while preventing any scrutiny of the government’s books, especially in the energy sector that has bankrupted the state.

The key to foreign aid is clear: serious negotiations must be held with the IMF with a proven commitment to comprehensive reforms – not selective adjustments that overlook certain sectors for political reasons.

Arab editorial cartoonists are also clued in to what the New York Times ignores. The caption here says "Hezbollah's weapons drag Lebanon's economy into the abyss."

Iran is holding Lebanon hostage, and that includes the economy. It is astonishing, although not surprising, that the New York Times does not want to even give Hezbollah's role in Lebanon's problems a passing reference.

(h/t EBoZ)

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.