Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Friday, May 11, 2018

05/11 Links Pt2: Zionism before Herzl and the Jewish connection to the capital; The embassy move could turn out to be Trumps most enduring presidential achievement.

From Ian:

Zionism before Herzl and the Jewish connection to the capital

Any attempt to deny the Jewish connection to Jerusalem is preposterous, says President Reuven Rivlin, a seventh generation Jerusalemite, whose forebears came to the capital of the Jewish people in the first decade of the 19th century at the behest of the Gaon of Vilna.

Many Lithuanian Jews who were part of the Vision of Zion movement established by followers of the Gaon in 1771 came to Jerusalem hoping to greet the Messiah, Rivlin said on Thursday in a Jerusalem Day interview with The Jerusalem Post.

There were old Sephardi families who had been living in Jerusalem for centuries, he said, listing among others the family of one of his presidential predecessors, Yitzhak Navon. Since 1809, Rivlin added, there has consistently been a Jewish majority in Jerusalem, because the surrounding Arab villages were not actually part of the city, but sat on its periphery.

Rivlin, even before he became the country’s number one citizen, was a walking symbol of Jerusalem, always responding to greetings by radio or television interviewers: “Shalom from Jerusalem, the capital of Israel.”

Born before the establishment of the state, and having grown up in the city, Rivlin knows about its history with the kind of familiarity of the next door neighbor. He was, in fact, the neighbor to some of Jerusalem’s most illustrious personalities – if not next door, then just two or three doors away.

Right at the beginning of the interview, as an outcome of his intimate knowledge of the history of the city, Rivlin put paid to the popular myth that Mishkenot Sha’ananim was the first neighborhood established outside the walls of the old city.

Trump’s Jerusalem Stand

We may never know why he did it. The number of additional Jews who are likely to vote for President Trump because of the embassy move would probably fit comfortably inside a polling booth. The decision, made in December of 2017, wasn’t even engineered to coincide with — or influence — any election. The move won’t win President Trump any peace prizes. Neither is it likely to change the outcome of any peace talks: the administration has specifically said this and reiterated its commitment to a two-state solution. As many of his detractors have pointed out, in this instance, our negotiator-in-chief seems to have given without a corresponding take. That might be an ill-advised tack with an adversary, but with a friend, we would more typically think of it as common decency.

The Trump economy may soon be a distant memory. In the next administration, the tax bill might easily be reversed or much of it allowed to expire, and so much deregulation undone. Every measure achieved by unilateral executive action — the travel ban, the tariffs, withdrawal from various international accords — dispatched as quickly as it was put into place. But the embassy move, accomplished by coordination of two branches of government, is unlikely to face reversal.

The Jewish people’s memory when it comes to Jerusalem is endless. Thrice daily we pray in the direction of its chalky limestone walls. We declare at every Jewish wedding, quoting Psalms, that our right hand should wither if we forget Jerusalem, and tempting the evil eye is not for the insincere or faint of heart. We mourn Jerusalem’s long-ago destructions with rigorous fast days and celebrate its rebirth with a Festival of Lights.

It isn’t hard to imagine that for hundreds of years, Jews will teach their children what I will tell mine when we travel to Jerusalem to watch history being made: On Israel’s 70th birthday, May 14, 2018, President Trump ensured that America, which has long been great, once again kept its word.

Why these Latin American countries support moving their embassies to Jerusalem

US President Donald Trump’s decision in December to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital drew wide international criticism, with 128 countries including the United Kingdom, Germany and Canada voting in favor of a United Nations resolution condemning it.

But several countries saw Trump’s decision in a different light: as an example to follow.

Shortly after the United States officially moves its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem on Monday, it will be joined by Guatemala and Paraguay. Both countries are planning to make the move this month, and Honduras may be next: Its Congress recently passed a resolution urging its foreign ministry to move its embassy.

Along with the Czech Republic, whose president said last month it will begin the process of moving its embassy to Jerusalem, these countries belong to a small club (albeit one with a superpower). On a visit to Venezuela on Monday, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas urged other Latin American countries not to move their embassies.

So how come? Why do these Latin American countries go where others fear to tread?

Observers suggest a number of reasons, or a combination thereof: The countries are likely motivated by a desire to curry favor with the Trump administration, their leaders’ personal views of the Jewish state and strong historic ties to Israel.

As Israel prepares for Yom Yerusahalyim, Jerusalem Day, celebrating the victory of the Six Day War that freed East Jerusalem from Jordanian occupation and returned Jewish sovereignty over the Temple Mount I keep hearing Yehoram Gaon describe the terror of the Yom Kippur war when Israelis did not know if the young country would survive, or if it would be the final genocide of the Jewish people.

He had been called to perform for soldiers stationed in the Sinai desert, almost at the border with Egypt. The soldiers requested he sing “Me’al Pisgat Har Hazofim”, a song about Jerusalem.

Think about that. So far from home, in such danger, they wanted to hear the ode to Jerusalem that declares:

“Thousands of generations I dreamt of you, to be granted to see the light of your face, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Shine your face to your sons! From your ruins, I will build you!”

He said: “I must tell you, I sang quite nicely. I was a little offended when they all ran away.” He thought that they were being attacked or were about to be hit by a missile but the soldiers were running to a command-car that had suddenly arrived at their desert position. It was Rabbi Goren, the Rabbi who was there when the Temple Mount was freed, the Rabbi who insisted the holy Tomb of the Patriarchs remain under Jewish administration. This man, a walking symbol of holiness and connection to the land of Israel, had two bags in his hands, full of small books of Psalms.

Yehoram Gaon’s face twisted in anguish as he recounted how the soldiers grabbed the tiny books, shoving them in to every pocket available, as if wrapping themselves in holiness. As if the Psalms would serve as a barrier, as armor, guarding them from the bullets and the bombs.

Today we still wrap ourselves in the dream of Jerusalem and Psalms to protect our soldiers and ourselves from the bullets and the bombs. The ayatollahs of Iran are determined to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Their religion actually dictates that they must wash the world in blood for their messiah to come. For them this is not a matter of politics, this is about bring the End Times closer.

The danger is very real and yet Iran doesn’t seem to understand the power of dreaming of one thing for thousands of generations, of the promise in this song: “Jerusalem, I will not move from you!”

ABOVE THE PEAK OF MT SCOPUS

Above the peak of Mount Scopus

I will bow down to the ground to you,

Above the peak of Mount Scopus,

Peace [hello] to you, Jerusalem

For thousands of generations I dreamt of you,

to see, to earn the honor of {experiencing] the light of your face.

Chorus:

Jerusalem, Jerusalem

Shine the light of your face [welcome] to your son!

Jerusalem, Jerusalem

From you ruins I will build you!

Above the peak of Mount Scopus

I will bow down to the ground to you,

Above the peak of Mount Scopus,

Peace [hello] to you, Jerusalem

Be blessed with a thousand blessings!

Temple, King, city of royalty [city from which one reigns]

Jerusalem, Jerusalem

I won't move from here!

Jerusalem, Jerusalem

The Messiah will come, will come.

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.

05/11 Links Pt1: Quds Force’s Bravest Runs Under Israeli Missiles; Gaza: A Failed Experiment by Hamas; After Netanyahu visit, Russia to back off S-300 missile transfer to Syria

From Ian:

Jason Greenblatt: U.S. envoy Greenblatt says Hamas has taken Gaza back to the Stone Age

The Israelis have indicated that they want to do more to help the people of Gaza, if they could be assured that additional things they allow into Gaza will not be repurposed into weapons or used to build tunnels to attack Israel. Israel might choose to ease restrictions on travel, if Israel could be assured that those who are crossing into and through Israel will not commit acts of terror or be smuggling weapons or cash to be used for terrorism.Egypt could also do more to help the people of Gaza, but Egypt shares the same legitimate security concerns as Israel. President Abbas and the Palestinian Authority could restore all salaries and payments in Gaza. But President Abbas also has legitimate concerns, even if the steps he has taken are unfortunate and damaging. Certainly, we would not want see the Palestinian Authority running an above-ground government and Hamas running a shadow government below ground. But neither Israel, Egypt nor the Palestinian Authority are the actual cause of the problems; they can only be part of the solution, if given the right opportunity.

Deep and pervasive donor fatigue has set in. In the 15 months I have been on the job, I have heard only quick, temporary, small fixes for the people of Gaza. Donors understand that none of us can significantly change the situation in Gaza in the current environment. No one wants to spend money building and rebuilding, only to find what they built is damaged or destroyed in yet another conflict. I have met many people from Gaza – impressive, resilient people. But there will be a limit to what we can do for them while Hamas is in charge. Hamas has managed to bring the people of Gaza, a people with a proud history and great potential, nearly back to the stone ages. What an embarrassment, what desolation, what failure.

I believe that given a real choice, the people of Gaza would reject this failed Hamas experiment. The fact is, Palestinians in Gaza need to be re-united with their West Bank counterparts under a single, responsible Palestinian Authority leadership. The future that Mr. Shammalah says he wants for his children – “a chance to thrive”– is the future we all strive to achieve for Gaza and its children.

Melanie Phillips: The elephant in the room is regime change

Amid the brouhaha over President Donald Trump’s decision to pull the US out of the appalling Iran nuclear deal, the elephant in the room is standing quietly all but unobserved.

Trump’s initiative is being either praised to the skies or deplored with dismay. The question being discussed is whether it will force the Iranian regime to abandon its nuclear program in a new deal or precipitate a terrible war.

Following Trump’s announcement, an Iranian missile attack on Israeli military bases on the Golan Heights led to heavy Israeli air strikes against Iranian targets in Syria.

There has been an equivalent, although more muted, flap over Trump’s decision to hold face-to-face talks with the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. The question discussed here is whether this will produce genuine nuclear disarmament by Kim, or whether Trump will be led by his monumental ego up the same garden path along which America has been lured before.

Both lines of thought are surely beside the point. For the elephant in the room is regime change.

Let’s go back to something approaching first principles. The Iranian regime is a menace to the world going far beyond its nuclear ambitions.

Seth J Frantzman: ‘House of Cards’: a perfect name for Israel’s anti-Iran campaign in Syria

Israel’s airstrikes on Syria overnight on Wednesday has been called “Operation House of Cards,” according to reports. On the surface the reference seems confusing. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps fired 20 rockets at Israel and in response Israel carried out a massive and complex retaliation targeting more than thirty sites in Syria.

House of Cards may be a reference to the Netflix series or the saying “house of cards.” Here’s why “House of Cards” is a perfect name for the campaign against Iran’s presence in Syria.

Iran has overplayed its hand in Syria
Iran wanted to retaliate against Israel for months but it couldn’t figure out when and how. Its rockets were targeted in various air strikes which Syria’s regime blamed on Israel. Iran also wanted to wait for Lebanon’s elections to end on May 6 and to see if US President Donald Trump would leave the Iran Deal. Then Iran’s IRGC sought to fire only 20 missiles at Israel. Iran thought that Israel would retaliate in kind, a rocket for a rocket. It didn’t realize that it had badly miscalculated and that a massive response would occur. It has badly mismanaged its hand in Syria. But creating so many bases and infrastructure it left itself exposed. Its footprint grew over time, and at each phase of Iran’s growth in Syria it became more exposed, not less exposed. So like a poker player who thought he had a great hand, only to see the river card and realize all hope is lost, Iran now realizes it has a weak hand.

Because Iran's Syria policy could collapse like a House of Cards
Iran has built up an impressive presence in Syria. It’s militias and tentacles wrap around the regime. It has tens of thousands of fighters it recruited. But because it is stretched thin and has invested so much it also has more to lose. This presents a kind of “house of cards.” Iran has built up its networks carefully over time. Huge investments in men and resources. Construction equipment. Convoys. Missiles. Bunkers. Training. And now that house of cards is at risk. Too many provocative moves and Iran could find itself seriously threatened.

In my last post I invited readers to look at the arguments that Arabs advanced against the UN partition plan that would have granted Jews a tiny, impossible to defend state.

The Syrian ambassador sounds a lot like Mahmoud Abbas today.

...The Arab delegations, as everyone knows, have not failed to point out to their colleagues the real danger involved in the partition plan. On several occasions, we have reminded the world that this Organization cannot trample on its own Charter, to which it owes its existence, without running the risk of dealing itself a very dangerous blow.

We have voiced here the uneasiness of the Arabs in Palestine and in all the Arab countries. In their opinion this plan is contrary to the principles of justice and to their natural rights, since their right to independence is not questioned.

Yesterday, however, certain delegations invoked, in support of the Jewish argument, an alleged "historic right" to Palestine. Even supposing that this right existed, it could not be considered equal to the historic and acquired rights of the Arabs, rights which we have moreover explained to you on more than one .occasion.

By quoting, in the Ad Hoc Committee, whole pages of the Jewish Encyclopedia, we have been able to prove that the Jews of Eastern Europe are not related in any way to Israel and that they are purely of Russian Khazar origin.

The article he is referring to in no way says that.

...As we have already stated in the Committee, if it had been only a question of Jewish refugees fleeing from persecution and terrorism, we should have received them not only in Palestine but also in all the Arab States. However, as everyone has already realized, we are faced, in this case with no more than a political scheme of an imperialist nature in which all ambitions coincide and the two extremes meet.

The Polish delegation, which is usually so punctilious with regard to interpretations of the . terms of .the Charter, is silent when it is a question of violating that same Charter, because that violation is aimed at founding a Jewish State in Palestine which would allow Poland to get rid of its own Jews.

...The United States Government is fighting communism not only in its own country but everywhere; it is attacking communists from Hollywood to the frontiers of Manchuria; it is deporting foreign communists even if they are recommended by very highly placed persons; it is granting all sorts of loans to fight communism in Europe.

But if the Black Sea ports could pour half a million communists into Palestine today, the delegation of the United States of America would be all the happier so long as Palestine was swarming with Jews. They are not satisfied with the one hundred and fifty thousand communists who are already in Palestine.

No plan has ever been more contrary to logic or to social, political and economic laws; no plan has ever been more absurd in its financial and economic difficulties, and in its political and administrative complications; no proposal has been adopted with more misgiving, one might even say repugnance; no plan has been defended with more propaganda and less courtesy. ...

You need only cast a glance at the map drawn up by Sub-Committee 1 to see that the whole affair is only a conspiracy. The southern part of Palestine, inhabited exclusively by Arabs, has been given to the proposed Jewish State on the excuse that a desert region like the Negeb is of no use to the Bedouins. This is a type of logic quite peculiar to the Zionists and their friends; they claim that a desert like the Negeb or Sinai is useless to the Bedouins but can be of great use to the Jews of Warsaw and Riga. What logic!

The truth is that the Zionists and their friends have other aims in mind. That is proved by the fact that they have made the territory of the Jewish State extend to the Red Sea; that is a threat to the Suez Canal, the Islamic Holy Places of the Hedjaz, the interests of all the Arab countries in the Red Sea region, and the interests of Ethiopia. In short, the United States delegation and the other delegations in favour of this plan consider it impossible and unjust to subject six hundred thousand Jews to a decision making Palestine one State; but these same delegations want the Arabs in Palestine and all the independent Arab States, with a total population of thirty million people, to be subject to an illegal decision contrary to the Charter and their vital interests.

I hope that the good people of this great and truly democratic country, the United States, will wake up one day, open their eyes, see things clearly and demand that their country's policy shall be independent of that of the Zionists.

As for us, we will never recognize this proposed partition, and we reserve the right to act accordingly.

One more word. Before concluding, I appeal to your consciences. May I remind you that, in this plan, the Charter's essential principles of justice and the dignity of the United Nations are at stake. I am sure that you will reflect, and that you will bear in mind all the disadvantages and dangers of this plan.

This has it all - antisemitism ("swarming with Jews"), accusations that Jews are all Communist, that they are not really Jews but converts from Russia, that opposing a Jewish state is a principled position, that creating a Jewish state would threaten the entire Arab world with its colonialist aims, that "justice" means no Israel, that the US bends its will to the "Zionists."

This speech is remarkably similar to things Palestinian leaders have said only weeks ago.The same arguments against "occupation" today were used against the very idea of Israel 70 years ago.

Which shows that today's arguments are really not motivated by "occupation" but by Israel having the chutzpah to continue to exist and defend itself.

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.

I'm shaking my head at an article on the far-Left Israeli site +972 by Orly Noy, about BDS targeting Israeli Eurovision entrant Netta Barzilai:

Israel is buzzing with excitement over the country’s contestant in this year’s Eurovision, and for good reason. Netta Barzilai is talented, has an awesome vibe, and is a strong female character who bucks all of the traits we have become used to seeing in a female performer. If you are a left-wing, Jewish feminist, and even if you’re not, it’s hard not to fall in love with her.

So it wasn’t surprising that a campaign by Israeli boycott activists asking European viewers not to vote for Barzilai managed to rile so many people, including in various left-wing Israeli circles — and no small number of my friends.

I don’t know anything about Barzilai’s political views but I don’t get the impression that she has any special affinity for militarism or that she likes anything about the killing of innocent people. My impression was actually the opposite, and that’s the point.

One of the fundamental truths with which the boycott movement attempts to confront Israeli society is that all of us, even the humanists and human rights lovers among us, are responsible for the crimes of the occupation, whether we participate in them directly or indirectly.

Netta Barzilai is a means for Israel to show the world that we are normal and pretty and creative, and that we send stunning representatives to compete in the Eurovision. In a way, that’s not a false representation of reality. Indeed, we live our lives like any other people trying to make it in the world, and we have a real culture and real musicians to be proud of — like Netta Barzilai. And while it is true that we Israelis do not live the occupation as part and parcel of our daily lives, the occupation is a part of us and who we and our society are and have become. That we have succeeded in creating a conscious separation between our lives and the occupation is our tragedy. The boycott movement is simply trying to stop the rest of the world from making the same mistake.

What a load of crap.

The BDS movement is not based on morality. It is based on hate. Its leaders freely admit that their goal is the destruction of Israel, not the end of "occupation." It is the direct descendant of the anti-Israel movements before the "occupation" that also tried to justify their hate based on the fig leaf of human rights - as did the Arabs who attacked the Jews in 1947 months before Israel declared itself to be a state. Their speeches in the UN also pretended to be concerned with human rights. Read them - they sound eerily familiar, yet it is obvious that their problem was with Jews having political power, not the lofty standards of human rights or protecting the UN Charter as they claimed.

Any objective observer can see that the haters of 1947 were animated by their antisemitism, not their love of justice or peace. BDS is exactly the same. The word "Zionist" elicits the same knee-jerk and violent hate that the word "Jew" has throughout history. BDS supporters who are less careful over their words in social media than their leaders regularly will call Israel "satanic" - they simply substitute "Zionist" for "Jew" but the hate remains the same. Justice and peace and human rights are the excuses to make their hate appear justified. But it is still hate, it is still ugly, and any real supporter of human rights should recognize this and fight against it, not support it.

Orly Noy might want to flagellate herself over the "occupation." Maybe one day she will set herself on fire in support of the Palestinian Arabs she cares about so much. But she knows, deep down, that if Israel would withdraw from every inch of the territory it won in a defensive war, the hate that the BDSers feel for her would not be reduced in the least.

Noy's pathetic desire to show how much she identifies with those who want to subjugate her to living as a second-class citizen in an Arab "Palestine" will not make them want to subjugate her any less. Her eagerness to justify the hate that BDS has for her and her people is pitiful.

There is no moral difference between the irrational hate for Israelis and irrational hate for Jews, or irrational hate for blacks, or irrational hate for gays. Racists and bigots find justifications for their hate that sound just as humanistic as those of BDS. The very term "anti-semitism" was based on a pseudo-scientific theory to justify hate. Most of us can see through the justifications and understand that they are after-the-fact, meant to make the hate that animated the bigotry be more palatable to a larger audience.

Which is exactly what BDS does.

The BDS movement is a hate group just like the KKK, and their arguments can be demolished just as easily as those of any white supremacist group - but only if one is willing to wake up enough to notice that their "human rights" and "justice" and "legal" arguments are mere justifications for hate. It is a shame that so many people who care about human rights can be as deluded as Orly Noy is.

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.

Syria is so F-ed up - massive Israeli airstrikes are a minor story in the bigger Syria picture

Syrian media, and Lebanese media that follows Syria, has very little objectivity. The best (although not perfect) place to see what is happening in Syria is the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights, which reports on all attacks in Syria from all factions and the casualties.

Reading their website on the day after the massive Israeli airstrikes yesterday is almost unreal. Sure, there were a couple of articles about the raids as they happened, but so many people get killed by so many different actors in Syria every day, the Israeli raids were just considered one event among many.

As of this writing, the SOHR hasn't published the total death toll in Syria from Thursday. On both Wednesday and Tuesday more than 60 were killed throughout the country on all sides of the civil war. The SOHR says that 23 people, apparently all of them Syrian or Iranian fighters, were killed in the Israeli raids - the biggest Israeli air raids in Syria since the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

The Israeli airstrikes are just another story.

As of this writing, here are the stories in the top two news sections of the site:

The Israeli raids are little more than a footnote the next day.

The Observatory's early story on the Israeli raids themselves show how precise they were. Although they say it is possible that two civilians were killed by being at the wrong place at the wrong time during an Israeli raid on Wednesday, the couple might have just died in a car accident.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights documented the death of 23 people at least as a result of the Israeli missile strikes, which targeted several military positions and points of the regime forces and allies in scattered areas in central Syria, near the capital Damascus and Rif Dimashq, the western countryside of al-Suwaidaa and the triangle of Daraa – Quneitra – West of Rif Dimashq just before dawn of Thursday the 10th of May 2018, and the casualties are: 5 members of the regime forces including at least one officer, and 18 others of Syrian and non-Syrian nationalities, and the death toll is expected to rise because there are some people in critical situation, and due to information about other casualties, the Syrian Observatory published that violent explosions rocked the several areas in the Syrian territory just before dawn of today, Thursday, the 10th of May 2018, caused by Israeli missile strikes which targeted scattered sites near the capital, Damascus, Rif Dimashq, central Syria and Quneitra, where the strikes targeted sites believed to belong to the Lebanese Hezbollah southwest of Homs city, and other sites of Hezbollah and fighters loyal to the regime forces in the triangle of Daraa – Quneitra – west of Rif Dimashq, also the strikes targeted a military area of the regime forces in al-Dumayr Airbase area at the Eastern Qalamoun, where the missiles fell near the headquarters where the Iranians are located, also the strikes targeted Muadamiyat al-Sham town west of Damascus, where fighters of Hezbollah, Iran and the 4th Division of the Syrian regime are located, but no information until the moment as to whether the missiles that fell on Muadamiyat al-Sham has targeted military positions or not, also a missile landed in the vicinity of Jaramana south of the capital, and the shelling targeted regime’s Air Defense sites, while the fall of Israeli missiles was renewed after midnight of yesterday on Al-Quneitra province, where the missiles targeted sites of the regime forces and their allies near Hodr town north of Quneitra and near Khan Arnabah town, and in the same context, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights in conjunction with the these intensive targeting operation has monitored explosions in the sky of the areas; caused by regime’s anti-aircraft interception for the Israeli missiles and managed to shoot down some of them, and the Israeli missile strikes caused significant material losses in several targeted locations, amid confirmed information about casualties.

The Israeli shelling came just before the dawn of Sunday after the fall of missiles after midnight, launched from al-Quneitra area and southwest Rif Dimashq adjacent to the occupied territories of Golan, following the Israeli shelling which took place last night and targeted locations near al-Ba’ath city in the central countryside of Quneitra.

The Syrian Observatory published yesterday, Wednesday, that the number of casualties continues to rise as a result of the missile strikes that targeted al-Kiswah area in the southwest sector of Rif Dimashq, which were carried out by Israeli forces targeting Iranian missile warehouses and platforms, where it rose to at least 15 including at least 8 Iranians, the number of members who were killed by the missile strikes on the area, while it is not known yet whether the rest of them belong to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard or if they belong to a militia loyal to Iran, also a man and his wife were killed near place of shelling but the circumstances of their deaths are not known whether they were killed the result of a traffic accident, or it happened that they were there in the moment of shelling which caused their deaths, and the death toll is expected to rise because there are some people in critical situation, and due to the presence of missing persons.

Israel seems to be the only player in Syria that actually cares about avoiding civilian casualties.

What a thoroughly messed-up country.

This raid proves (among many other things) that the world media pretty much ignores Syria unless somehow Jews are part of the story.

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.

05/10 Links Pt2: Salt Lake Tribune Op-Ed Fits EU Definition of Anti-Semitism; Gaza: Where Terrorists Are ‘Victims’ and Terrorism Is ‘Resistance’; Jerusalem has never been holy to Islam

From Ian:

CAMERA: Salt Lake Tribune Op-Ed Fits EU Definition of Anti-Semitism

The Salt Lake Tribune recently published an Op-Ed, penned by one Michael S. Robinson, that can best be described as an anti-Semitic rant, filled with attacks against “the Jews,” falsehoods demonizing Israel, calls for “regime change” targeting the Jewish state and insistence that it was a mistake to establish a Jewish state. This conforms perfectly to the definition of “anti-Semitism” used by the United States and the European Union.

Perhaps one of the most appalling aspects of Robinson’s guest column is his dismissive and demeaning analogy of Jewish Holocaust victims to a young child who has suffered a minor injury in the past:

“…It doesn’t make a naughty child any better when parents decline all discipline, just because little Suzie had a nasty owie two weeks ago.”

Robinson tries to innoculate himself against charges of anti-Semitism by pretending he is merely criticizing the Israeli government and policy:

“I hate Israel — not, of course, its many innocent citizens, but its inhumane and murderous government.”

But he reveals early on exactly what he is trying to conceal – that his is not legitimate criticism of a specific Israeli policy but an attack on “the Jews” in general:

“There seems to be a mindless philosophy that, because the Jews have historically suffered so much, we must never criticize them… “[emphasis added]

Robinson again refers to “The Jews” when he demonizes them as as lacking in “human compassion”:

“Oh, yes, the Jews know all about concentration camps, but they seem unable to muster any human compassion for the suffering of their neighbors.”

Gaza: Where Terrorists Are ‘Victims’ and Terrorism Is ‘Resistance’

"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" is one of the worst clichés in the English language. Unfortunately the phrase's logic is applied all too often to the ongoing violence at the Israel-Gaza Strip border. Just look at Peter Beinart's recent column on the riots there. "Why are thousands of Palestinians risking their lives by running toward the Israeli snipers who guard the fence that encloses Gaza?" asks Beinart. "Because Gaza is becoming uninhabitable." And why is the Strip becoming uninhabitable? Because Israel is "denying Gaza's people the water, electricity, education, and food they need to live decent lives."

According to Beinart, the ongoing attempts to damage and breach the border security fence to attack Israel, the rocks and firebombs hurled and shots fired at Israeli soldiers, the firebomb-bearing kites that torment Israeli farmers trying to grow crops, the widespread presence of swastikas at the demonstrations, the anti-Semitic threats against Jews, the horrible ecological effects caused by burning tires to blind Israeli border guards—all actions carried out by Gazans—are reactions of victims motivated by resistance against their oppressors. The fact that most of the rioters who Israelis have killed were terrorist operatives, or individuals affiliated with terrorist organizations, is irrelevant, because it gets in the way of this narrative.

"Hamas is indeed a brutal and destructive force, to both Israelis and Palestinians," acknowledges Beinart. "But Hamas did not force Israel to adopt the policies that have devastated Gaza. Those policies represent a choice—a choice that has not only failed to dislodge Hamas, but has also created the very conditions in which extremism thrives."

This argument is so inaccurate—yet so commonly found in Western media—that it requires a response. One simply needs to look at recent "protests" to see who is really devastating the lives of Palestinians in Gaza, who suffer under the cruel and incompetent rule of Hamas, an Islamist terrorist group that seeks Israel's destruction.

Apology? Abbas again mocks the Holocaust

Palestinian Authority (PA) chairman Mahmoud Abbas is apparently incapable of concealing his true views.

Channel 10 News reported on Wednesday that Abbas had held a press conference following a meeting with the President of Chile and spoke about the suffering of the Jews in the Holocaust, while comparing their suffering to the suffering of Palestinian Arabs in Judea and Samaria.

"I respect the victims of the Holocaust, which was the greatest and most heinous crime in history, but also express the hope that the suffering of Palestinians who live 70 years in exile and the occupation will end," Abbas said, according to the report.

The report follows last week’s controversy surrounding Abbas’s anti-Semitic speech in which he claimed was that the Holocaust was not the result of anti-Semitism but rather of the Jews “social behavior, [charging] interest, and financial matters.”

The PA chairman’s remarks were met with a flurry of condemnations, both in Israel and abroad.

U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman ripped Abbas over his remarks, saying the PA leader has “reached a new low in attributing the cause of massacres of Jewish people over the years to their ‘social behavior relating to interest and banks.’ To all those who think Israel is the reason that we don't have peace, think again.”

German’s Foreign Minister, Heiko Maas, criticized Abbas as well, writing on Twitter that Germany was responsible for “one of the worst crimes in history and therefore, we must respond resolutely to any anti-Semitic expression.” He linked his comment to Abbas's speech.

Britain similarly criticized the anti-Semitic speech, saying Abbas’s remarks were “deeply concerning” and unhelpful to peace in the region.

John ‘Maverick’ McCain carries a certain amount of clout to his name awarded by his peers and the American populace over the years, and a distinct reputation as one of the last true advocates of bipartisan collaboration for his numerous efforts to extend beyond party bounds to support the greater good of the American people. Such is the legacy by which his political service will be characterized for years to come. He’s never been one to acquiesce to the ideals or ulterior motives of others, be it constituents or donors--a prevalent component of the Washington political machine, regrettably--or fellow politicians, or the media, even if it means he needs to ‘maverick’ on a particular issue, and adopt an unpopular stance for all the right reasons. For those that are current with secular American politics, you’ll remember he shocked his party and the world with a resounding ‘thumbs down’ to nix the proposed healthcare bill in 2017, among other contentious decisions possibly detrimental to his long term political career, but true to his beliefs. He’s a good person for his evident moral compass, and is also somewhat unique compared to many other politicians: McCain is a truly logical thinker, and supportive of whatever position makes sense to him.

He applies his nearly infallible logical reasoning to the complex issues surrounding the Middle East and Israel, and while Republicans as a cohort comprise a significant amount of Israel’s American support base, Senator McCain doesn’t rely on his party’s alignment with Israel to influence his understanding of what’s going on. Instead, McCain reaches the conclusion that Israel is a free and democratic and just state, through his logical reasoning:

McCain always takes an ‘America first’ approach to any and all political matters, applying his sensibility to assess ramifications for the American people--a tactic surprisingly little-used by American politicians. He reasons that American support for the welfare of the State of Israel can only prove beneficial for American national security efforts. Having a staunchly democratic ally as a proxy in the Middle East can only have an upside for America, logics McCain. A focal point of the McCain 2008 campaign and his work as a senator since has emphasized the eradication of Islamic extremism, and Israel is at the forefront of this effort due to its geographic proximity to the terrorist activities of the region. In a 2008 campaign trail interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, editor of the Atlantic, McCain described Iran as “hell-bent on the destruction of Israel, they're hell-bent on driving us out of Iraq, they're hell-bent on supporting terrorist organizations, and as serious as anything to American families, they're sending explosive devices into Iraq that are killing American soldiers.”

And of course, McCain is completely correct, on all of the above. A top-priority of the Iranian government is the swift annihilation of Israel, a sentiment purportedly shared by much of their population. McCain recognizes that Israel is America’s best shot at eliminating Islamic fundamentalism at the source of the problem, before it fully reaches the United States. And Israel simultaneously upholds democratic ideals in a predominantly theocratic Middle East, promoting American interests abroad just by implementing democracy. Ensuring mutually-beneficial cooperation between the two nations is the logical route to take. It doesn’t take a genius to figure that one out, just a simple understanding of the facts, something disturbingly lacked by many--maybe even most--Americans.

While McCain prides himself on being an individual in all respects, he’s emblematic of a shrinking cohort of moderates in Congress, who place political points below righteousness. Chuck Schumer is an example from one of the political spectrum, who remains justifiably committed to Israel, breaking from the typical Democrat ideology on Israel. But unfortunately, other political figures have in recent years discounted the truth on a host of issues, including Israel, fully undoing the ethical work of senators and congressman like McCain and Schumer.

McCain’s outlook on politics is exactly what the political world is currently lacking, making it all the more unfortunate that his health issues, battles with brain cancer among other issues, have kept him from promoting bipartisanship for the past months. As much as the world has been reluctant to say it over the past few days and as much as it pains me to acknowledge it, John McCain is dying, and it seems the pursuit of truth may die with him, for if the majority of politicians nowadays even remotely worked the way McCain operates, support for Israel would be indisputable, irrefutable and certainly, common ground across the aisle.

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.

Lies, damned lies and biased surveys written to make the Iran deal sound wonderful (@CNN and @Politico)

CNN published a poll asking Americans if the US should withdraw from the Iran deal.

And the question was designed to get the answers they wanted.

The question was:

As you may know, the United States and five other countries entered an agreement with Iran aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Do you think the U.S. should or should not withdraw from that agreement?

Pollsters know that most people answering a poll know little or nothing about the topic, so they will include an explanation of what they are asking. That's how they can get the answers they want.

The explanation is "the United States and five other countries entered an agreement with Iran aimed at preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons." If that is the only thing in your mind, why wouldn't you support it?

A similar poll, widely reported, from Politico has the exact same methodological error, and a similar result (56-26.) The question there was:

As you may know, the United States and other countries made a deal in 2015 to lift economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for Iran agreeing not to manufacture nuclear weapons. This agreement is sometimes referred to as the Iran nuclear deal. Knowing this, do you support or
oppose this agreement?

Again, no reason given to oppose something that sounds so great on paper, and critics have no say in the wording of the poll.

A fair question would have either been "Do you think the US should or should not withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal" without any explanation whatsoever, to reveal that most people really don't know one way or another - or it should have added a single sentence: "Critics say that the deal only delays Iran's ability to build a nuclear bomb by a few years and it should be renegotiated."

The results from that poll would be radically different. But CNN and Politico doesn't want people to answer that question.

I believe that the ubiquitous wording that surveys use of "As you may know..." discourages people from answering honestly that they don't know about the topic, and it prompts them subconsciously to make a guess that would make them appear to be better informed than they are. Only people who are intimately aware of the details and who oppose the deal are going to say they are against it; the "don't knows" are prodded to lean towards support by the very wording.

These questions show that polls are now used not to inform, but to influence. It is a scandal that no one wants to talk about. And the media loves to report on polls that fit their biases.

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.

Vic Rosenthal's Weekly Column

As everyone knows, US President Donald Trump has dumped the so-called “Iran deal” (JCPOA), and re-imposed strict economic sanctions on the Iranian regime.

I agree with PM Netanyahu that not only did the deal not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, it “[paved] Iran’s path to an entire arsenal of nuclear bombs.”

The deal limited the enrichment of uranium, at least at the sites that were known to the IAEA. It mandated the removal of some centrifuges from Iran’s facilities and the sealing of a nuclear reactor that could have produced Plutonium. But it did not prevent the regime from developing advanced centrifuges that will allow it to produce fissionable material much faster once we reach the deal’s “sunset” dates. It did not prevent it from continuing its development of nuclear warheads at military sites that are off-limits to IAEA inspectors. It did not prevent it from developing the missiles that will carry those warheads.

It did provide a diplomatic shield that protected the Iranian program from attack by Israel, which quite reasonably sees herself as a target – the regime itself told us so, more than once. It did offer sanctions relief that provided large amounts of money, which were used to finance the war in Syria, terrorism against Israel, and probably secret nuclear-related work. It also weakened existing UN resolutions against missile development.

Reuel Marc Gerecht, anything but a Trump supporter, said the deal “isn’t really an arms-control agreement; it’s just cover for American inaction, and for President Obama’s acute desire to leave the Middle East.” One might add that the Europeans also had a strong desire to see sanctions lifted so that they could jump into the Iranian market with both feet.

The deal, which wasn’t actually signed by either the US or the Iranian regime, was implemented by the Obama Administration against the wishes of the majority in Congress and the majority of the American people, as Bret Stephens, another non-Trump-supporter, notes. But it was ratified by the UN Security Council, which is how previous Security Council resolutions demanding that Iran not undertake missile development were weakened into one that merely called upon Iran to do so.

Supporters of continuing the deal argue that while it isn’t perfect, it at least slows Iran’s progress to an arsenal of deliverable nuclear weapons. They also suggest that ending the deal will cause Iran to be more aggressive in its nuclear program, ultimately leading to war (either with the US, Israel or both).

In response, we need to consider the objectives of the Iranian regime in the region and in the world. If we take it at its word and by its actions, the revolutionary regime has truly grandiose goals: establishing a Shiite caliphate in the Middle East, removing all US influence from the region, ending America’s world leadership, and destroying Israel – which it sees as both an agent of the US and an unacceptable Jewish presence in what should be an all-Muslim region.

The JCPOA assisted Iran in accomplishing these goals. Although it may have slowed her nuclear program somewhat, it allowed the regime to develop components of nuclear weapons without interference, so that when it is ready it can quickly “break out” before its opponents are able to confront it. In the long term, it guaranteed stability for Iran to carry out her plans.

It goes without saying that Israel and the Sunni Arab powers in the Middle East will not permit this to happen, and that if Iran continues its march toward its goals, regional war is unavoidable. What will happen with the US is less predictable, because it will depend on whether the US returns to appeasing the regime – that is, feeding the crocodile in order to be eaten last, as Churchill said – or continues Trump’s policy of starving it. Unlike the far-away USA, Iran’s regional neighbors don’t have the luxury of embracing appeasement. They will always be the ones it eats first.

I’ve argued that war between Iran and Israel is unlikely in the short term due to Israel’s deterrent strength, and the very astute David P. Goldman agrees with me. The long-term picture is cloudier, but it’s likely that continuing the JCPOA would have resulted in a gradually stronger and more militarily capable Iran that would ultimately be ready to challenge Israel. Its cancellation will weaken Iran economically and strategically, and disrupt her plan to make war on her own terms and at a time of her choosing.

Whether it will be enough to prevent war depends on the actions taken by all the anti-Iranian players: the US, Israel, and the Sunni Arabs. The pressure on Iran must be increased, and internal regime opponents strengthened. Countries like India and China that buy a lot of oil from Iran should be encouraged to find alternative sources. Russia’s anti-Western mischief will continue to be a problem, as well as European greed and shortsightedness. Finally, for Israel there is nothing more important than to continue to build up her deterrent capabilities – and also to continue to demonstrate them as aggressively as possible to Iran.

Iran is truly a rogue state, but in conventional military terms it is a relatively weak one. Today it can be deterred, and perhaps at some point its own people will be able to overthrow the regime. But thanks to Obama’s policy of feeding the Iranian crocodile, it has grown stronger and more dangerous in recent years.

Trump’s decision to end the policy of appeasement is the right one. This is a beast we cannot afford to feed.

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.

05/10 Links Pt1: IDF Strikes Iranian Targets in Syria; Liberman: If it rains in Israel, it will pour in Iran; How Trump took away Iran’s “war” card; Give Netanyahu credit

From Ian:

IDF Strikes Iranian Targets in Syria

Iran is actively conducting its military activities beyond its borders, which not only is a threat to Israel, but to the Middle East as a whole. On Wednesday, May 9, 2018, the Quds force, a special force wing of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, stationed in Syria, shot 20 rockets towards IDF posts in the Golan Heights. The IDF intercepted four of the rockets, preventing casualties and damage. This is the first time that Iranian forces have directly fired at Israeli troops.

In response, IDF fighter jets struck dozens of military targets in Syria that belonged to Iran’s Quds force. The IDF’s wide-scale attack included Iranian intelligence sites, the Quds force logistics headquarters, an Iranian military compound in Syria, observation and military posts, et cetera. In spite of a warning from Israel, Syrian aerial defense forces fired towards the IAF aircraft as they conducted the strikes. In response, the IAF targeted several aerial interception systems (SA5, SA2, SA22, SA17) which belong to the Syrian Armed Forces. All of the IDF’s fighter jets returned to their bases safely.

This is the second time this year that Iran has used its military facilities in Syria to attack Israel. In February 2018, the Quds force launched a UAV from Syria, which violated Israeli airspace and threatened Israeli security.

Iran’s aggression is further proof of the Iranian regime’s intentions and the threat it poses to Israel and regional stability. Iran continues to use Syria as its personal military outpost from which it can attack the State of Israel and its civilians, while the Syrian regime allows it to happen.

Overnight clashes show Shiite ‘monster’ in Syria is limited, for now

The broadly unsuccessful Iranian military response overnight Wednesday to alleged Israeli attacks on Iranian-affiliated targets in Syria in recent weeks — themselves a response to Iran’s deepening military presence in Syria, and to its launch of an attack drone into Israel in February — reveals a lot about the present Iranian deployment in Syria.

Despite the impression one might get from some Israeli reports that a real monster in Syria is threatening the very existence of the Jewish state, it emerged that pro-Iranian Shiite forces in Syria are, at this stage, limited in their capacity to attack Israel.

During Iran’s overnight revenge operation, 20 rockets were fired at Israel, of which 16 landed in Syrian territory and the other four were knocked out of the sky by Israeli missile defense systems.

It’s doubtful that this was what the Iranians or the ayatollahs had in mind when they authorized Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Revolutionary Guards’s Quds Force, to respond to what foreign sources have called recent Israeli attacks on Iranian-affiliated targets in Syria.

Not only did the operation not achieve anything — there was no damage and there were no injuries on the Israeli side — it gave Israel the pretext for a wide-ranging attack on Iranian targets inside Syria.

According to Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, nearly the entire Iranian military infrastructure was attacked overnight. The Israeli army said this infrastructure sustained heavy damage.

What worries Israel, though, is not the attacks launched from Syria but the threat of a broader military confrontation with the much more important Iranian proxy in the region — Lebanon’s Hezbollah.

Up until now, the Lebanese Shiite terror organization has avoided being drawn into war with Israel. It is keeping its troops on alert but has not ordered them into action.

As long as Hezbollah in Lebanon remains out of the picture, the exchange of blows in Syria can continue without escalating into war.

Liberman: Israel destroyed ‘nearly all’ Iranian military sites in Syria

Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman said Thursday morning that the IDF had destroyed “nearly all” of Iran’s military infrastructure sites in Syria overnight in response to a rocket barrage on Israel’s north, and warned Tehran that attacks on Israeli territory will be met with “the strongest possible force.”

In his first public comments following the strikes on dozens of targets that the IDF said were affiliated with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards’ al-Quds Force, Liberman said that Israel has no interest in escalating tensions but will not accept any provocation against it.

“If we get rain, you will get a flood,” he warned Iran, speaking at an annual Herzliya Conference. “We will not let Iran use Syria as a base to attack us from.”

“The Iranians tried to attack the sovereign territory of Israel,” Liberman said. “Not one Iranian rocket landed in the State of Israel. Nobody was hurt. Nothing was damaged. And we’re to be thankful for that. We damaged nearly all of the Iranian infrastructure in Syria.”

But he added, “It’s not a stunning victory. Everything’s limited at the moment to a confrontation between us and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Syria. Everyone wants to limit this confrontation and keep it in this form.”

Liberman stressed that Israel had no interested in an escalation but that Iranian provocation met with force.

Photos of Israel at 70 celebrations in Cairo

Arab media are distraught as they are showing photos from the Ritz Carlton Cairo Tuesday night, where the Israeli embassy held a celebration for Israel's Independence Day, including Egyptian dignitaries.

The reports emphasize that the hotel is on "Tahrir Square" which adds to the horror.

Lots of anguished comments on Facebook from Egyptians who are horrified at the event and the guests. Apparently some are recognizing some Turkish diplomats.

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.