In these dark days for Israel and the civilized world, there are many things that keep me up at night. One is that the international legal system has begun to ignore reality and truth. Justice is unrecognizable, and noble ideals are perverted by terrorists and cynics.
These feelings were brought in focus as the International Court of Justice at The Hague in January considered South Africa’s accusation that Israel was guilty of genocide. This absurd claim and the abuse of an august international forum convened to weigh its merits remind us how far we’ve come from the moral clarity of the fight against Nazism (after which the ICJ was established).
Amid the many demonstrable misrepresentations that emerged from the accusation against Israel, one caught my attention—a quote attributed to me. The quote was taken from a news conference I held on Oct. 12, five days after Hamas terrorists butchered 1,200 people in southern Israel and kidnapped hundreds more. The quote, which included a line that there was “an entire nation out there that is responsible,” referring to the Palestinians, was presented as if it justified the killing of civilians. South Africa used the misconstrued quote at The Hague in an attempt to prove Israel’s intent to commit genocide and thus invoke the jurisdiction of the court.
At that Oct. 12 news conference, I was meeting international journalists at the president’s residence in Jerusalem. Not one journalist asked me about the pain in Israel or about the global implications of this act of catastrophic terror. They were instead preoccupied with the effect this would have on Palestinians in Gaza—the territory that had produced and then celebrated the perpetrators of the attack.
The fact is that many Palestinian civilians entered Israel on Oct. 7 on the heels of the Hamas terrorists and participated in murder, rape and looting, much of it documented on film. Palestinians were filmed cheering the massacre and jeering and attacking the hostages as they were led into captivity. I also pointed out that Hamas operates from within the heart of its civilian population and enjoys broad support. I then stated, in no uncertain terms, that there are many innocent Palestinians, and that the state of Israel and our security forces don’t view innocent civilians as targets in any way. I made it clear that Israel acts in keeping with international law.
These words were purposely distorted when presented to the court. The claim that Israel is committing genocide can’t rest on accurate information, because it is a lie. Israel is acting to protect its citizens from an explicitly genocidal enemy, as we are required to do under international law. Israel is doing so with utmost concern for civilian life, as experts from other Western militaries know well. The civilian casualties in Gaza are a tragedy—due to Hamas’s decision to attack Israelis and the way Hamas fights from under and behind its own civilians.
Differentiating civilians from combatants isn’t only a basic part of my own worldview and Israel’s basic values; it is essential to the values of humanity. We are at war with Hamas, not with the civilians of Gaza. I reject and condemn any call for their harm. Humanitarian aid must reach them, as it is already reaching them, even though more than 130 of our people remain hostages in the hands of Hamas, a fact that hasn’t been sufficiently appreciated as an international priority. I understand that many in Israel feel that by allowing aid we are helping the people abusing our kidnapped citizens and giving up a pressure point that could hasten their release and shorten the war.
The world can’t disregard what we saw on Oct. 7. The International Court of Justice has ignored most of these crimes, but we in Israel can’t. The free world must not forget that the crimes against humanity in this war were perpetrated, and continue to be perpetrated, by Hamas and its allies in Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen and Iran.
The South African case, brought in support of Hamas, is a blood libel against the nation-state of the Jewish people—a shameful low for an international system that emerged from the ashes of the Holocaust. This abandonment of moral clarity, the desertion of the vision of international justice and its replacement by cynical politics and outright falsehoods, will have repercussions far beyond Israel.
+++++++++
The coolest/breeziest airline in the sky.
+++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I am not endorsing this Op Ed. I am simply posting it because there might be some truth in what it depicts and there are always two sides to any story.
We know there were a lot of changes made in voting procedures before the election which were implemented during the election. The GOP never chose to respond. Trump's claims were very disorganized and failed.
+++
Mail-In Ballot Fraud Study Finds Trump ‘Almost Certainly’ Won in 2020
Empty envelopes of opened vote-by-mail ballots for the presidential primary are stacked on a table at King County Elections in Renton, Wash., on March 10, 2020. (Jason Redmond/AFP via Getty Images)
A new study examining the likely impact that fraudulent mail-in ballots had in the 2020 election concludes that the outcome would “almost certainly” have been different without the massive expansion of voting by mail.
The Heartland Institute study tried to gauge the probable impact that fraudulent mail-in ballots cast for both then-candidate Joe Biden and his opponent, President Donald Trump, would have had on the overall 2020 election results.
The study was based on data obtained from a Heartland/Rasmussen survey in December that revealed that roughly one in five mail-in voters admitted to potentially fraudulent actions in the presidential election.
After the researchers carried out additional analyses of the data, they concluded that mail-in ballot fraud “significantly” impacted the 2020 presidential election.
They also found that, absent the huge expansion of mail-in ballots during the pandemic, which was often done without legislative approval, President Trump would most likely have won.
“Had the 2020 election been conducted like every national election has been over the past two centuries, wherein the vast majority of voters cast ballots in-person rather than by mail, Donald Trump would have almost certainly been re-elected,” the report’s authors wrote‘Biggest Story of the Year’The new study examined raw data from the December survey carried out jointly between Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports, which tried to assess the level of fraudulent voting that took place in 2020.
The December survey, which President Trump called “the biggest story of the year,” suggested that roughly 20 percent of mail-in voters engaged in at least one potentially fraudulent action in the 2020 election, such as voting in a state where they’re no longer permanent residents.In the new study, Heartland analysts say that, after reviewing the raw survey data, subjecting it to additional statistical treatment and more thorough analysis, they now believe they can conclude that 28.2 percent of respondents who voted by mail committed at least one type of behavior that is “under most circumstances, illegal” and so potentially amounts to voter
“This means that more than one-in-four ballots cast by mail in 2020 were likely cast fraudulently, and thus should not have been counted,” the researchers wrote.
A Heartland Institute research editor and research fellow who was involved in the study explained to The Epoch Times in a telephone interview that there are narrow exceptions where a surveyed behavior may be legal, like filling out a mail-in ballot on behalf of another voter if that person is blind, illiterate, or disabled, and requests assistance.
However, the research fellow, Jack McPherrin, said such cases were within the margin of error and not statistically significant.
What Are the Implications?
In addition to reassessing the likely overall degree of fraudulent mail-in ballots in the 2020 election, Heartland analysts calculated the potential impact that fraudulent mail-in ballots might have produced in the six key swing states that President Trump officially lost.
This, then, was used to determine the impact of potentially fraudulent mail-in ballots on the overall 2020 election result.
First, the researchers analyzed the electoral results for the six swing states—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—under the 28.2 percent fraudulent mail-in ballot scenario that they estimated based on the raw survey data.
Then they calculated the electoral results in the six states under the different scenarios, each with a lower assumed percentage of fraudulent ballots, ranging from 28.2 percent all the way down to 1 percent.
For each of the 29 scenarios that they assesses, the researchers calculated the estimated number of fraudulent ballots, which were then subtracted from overall 2020 vote totals to generate a new estimate for vote totals.
Overall, of the 29 different scenarios presented in the study, the researchers concluded that President Trump would have won the 2020 election in all but three.
Specifically, they calculated that the only scenarios that would affirm the official 2020 election result, namely that candidate Biden won, were mail-in ballot fraud levels between 1 and 3 percent of ballots cast.
Mail-in ballot fraud rates higher than 3 percent would, according to the study, mean more fraudulent Biden votes that should be subtracted from the total, putting President Trump ahead.
For example, the adjustment to the vote tallies under fraud percentage rates between 13 and 6 percent would mean President Trump would have won Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, though he would have still lost in Michigan and Nevada.
Under such a scenario, President Trump would have won 289 Electoral College votes compared to candidate Biden’s 249.
In scenarios of 5–4 percent fraud, each candidate would have received 269 Electoral College votes, but President Trump would likely still have won because Republicans controlled more state delegations and, under a tie scenario, Congress would have voted based on the number of delegates.
However, the researchers expressed confidence in their overall assessment that the level of mail-in ballot fraud was over 25 percent, indicative of an actual Trump win.
“We have no reason to believe that our survey overstated voter fraud by more than 25 percentage points, and thus, we must conclude that the best available evidence suggests that mail-in ballot fraud significantly impacted the 2020 presidential election, in favor of Joe Biden,” the paper’s authors wrote.
Survey Criticism
Jim Womack, president of the North Carolina Election Integrity Team, told The Epoch Times in an earlier interview and in additional written comments in response to the new study, that he believes the survey questions were flawed and make the survey statistically meaningless, though not without value.
“We know there was fraud in the 2020 election, but you can’t conclude that it was 20 percent or 10 percent or even 5 percent based on the survey because the questions that could lead to such conclusions were unclear,” Mr. Womack said.
However, he said that the survey questions on which Heartland based its research were unclear. He argued that the questions comingled legal and illegal activity and that this made it impossible to conclude specific percentages of mail-in ballot fraud with certainty.
For instance, Mr. Womack pointed out that it’s
legal and permissible in all states for people who by reason of blindness, disability, or illiteracy request or require assistance in filling out mail-in ballots to get such assistance.
However, the wording of one of the survey questions—“During the 2020 election, did you fill out a ballot, in part or in full, on behalf of a friend or family member, such as a spouse or child?”—did not differentiate between legal and illegal forms of filling out a mail ballot on behalf of someone.
Therefore, 21 percent of people responding “yes” to this question does not necessarily mean that this percentage of people actually committed voter fraud, Mr. Womack argued.
Mr. Womack also said that another survey question–“During the 2020 election, did you cast a mail-in ballot in a state where you were no longer a permanent resident?”—to which 17 percent replied yes—also does not support the conclusion that all such cases were illegal. That’s because, as Mr. Womack pointed out, federal and state laws allow some voters (such as UOCAVA registered citizens) to cast a ballot in a state where they are no longer permanent residents under certain circumstances.
“We'd need to dive deeper into these responses to determine if these were fraudulent or not,” Mr. Womack said.
Regardless, he praised the Heartland Institute for engaging with the topic of mail-in ballot fraud and raising public awareness about what he said is an important problem.
Response to Criticism
When asked to comment on Mr. Womack’s objections, Mr. McPherrin, of the Heartland Institute, told The Epoch Times that he stands by the findings.For instance, Mr. McPherrin acknowledged that it’s legal for people who are blind, disabled, or illiterate to get help from someone in filling out a ballot.
However, he argued that the number of such individuals responding to the Heartland/Rasmussen survey (which was based on a representative sample of 1,085 likely voters) would likely have been tiny.
“It would be difficult to imagine that dozens of blind people or those that are illiterate or disabled are answering this poll,” he said, adding that the presumably tiny fraction of survey respondents who fall into this category would be statistically insignificant and not impact the overall survey results.
But even if that particular question is left out due to concerns about its clarity, the percentage of people who admitted to potentially fraudulent voter activity would still be about one in five, he said.
Mr. McPherrin said he and his team have received and reviewed Mr. Womack’s criticism and they believe the points he makes have some validity but not enough to affect their findings in a meaningful way.
He maintains the study clearly shows that if the 2020 election had been as fair and secure as prior elections, President Trump would “almost certainly” have been re-elected to a second term.
Mr. Womack continues to stand by his criticism of the survey question design, providing The Epoch Times with a written statement on Feb. 8 that calls the survey “very poorly constructed, failing to capture even a single instance of probable voter fraud.”
He argued that the survey questions were “vague and ambiguous, commingling permissible with impermissible behaviors, thus diminishing the quality and usefulness of responses.”
Further, Mr. Womack argued that propagating the contents of the survey does more harm than good and potentially undermines the work and reputation of “legitimate election integrity organizations like EIN,” referring to the Election Integrity Network, a project of the Conservative Partnership Institute.
Meanwhile, the authors of the Heartland study call for state legislatures to do all in their power to ensure the 2024 presidential election is as secure as possible, mostly by severely limiting mail-in voting and adopting other commonsense policies to prevent mail-in voter fraud.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE
Op-Ed
The Empty Sloganeering of a“Two-
State Solution”
It is beyond ironic that the vile attacks of October 7 have revived the notion of a two-state solution to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians—an idea that was, until that moment, politically moribund. Of course, such a “solution” was far from Hamas’s aim, but it remains the only idea available to the lazy diplomatic and peace-processing class. The two-state idea serves the aims of political leaders in the United States and Europe flailing for a response to the far Left’s anti-Israel-driven outrage over the war in Gaza. It answers the mail to the demand to “do something.”
But the one question no one has bothered to ask is, Is it good for the Palestinians? And the short answer to that question is no.
“Two-state solution” is part of the lexicon of sloganeering-cum-politics that includes “black lives matter,” “defund the police,” and “cease-fire now.” And like all of those reductionist bumper stickers, it crumbles under scrutiny. The evolution of each of these ideas is predicated on a grain of truth: Of course black lives matter. There is indeed police brutality. A cease-fire now would indeed end the fighting in Gaza, albeit briefly. And a two-state solution would certainly satisfy the symbolic demands for a Palestinian state.
Also true of these parallel political constructions is that the slogan has precious little to do with the actual lives it purports to value. The Black Lives Matter movement, while soothing to upper-class suburban whites focused intently on their virtue and their Land Rovers, has enriched a few grifters at its heart and delivered shockingly little to the actual blacks who live in America’s cities and are disproportionately victims of crime, beset by poor schooling, drugs, broken families, and more.
Ditto the mindless effort to slash police budgets in the unreasoned hope that by destroying the instruments of law enforcement, somehow there would be fewer incidents of police brutality. Instead, as numerous failed experiments in a light police footprint have demonstrated, crime has skyrocketed, businesses have been forced to shut down, and cities like Portland, Ore., San Francisco, Oakland, and Washington, D.C., have spiraled into dystopia.
Back to the Palestinians. They are people before they are a nation or a movement. And like the hapless props for the various other slogans/movements, their fate is of little genuine interest to their putative champions. To be pro-“Palestine” has come to mean little more than to be anti-Israel, shortchanging the very people such a position is intended to support.
A little history: Arab opposition in 1948 to the United Nations partition plan for British mandatory Palestine marks the moment the pro-Palestine movement trumped the welfare of actual Palestinians. Ignominious losses by Arab armies to the newly born State of Israel resulted not in a smaller Palestinian state but in no Palestinian state at all. Neither Jordan nor Egypt evinced any interest in creating a “Palestine” from the land they occupied after losing the first war waged against Israel.
The rise of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and various other “liberation” movements similarly focused not on the actual lives of Palestinians but on the “virtue” of killing Israelis and other Jews. Indeed, we have those movements and later additions like Hamas and Hezbollah to thank for the identification of the Palestinian cause with terrorism worldwide.
Worse still, the PLO maintained its death grip on the reins of the Palestinian cause by insisting that no Palestinian move into permanent housing or demand equal rights in the Arab lands they occupied, thereby creating permanent stateless “refugees.” How was this about the betterment of Palestinian lives? Of course, it wasn’t.
Even after the 1993 Oslo Accords, which created the Palestinian Authority and transferred limited autonomy over parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip to PLO chairman Yasser Arafat, the question of Palestinian well-being at the hands of their own masters never entered the equation. Israeli treatment of Palestinians has always been front and center—and that is not unreasonable. But Arab and Palestinian leaders’ treatment of Palestinians has been a matter of supreme indifference to Western champions of the cause.
Even the United Nations agency mandated to care for the welfare of the Palestinians, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, became a tool of extremists, focused on teaching radical Islamism and antisemitism. UNRWA employees have been caught participating in and celebrating the October 7 attacks, a far cry from their mandate to support the humanitarian needs of Palestinians. Indeed, UNRWA has for decades relegated its charges to endless refugee status, discouraging them from naturalizing—if permitted—in the countries where they live and forcing them to subsist rather than thrive.
In fact, the Palestinian people have no real champion.
Palestinians turfed out of Kuwait in the hundreds of thousands in 1991? Whatever. Palestinians discriminated against in Lebanon, barred from intermarriage with citizens, forbidden from entering certain professions, and barred from land ownership? Meh. And in the West Bank and Gaza? Corruption, declining levels of education, collapsing economic security, Islamist indoctrination, murder, kidnapping, and crime . . . all at the hands of the PLO in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza—from which Israel withdrew in 2005? Blame the Jews.
If, for once, the Palestinian people themselves were the priority, rather than their terrorist and criminal leaders, and if, for once, the two-state-solution movement—which has morphed into Israel-hatred over support for Palestinians—took a back seat to the well-being of the population, there might actually be a pathway to a viable Palestinian state. Right now, however, the Palestinian people are pawns, props in a local, regional, and global game that puts their real interest last.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
UNRWA’s ‘Nobel Prize for Genocide’
By Dan Diker
George Orwell, one of Britain’s greatest gifts to Western literature, warned his readers about the deceptive use of language, particularly in the realm of politics. Political language, Orwell wrote, “Is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”
So, it is with Norwegian Labour MP Asmund Aukrust’s recent nomination of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) to receive a Nobel prize “for its long-term work in providing vital support to Palestine and the region as a whole”.
UNRWA’s nomination, like hundreds made annually to the Nobel committee, has no operative meaning. And the Nobel committee permanently stained its noble name in 1994, when it awarded the prize to arch terrorist, Palestine Liberation Organization Chairperson Yasser Arafat, a long time African National Congress (ANC) ally. But the message in the recent UNRWA nomination does matter. It’s another weapon in the deception-driven global disinformation war the Iranian regime and its terror proxies are waging primarily against Israel, the Jewish people, and the West. Psychological warfare is consequential in a world shaped by feelings over facts and in which iPhones and social networks sire instant alternative realities for billions of people.
The recent UNRWA nomination is yet another case of Orwellian “double speak”. It comes as the world bears witness to incontrovertible evidence of UNRWA employees’ direct role in the Hamas mass terror invasion, massacre, rape, and kidnapping of Israelis and other nationals on 7 October 2023.
UNRWA’s crimes were well documented. On 30 January 2024, UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer testified before the United States Congress, documenting UNRWA employees’ incitement of the murder of Jews and glorification of the Hamas 7/10 massacre.
Neuer said, “Just in November 2023, we sent a report to the UN on 20 teachers who celebrated the October massacre. In March, together with the organisation Impact-se, we identified 133 UNRWA teachers who promoted hate and violence on social media.” Neuer summarised his congressional testimony, observing that, “the core problem with UNRWA is that the very purpose of the agency is to perpetuate the war of 1948, and to send the message to Palestinians that the war of 1948 isn’t over”.
Neuer isn’t a lone voice. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken characterised as “highly credible” evidence provided by Israel proving UNRWA staffers participated in Hamas’s 7 October terror onslaught. Even UNRWA, albeit tacitly, admitted the culpability of its employees by terminating their employment pending a hearing.
UNRWA isn’t the only worthy nominee for the “Nobel Prize for Genocide”. The South African government is another leading candidate for its abominable and unforgivable referral of Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on charges of genocide. This “award winning” Orwellian perversion of justice reflects what Mary Kluk, the vice-president of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies, characterised as “a pornographic and sycophantic romance between [South African] government ministers and Hamas”. It’s also become clear to many in Israel that the South African government and Hamas serve at the pleasure of the genocidal Iranian regime.
South Africa’s ICJ claim didn’t develop in a vacuum. Just months before the petition was submitted, the ANC teetered on the verge of bankruptcy. Almost magically, following South Africa’s minister of international relations, Dr Naledi Pandor’s, 23 October 2023 visit to Tehran, it was reported that the ANC ruling party’s finances had “stabilised”. Pandor’s visit was almost immediately followed by South Africa’s full-throated accusation of genocide against Israel. Soon after, the South African Parliament voted in favour of severing diplomatic ties. It was a perfectly timed political-warfare operation.
Deception, disinformation, and psychological warfare are tentacles of the Iranian “octopus” in its mission to sow global destruction. Though Iranian officials remain in the background and often unseen, their presence is constantly felt, pulling on the strings of state puppets and terror proxies. Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Syria, the Houthis and even South Africa do Teheran’s bidding, while the mullahs rub their hands in satisfaction.
Alfred Nobel must be turning in his grave.
Dr Dan Diker is president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From Israel: The Unmitigated Gall of Antony Blinken!!
Last Wednesday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken paid a visit to Israel, his fifth since October 7.
He made several stops – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt and the PA – prior to heading for
Israel. Before he had even arrived, he requested that a private meeting with Chief of
Staff Herzi Halevi be arranged for him when he got here. That inappropriate request
was denied but provided more than an inkling of the degree to which he hoped to be
involved (that is, to meddle).
The meetings he did hold – with the War Cabinet, Prime Minister Netanyahu and
Defense Minister Gallant (as well as with opposition head Yair Lapid) – were extensive.
When discussions ended, the secretary and Netanyahu failed to appear together for a
joint press conference, which is common practice: this was a signal that
all had not gone smoothly. This picture of Netanyahu and Blinken with faces somber
suggests a similar conclusion.
But I want to focus first on one particular statement he made:
“Israelis were dehumanized in the most horrific way on October 7th. The
hostages have been dehumanized every day since. But that cannot be a license
to dehumanize others.”
What?? Dehumanize others?? Here we see his gall.
We have lost some of our precious soldiers because we have taken actions to minimize
civilian casualties. Actions that no other army takes. One example: So that they
would be able to flee from the theater of battle before we began, we let civilians know
where we would be acting next – thereby surrendering the element of surprise and
allowing the enemy to prepare for our offensive. No one else does this. We have even
helped the civilians move out of harm’s way and will be doing so again.
We have permitted increased amounts of humanitarian aid to go into Gaza, even
though 60% of it is taken by Hamas, making our enemy stronger.
Former Israeli ambassador to the US Michael Oren responded with shock to Blinken’s
statement:
“When Secretary of State Blinken accuses Israel—inaccurately, unfairly, and
libelously—of dehumanizing Palestinians, he dehumanizes us and contributes
to the delegitimization of Israel and the demonization of Jews worldwide.” (I
will have more about the delegitimization of Israel below.)
There are those who maintain that we should not criticize the US, which has acted as
a friend in the course of our war with Hamas. Oren addressed this, as well:
“Thank you, Secretary Blinken, for resupplying us with ammunition and standing up
for our right to self-defense, but without legitimacy we will be hard pressed to
use that ammo or exercise that right. Dehumanizing us endangers our
security and possibly our existence.” (Emphasis added)
Let us circle back, then, to another aspect of Blinken’s statement:
“The overwhelming majority of people in Gaza had nothing to do with the attacks of
October 7th, and the families in Gaza whose survival depends on deliveries of aid
from Israel are just like our families. They’re mothers and fathers, sons and
daughters – want to earn a decent living, send their kids to school, have a normal
life. That’s who they are; that’s what they want. And we cannot, we must not lose
sight of that. We cannot, we must not lose sight of our common humanity.”
I find this description of the civilians of Gaza, which paints them as no different from
Israelis, to be highly offensive. I would never say that there are no innocent Gazan
civilians, but I know enough about their behavior to be certain that we are not like
them, thank Heaven.
There is one particular scenario that I have not been able to erase from my mind:
There was an Israeli girl raped and then killed on October 7. Her naked body was then
brought into Gaza. People cheered to see her condition and spat upon her. By any
chance, were some of the mothers and fathers who Blinken tells us just want to earn
a living and send their kids to school among them?
There are a number of testimonies from Israelis who survived the massacre,
testimonies of their treatment at the hands of civilians on October 7: Civilians rushed
across the border from Gaza along with members of Hamas, assisting in the murder
and mayhem.
And there are testimonies from hostages who were in Gaza in the days after and
subsequently made it out. Mia Schem, for example, said after her release from
captivity, “I experienced hell. Everyone there are terrorists… there are no innocent
civilians, not one. [Innocent civilians] don’t exist.”
What then is going on? We are being squeezed, pushed to end the war
prematurely. That would mean Hamas would be around to attack yet another day.
This apparently does not concern Biden, or Blinken, as long as the progressives in
the US are reassured that the government is not siding with Israel.
Consider:, In a press conference last week, Biden said, “I’m of the view, as you know, that
the conduct of the response [by Israel] in the Gaza Strip has been over the top.”
The US is now going to condition aid to Israel on submission of a report
providing proof that international human rights laws were not violated in
Gaza. Israel has a deadline of 45 days for submitting this report that must
demonstrate “adherence to international law, including, as applicable, international
human rights law and international humanitarian law.”
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has indicated that a memo released
by the White House addressing this forthcoming requirement that a report be
submitted “emerged in part because of our discussions with members of Congress.”
This is a reference to a memo sent to Biden by the Progressives of Congress, notably
Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), pictured – who identifies as Palestinian-American – requesting
an assessment of the State Department’s policies regarding security assistance to
Israel. What we are seeing then is the growing (disproportionate) influence of
members of the “Squad” who are blatantly anti-Israel.
In November, calling Netanyahu a “genocidal maniac,” Tlaib accused Biden of
supporting "the genocide of the Palestinian people."
Now – no surprise! – she is focused on the Rafah area:
“Over 1.5 million displaced Palestinians are sheltering in Rafah, and now they are
being threatened with attacks. There is nowhere left for them to go. When will it
be enough for [Biden] to end support for Netanyahu’s genocide?” (Emphasis added)
Unfortunately, Biden seems to be listening. He has declared his opposition to an IDF operation in Rafah, which is at the border with Egypt, because of the risk of civilian damage.
National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby declared , “Any major military operation in Rafah at this time, under these circumstances, with more than a million– probably more like a million and a half – Palestinians who are seeking refuge and have been seeking refuge in Rafah without due consideration for their safety would be a disaster, and we would not support it.”
An operation in Rafah is essential for completing our goals of defeating Hamas. While
we have had significant success and have taken out 18 battalions, there are still six
active Hamas battalions operating in the Rafah area, adjacent to Egypt.
Prime Minister Netanyahu has now said unequivocally that we will go in: “Victory is
within reach. We’re going to do it. We’re going to get the remaining Hamas
terrorist battalions in Rafah, which is the last bastion, but we’re going to do it.”
He ordered the IDF to come up with a detailed plan for moving out the civilians who
had fled south. You see, Kirby spoke about an operation “without due consideration”
for the safety of civilians, thereby making a regrettable (and erroneous) assumption.
Said Netanyahu, undercutting the American complaint: “In this, I agree with the Americans. We are going to do it while providing safe passage for the civilian population so they can leave.
“We have worked out a detailed plan to do so. And that’s what we have done up to
now. We are not cavalier about this. This is part of our war effort, to get civilians
out of harm’s way. It’s part of Hamas’s effort to keep them in harm’s way.”
(Emphasis added)
The plan is to move the civilians north into spaces that have been cleared.
Egypt remains adamant about not allowing any Gazans into the Sinai, even though
doing this would provide a temporary solution. The Egyptians have stationed
bulldozers on their side of the border and are making threats with regard to the
peace treaty with Israel.
We are being squeezed from so many directions, my friends.
Saudi Arabia (surely with US encouragement) has announced that there will be no
normalization with Israel unless there is agreement on a Palestinian state established
along the Green Line, which means eastern Jerusalem would be Palestine’s capital.
In their dreams. It’s time for the Saudis to think about the advantages to them of
normalization with Israel.
And then there was the recent offer advanced by Hamas for releasing the hostages
in three stages over the course of months. No point in parsing all of the details: in
essence, it called for a final truce at the last stage, reconstruction of Gaza, full
withdrawal of Israel from Gaza, and the release of large numbers of terrorists in our
prisons, including some with life sentences.
Netanyahu, who here as well declared that we are in this to win, called the proposal
“delusional.”
Other parties, including Blinken, indicated that some of the proposal was excessive
but that there was still reason to be optimistic – Blinken said the proposal “created
space” for something to be agreed upon.
Right…They are hoping, oh how they are hoping, that a ceasefire can be negotiated
before Israel goes into Rafah and wins the war. Biden has made it clear he would
want that ceasefire to become permanent.
There are reports that Egypt has sent a message to Hamas indicating they had two
weeks to come up with a new proposal or the IDF would be in Rafah
I thought an observation by Michael Oren was particularly pertinent: The more the
US comes down on Israel to stop fighting because of civilian deaths, the more
motivated Hamas will be to increase to the number of civilian deaths to encourage
the US to be even tougher on Israel.
We are going to win this. Because of the determination of our soldiers and
our government and the will of our people.
But this is a tough, tough time, my friends. I cannot pretend otherwise.
It’s not easy standing against much of the world, yet we are doing it.
I want to note here how splendidly Prime Minister Netanyahu is coming through.
He knows we must win, and he is determined to see it through. Time is of the
essence: He recognizes that we don’t have unlimited time before the world closes
in on us – probably a couple of months at most.
Here I want to say, Kol Hakavod! to Bibi Netanyahu. Hold tight, please!
The prime minister had a 45-minute phone conversation with Biden today, Sunday,
during which they discussed our plans for Rafah. It had a more pleasant tone than
recent exchanges. Do we give Bibi credit here for adopting the right tone – a
willingness to share plans?
The IDF has uncovered a subterranean data center — complete with an electrical
room, industrial battery power banks and living quarters for Hamas terrorists
operating the computer servers — built under a location where Israel did not
consider looking at first: beneath the Gaza headquarters of UNRWA.
“IDF officials believe Hamas used the server farm for intelligence gathering, data
processing and communications. Hard drives and some of the computers were taken
to Israel to be investigated by intelligence authorities before the tunnel was demolished in a large explosion.”
There is no way that the insistence of UNRWA officials that they weren’t aware of
this is credible.
What has brightened my day is the knowledge that spring is coming. On Friday, I
saw the first kalaniot, red poppies, along the roadside where I was going.
And today, just blocks from my home in Jerusalem, I saw the first shekediah, almond tree, in bloom. This tree is the earliest. And this is just the beginning.
Keep praying to Heaven for Israel, my friends. Pray for the strength and
wisdom of our leaders, for the safety of our boys, and for the rescue of
our hostages. Pray with a heart filled with hope.
© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by independent journalist Arlene
Kushner. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Beginning of Wisdom | PragerU
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Israel’s 129th Day of War By Sherwin Pomerantz As the 129th day of war in Israel dawned, there was good news out of Gaza. IDF troops found and freed two hostages who have been held by Hamas since October 7th. Both male, one is 60 years of age and the other is 70, and both of them seem to be in good health. Nevertheless, they were immodestly flown to Sheba Medical Center near Tel Aviv for evaluation and treatment as needed. Over the past weekend, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu directed the IDF and the defense establishment to bring to the war cabinet a plan for both the evacuation of civilians in the southern Gaza city of Rafah and the neutralization of the four Hamas battalions therein. “It is impossible to achieve the goal of the war without eliminating Hamas, and by leaving four Hamas battalions in Rafah," the Prime Minister noted. "On the contrary, it is clear that intense activity in Rafah requires that civilians evacuate the areas of combat." Egypt has opined that if Israel chooses to engage militarily in Rafah it has the potential to scuttle the peace accords between Egypt and Israel. There is, as well, virtually complete global opposition to Israel’s intention to conduct military operations in Gaza which would undoubtedly results in mass civilian casualties. US President Joe Biden issued a memorandum linking American military aid globally to adherence to international humanitarian law, including that for Israel, as he called the IDF’s military operation in Gaza “over the top.” Forms of military aid could be suspended If reports of violations are found credible, according to the National Security Memorandum. Countries currently at war and receiving military aid have 45 days, by February 8, to assure the US that they will comply with the memorandum or risk a pause in the delivery of that aid. Others have 90 days to submit their reports. The memorandum was issued as an executive order following a visit to Israel last week by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who underscored for Israeli officials the importance of treating humanitarian issues relating to the IDF’s campaign to destroy Hamas in Gaza in a serious manner. The President spoke with the Prime Minister for 45 minutes as well over the past weekend. The Hostage and Missing Families Forum intends to file a lawsuit against Hamas at the International Criminal Court, with a delegation from the Forum set to head to the Hague on Wednesday, Ynet reported on Saturday. The delegation, which will include about 100 representatives and attorneys from Israel and abroad, will file the suit which the forum has worked on for the past four months. Of course, it is not clear that even if the court rules in favor of the motion, to whom it would be addressed as Hamas is not a country but rather a movement in power in a non-state player, i.e. the Palestinian Authority. Credit ratings agency Moody's on Friday concluded its review of Israel and downgraded the country to "A2" from "A1", citing material political and fiscal risks for the country due to its war with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. "While fighting in Gaza may diminish in intensity or pause, there is currently no agreement to end the hostilities durably and no agreement on a longer-term plan that would fully restore and eventually strengthen security for Israel," Moody's said in a statement. Moody’s said that the credit rating drop came following an assessment of Israel's current climate. “The ongoing military conflict with Hamas, its aftermath and wider consequences materially raise political risk for Israel as well as weaken its executive and legislative institutions and its fiscal strength, for the foreseeable future,” the statement said. In the first cast of an Israeli ally limiting the flow of military supplies to Israel. a Dutch appeals court on Monday ordered the government to block all exports of F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel over concerns they were being used in violation of international law during Israel's Gaza offensive. "It is undeniable that there is a clear risk the exported F-35 parts are used in serious violations of international humanitarian law," the court said. It said the state had to comply with the order within seven days and dismissed a request by government lawyers to suspend the order during an appeal to the Dutch Supreme Court. Future Leadership
Today we feature Dr. Ami Appelbaum, the former Chief Scientist and Chairman of the Board of Israel Innovation Authority as a potential future leader for Israel.
He has almost 40 years’ experience in research, development and senior level management in the field of semiconductors. He served for 22 years at numerous executive positions at KLA Tencor, and is a world leader in the business of capital equipment for the semiconductor industry. His most recent position at KLA was Corporate Senior Vice President and president of KLA Tencor Israel. Dr. Appelbaum holds PhD and Masters’ degrees from the Technion, Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa and an Engineering degree from Ben Gurion University in Beer Sheba, all in the field of materials engineering. He is the author and co-author of more than 50 scientific and technical publications, and holds 7 patents in the field of semiconductor equipment and processing. Clearly a new government will be able to make good use of someone with his experience and knowledge of Israel’s tech platform. I close today with a suggestion to watch this moving video about two reservists here who were “on the outs” before the war but now give us hope for the future+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
|
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment