The picture is from the Carmel forest fire a few years ago and not from today. But it's a scenario that could God forbid repeat itself at any time. Unconfirmed reports indicate that three Hamas rockets reached the Haifa area in the last hour. One reached Zichron Yaakov, which is about 45 kilometers south of Haifa, while the other two reached the Hof HaCarmel area on Haifa's southern edge. Haifa is 165 kilometers (102 miles) from Gaza. The rockets involved are likely Syrian-made M-302 rockets.
Rocket alert sirens sounded in Zichron Yaakov on Wednesday, some 120 km north of the Gaza Strip.
Channel
2 reported that two rockets had fallen in open areas of Zichron Yaakov ,
lightly injuring one person, while Channel 10 reported that 2 rockets
had fallen in the Hof Hacarmel region south of Haifa.
The IDF has not yet confirmed that rockets fell in the area. A Code
Red siren sounded in nearby Binyamina on Tuesday, but that proved to be a
false alarm.
Channel 2 suggested that the rockets may have been the Syrian-made M-302 type rocket, which was used to target Hadera on Wednesday.
Sirens sounded near Haifa in Hadera, Zikhron Ya'akov, Caesarea and
Hof HaBonim on Wednesday afternoon - at least 45 kilometers (almost 30
miles) north of Tel Aviv, and the farthest attack recorded from Gaza in
the ongoing rocket barrage.
Two rockets landed in the sea near Haifa, reports AFP, noting the city is 165 kilometers (102 miles) away from the Hamas stronghold of Gaza.
...
Hamas has taken responsibility for the rocket fire close to Haifa, according to Walla!, stating that the rockets fired were of the R-160 model.
The IDF needs to finish this off quickly. If people feel that they have to flee to the north and Hezbullah gets involved (which is what happened in 2006 when we had a skirmish with Hamas and then Hezbullah got involved), we could God forbid be in big trouble.
In other news, Iran, Hamas's arms supplier, has condemned Israel's 'savage aggression' against Hamas. And the UN has not gotten involved yet, so we must not be winning yet. What could go wrong?
Hamas has four times the long-range missiles previously thought
A Hamas rocket landed in Hadera tonight - 45 kilometers north of Tel Aviv. In a series of tweets, Haaretz's Yossi Mehlman tells us that there may be a lot more rockets in Hamas' arsenal.
M-75 s #Hamas self produced rocket based on Iran's #Fajr. Range 75k weight 400kg. Warhead 40-50kg. Extremly inaccurate - 1k radius
— Yossi Melman (@yossi_melman) July 8, 2014
A military source told me that that more rocket attacks against central Israel are expected&that the campaign will last at least a week
— Yossi Melman (@yossi_melman) July 8, 2014
Intel updates Hamas and PIJ have an arsenal of 400 long range missiles 4 times bigger than estimated. 30-40 destroyed by IAF & 40 used.
— Yossi Melman (@yossi_melman) July 8, 2014
A 'Palestinian' symbol of hate on the Temple Mount
In my neighborhood, the kids made snowmen and igloos. But the 'Palestinians' had something different in mind for the snow. Here's what they did on the Temple Mount:
While Jewish children in Jerusalem are building snowmen and having
friendly snowball fights, The Arabs, on the holiest site to Judaism, and
a site the Arabs claim is holy to them too, are building symbols of
hate, M-75 missiles out of snow, to show what they want to do to Israel.
The M-75 is the Gazan long-range missile that targeted Jerusalem and Tel Aviv during the “Pillar of Defense” operation.
But I'm sure if we give them a 'state,' they'll stop doing things like this (/sarc).
Below are two pictures taken by a Japanese journalist from the newspaper Asahi Shimbun at the Hamas rally in Gaza on Saturday. The pictures are of a huge wall poster which purports to show the damage from Hamas rockets shot at Jerusalem during Operation Pillar of Defense. If you look at the burnt area above the church steeple, that's where they apparently suggest that the rockets hit.
Two problems with the photos. First, they're a lousy photoshop job. Second, Asahi Shimbun's offices are right above the area (where there are two towers that are really supposed to be one), and they know they weren't hit.
Fox News is reporting, based on an interview with Jonathan Schanzer, that Israel avoided its own Cuban missile crisis by destroying Hamas' Fajr-5 rockets in Operation Pillar of Defense (Hat Tip: Memeorandum).
Rocket attacks from Gaza were commonplace in Israel prior to the
campaign, dubbed "Operation Pillar of Defense," with at least 750
projectiles falling on the area close to the border since January. The
attacks were ratcheted up in early November, which seemed to prompt
Israel's move and the deployment of its vaunted "Iron Dome" defense
system. But behind the scenes, the Israel Defense Force (IDF) had a more
pressing need to launch their intense bombardment on Hamas’ weapons
stores.
Israel's elimination of senior Hamas figure Ahmad Jabari as he drove
in broad daylight in Gaza also fits into Schanzer's narrative.
“Ahmad Jabari, along with another major Hamas figure, Mahmoud al
Mabhouhk, [who was assassinated in Dubai in 2010], was a key part of the
procurement network for the Fajr missiles and there is little doubt
that Israel was keen to take out the man responsible,” Schanzer
explained.
Schanzer contends that the operation actually began three weeks
earlier, when, on Oct. 23, the Iranian-owned Yarmouk armaments factory
in Sudan - believed to be the assembly plant for the Fajr5 missiles that
have a range of up to 45 miles - was devastated by air strikes for
which the Sudanese government holds Israel responsible. Israel, and for
that matter the U.S., both deny any knowledge of the attack.
And therein lie some key differences between Operation Pillar of Defense and the Cuban missile crisis. In the Cuban missile crisis, the US was not existentially endangered. Other than Cuba itself, it had to worry about Russia, but it did not have to worry about another, closer party trying to retaliate. The US resolved the Cuban missile crisis diplomatically (albeit with a threat of military action). And most important of all, a recurrence was unlikely.
It is entirely possible that Hamas will try again, with the support of our 'friends' in Egypt, and with the support of Sudan, Iran and other countries in our region. In fact, they are likely trying already. Egypt's behavior regarding the smuggling is an issue that goes back to the Mubarak days and has only gotten worse.
The apparent coordination between Israel and the U.S. raises
questions about the role of Egypt, which was credited with helping
broker a cease fire between Israel and Hamas. The missiles were almost
certainly smuggled into Gaza from Egypt, with the likely knowledge of
President Morsi, whose Muslim Brotherhood is the parent organization of
Hamas.
“There’s little doubt that Iranian-built rockets came from Sudan
through Egypt, and that Egypt’s security forces weren’t interested in
intercepting the missiles," Eric Trager, of the Washington Institute, an
expert on Egyptian affairs, told FoxNews.com. "Morsi was more
interested in furthering his own internal agenda than worrying about
foreign policy issues at that time.”
Egypt needs to be forced to choose between its Muslim Brotherhood ties and its massive US foreign assistance. But don't expect it to be presented with that stark choice with this administration in power. They could probably abrogate their treaty with Israel and suffer little or no consequence from Washington.
And then there's the role of the media.
“I think that Washington and the international media have been so lazy
in their coverage of this conflict in terms of identifying what actually
happened,” Schanzer said. “Both the Israeli intelligence community and
Israeli officials referred to the presence of Fajr5 missiles in the
hands of Hamas as 'game changing rockets,' a change that very nearly
produced Israel’s own Cuban missile crisis.”
Lazy isn't really the word. After all, they all sent reporters to Gaza to report on the poor, suffering Islamist canon fodder. Mendacious is more like it.
Did Netanyahu put Israeli lives at risk to avoid attacking Hamas before the US election?
Jonathan Schanzer argues that Operation Pillar of Defense was a net positive for Prime Minister Netanyahu's relationship with President Obama, because Israel put off its hunting expedition for game-changing Fajr-5 rockets until after the US Presidential election.
For Israel, Pillar of Defense was not about killing terrorist
masterminds like Ahmed Jabari or blowing up Hamas headquarters. Those
were ancillary targets. This round of hostilities was actually a hunting
expedition for Fajr-5s.
As Israel's air force methodically struck these rocket sites, one
after the next, Hamas realized it was "use 'em or lose 'em." They began —
along with Palestinian Islamic Jihad – firing off their Iran-supplied
weapons. But even then, the Fajrs hurtled some 50 miles out of Gaza only
to be shot out of the skies over Tel Aviv by Iron Dome, an anti-missile
system developed jointly by the U.S. and Israel.
The Israelis claim to have destroyed most if not all of the Fajr-5s –
about 100, give or take – in the first few days of fighting. Only then,
after Israel had destroyed the bulk of the rockets, did Secretary of
State Hillary Clinton make any serious effort to pressure Egyptian
President Mohammed Morsy into brokering a ceasefire.
In other words, Operation Pillar of Defense bears unmistakable signs
of close coordination between Netanyahu and Obama. And while the White
House may not admit it in public, Netanyahu appears to have done
everything in his power to ensure that Israeli military operations did
not get in the way of Obama's bid for reelection.
If anything, Netanyahu may have put off striking the Fajr-5s until
well after the election, even if it put his own population at risk.
Of course, Obama and Netanyahu may yet come to loggerheads over when
and whether to attack Iran's nuclear sites. Even before that, Obama may
demand the Israelis return the favor, either by asking anew for a
settlement freeze, or even pushing Netanyahu to forgive PLO chief
Mahmoud Abbas' unilateral theatrics at the United Nations tomorrow.
But, for now, Pillar of Defense has resulted in a surprising new
understanding between two leaders who have struggled to find common
ground. And that's a victory for the U.S.-Israel relationship.
While the delay in the operation may have been positive for our relations with the US in the short term (and I'm not so sure even that can be said in the long run, although clearly Obama did not object to Israel's bombing Hamas for an entire week), I'm afraid it sets a bad precedent and that in the end Obama will not help us with Iran anyway. This story reminds me of Operation Desert Storm, where Israel sat back and absorbed rockets for the sake of the Bush (I) administration's coalition, and then found itself the target of a gang rape a couple months later in Madrid. What could go wrong?
In an earlier post, I reported that FIFA, the international soccer soccer federation, is going to pay the costs of rebuilding Gaza's bombed out soccer stadium for the second time since 2006.
In case you are wondering why the IAF destroyed the stadium in the first place, here's an image that was released by the IDF (I had previously seen a much smaller version that wasn't very useful, and I saw this one this morning). Note that the stadium had been used to launch Fajr-5 rockets at both Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.
Israel to strike ships carrying Iranian arms to Gaza
Russia Today is reporting based on a Sunday Times of London report that Israel plans to strike a ship that is carrying Iranian missiles to Gaza.
Israeli spy satellites spotted a cargo vessel in the Iranian port of
Bandar Abbas that was allegedly Gaza-bound and carrying arms, the Sunday
Times reported.
“Regardless of the ceasefire agreement, we will attack and destroy any shipment of arms to Gaza once we have spotted it,” an Israeli defense official told the newspaper.
The
vessel reportedly began its voyage last week just as Israel and Hamas
agreed to a ceasefire ending eight days of violence in Gaza, in which
over 150 Palestinians died. The cargo is believed to include Fajr-5
rockets, similar to those used by Hamas in the conflict, and Shahab-3
ballistic missiles.
The ship is set to travel through the Red Sea, Sudan
and Egypt, according to the Sunday Times report. The newspaper also
cited Israeli officials speculating that Iran could be moving
longer-range ballistic missiles into Sudan, which could be aimed at
Israel from the African country.
The Sunday Times’ report comes a
day after the Hamas leadership announced they aren’t ready to stop
arming themselves, despite the recently-agreed truce and ceasefire.
"We have no choice but to continue to bring in weapons by all possible means," senior Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar told reporters, adding that he expected Tehran would "increase its military and financial support to Hamas."
Earlier on Wednesday, exiled Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal thanked Shia-majority Iran for what he described as arms and funding.
There is nothing new in Israel saying that it will destroy any weapons being shipped to Gaza. It also has nothing to do with the 'cease fire' agreement, which only deals with Gaza and not with actions outside of Gaza.
A number of recent Israeli military attacks were aimed at cutting the
supply chain into Gaza. In late October, a munitions factory in Sudan
was hit from the air. Israel did not acknowledge carrying out the
attack, but the winks and nods of officials here make clear that it did.
Israel has carried out several other such attacks on Sudan, including
on convoys, in the past few years.
In addition, Mossad agents killed a Hamas official in a Dubai hotel in
early 2010 because he was thought to be crucial to the Hamas supply
chain of weapons and rockets into Gaza.
One official here said that until Israel ended its military occupation
of Gaza in 2005, there were only primitive weapons factories there. The
Hamas rockets had a flight capacity of about a mile, they could not be
aimed and they flew in a wild cylindrical pattern. Hamas then built
better rockets that could fly up to 12 miles.
(In some accounts Ahmad al-Jabari, who was killed at the outset of
Pillar of Defense, was a moderate. He was Mabhouh's replacement. Maybe
he was playing both sides - arming and leading Hamas on one hand, and
talking peace with gullible leftists on the other - but he was a real
threat to Israel.)
Going back to contemporaneous reporting of the Mabhouh killing, Yossi Melman and Dan Raviv wrote in Israel's hit Squads in the Atlantic:
What made Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, the Hamas man visiting Dubai, worth all
the trouble and risk this time? He was involved in the killing of two
Israeli soldiers 22 years ago. But that’s not why he was assassinated.
The hunters stalked him because of his key role in forging secret
connections between the Palestinian radicals who rule Gaza and the
Al-Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guards in Iran. Israel believed that
Mabhouh had a major role in arms shipments from Iran to Gaza via the
shores of Sudan and Egypt, and on through the Sinai. And rockets that
get into Gaza have a high likelihood of killing Israelis.
Mabhouh’s passing definitely sets Hamas back, at least for a few months.
It will take time to find a suitable replacement. And the leadership of
his radical movement is now in a tizzy trying to figure out where the
security breach occurred. The vortex of suspicion can only be a good
thing for Israel.
As for complaints by the British, Irish, French, and German governments
that their passports were misused, the issue is likely to simmer down.
Israeli intelligence can get its contacts in London’s MI6 and Berlin’s
BND to put in a good word, pointing to favors Israel regularly does for
European security agencies. The Mossad might even unveil dossiers
showing how dangerous Hamas is to everyone.
Edward Jay Epstein made similar observations in More Questions about the Dubai Assassination. Epstein also noted that Dubai "... the principal transshipment points for the lethal arms trade between Iran and Hamas..."
The arms smuggling that allowed Hamas to rebuild its military capacity
has been underway for some time - probably since the end of Cast Lead.
But the recent escalation of hostilities by Hamas also sheds light on
another news story. In 2010 Israeli forces boarded the Mavi Marmara,
which was part of an attempt to break Israel's blockade of Gaza. Israel
suffered a major public relations blow, when its forces were attacked
and in response killed nine Turkish nationals. Israel was accused of
damaging its relationship with Turkey and isolating itself. Given that
the flotilla was intended to aid arms smuggling to Hamas, the complaints
against Israel were misplaced. Turkey was aiding Israel's enemies.
Subsequent pressure to get Israel to relax the blockade (including from
the Obama administration) only aided Hamas.
Another news story worth revisiting is Israel's disengagement from Gaza. Bret Stephens has written an amazing mea culpa for having advocated disengagement, The Truth about Gaza. (For the complete article, click on the title here.) Stephens concluded:
Now Israel may be on the cusp of purchasing yet another long-term
strategic failure for the sake of a short-term tactical success. The
Israeli government wants to bomb Hamas into a cease-fire—hopefully
lasting, probably orchestrated in Cairo. That way Israel gets the quiet
it seeks, especially on the eve of elections in January, and the
Egyptians get the responsibility for holding the leash on Hamas. That is largely how it played out during Cast Lead. But as one
leading Israeli political figure told me in January 2009, just as the
last cease-fire had been declared, "Notwithstanding the blows to the
Hamas, it's still in Gaza, it's still ruling Gaza, and the Philadelphi
corridor [which runs along Gaza's border with Egypt] is still porous,
and . . . Hamas can smuggle new rockets unless [the corridor] is closed,
to fire at Israel in the future." That leading political figure was Benjamin Netanyahu, just before he
returned to office as prime minister. He might now consider taking his
own advice. Israel can afford to watch only so many reruns of this same,
sordid show.
Israel abandoned the Philadelpi corridor at the insistence of the Bush
administration (which also pressured Israel to allow Hamas to run for
legislative election in 2006).
Yaacov Lozowick adds more background about disengagement and the withdrawal from the Philadelphi corridor:
The significance of this is that between September 2005 and early
2006, there was no Israeli blockade of Gaza. The Gazans were in an eiree
sort of diplomatic limbo, unlike anywhere else in the world, with no
internationally recognized sovereign, but with lots of internationally
recognized clout, and could have reasonably expected the Palestinian
Authority to move towards an upgrade of its status. There can be little
doubt that had the Gazans done in 2005 what the Jewish Agency did in
1947, namely purposefully go about the mundane but crucial task of
nation building, Israel wouldn't have interfered. On the contrary: a
majority of Israelis were hoping - fervently or dubiously - they'd do
exactly that, which is why Sharon, then followed after his illnes by
Ehud Olmert, built the election strategy of their brand new party Kadima
on the idea of continuing the disengagement process on the West Bank.
(Hitkansut, Olmert called it).
The reason none of this ever happened is that the Palestinians made
their choices, and their choices were not what Israel had hoped. And
thus began the downward spiral to where we're at now.
Is Hamas is now negotiating for what already existed in 2005, after
having spent the intervening years pounding into the collective Israeli
psyche that the gamble of 2005 was idiotic?
Listening to the news, I get the impression that the main goal of a
ceasefire is to end the suffering of civilians on both sides. But unless
something substantive is done - more than worthless promises of Hamas -
Hamas will simply re-arm and Israeli civilians will soon be under fire
again. Any ceasefire that doesn't substantially improve Israel's
capacity to deter Hamas will fail and Israelis will pay the price for
international meddling.
Suddenly, just after 2 p.m., the crowd was startled as militants near
the hospital fired a missile — most likely one that landed near
Jerusalem. In an instant, anticipation gave way to fear, and horror, as
Israel fired back, explosion after explosion in the distance.
And then came the sound of sirens roaring up the circular driveway,
signaling what would become the bloodiest afternoon yet in the seven-day
firefight with Israel.
First there were six ambulances, one after the other, unloading the
bodies of men identified as militants, at least two of them decapitated.
Then came three more, this time with children, dead and wounded.
Another ambulance rushed in, then quickly sped back out.
Rudoren wasn't the first to report the firing of a rocket from near the hospital. But what does this reporting tell us?
Hamas, as Israel charges, strikes at Israel from populated areas.
The injuries to the children show that there was also a play area near where the terrorists fired from.
What "anticipation" was Rudoren referring to? Was the crowd waiting to cheer the latest strike against Israeli civilians?
These are issues that Rudoren doesn't address. She was quick, though, to filter the events through the eyes of Hamas.
Even the medics unloading the bodies grimaced. “There’s a real massacre now,” said Fawzi Barhoum, a Hamas spokesman,
who was at the hospital waiting for the diplomatic delegation. “At the
same time when the Arab leaders came to Gaza, 10 persons are killed. At
this moment, kids playing soccer are hit. It is a clear reflection of
the mind and the thought of the occupation, thinking how to kill more
and more Palestinians.”
Then Rudoren muddies the narrative further:
It remains unclear whether the intense afternoon bombing was in
retaliation for the Jerusalem strike, the second in five days, or an
effort to take out as many targets as possible while final details of a
cease-fire deal were being discussed. A frenzy of about 200 rockets also
flew from Gaza into Israel on Tuesday, hitting the southern cities of
Beersheba and Ashdod as well as the Tel Aviv suburb of Rishon LeZion; an
Israeli soldier was killed in a week of cross-border battles, along
with a civilian. The violence, which health officials said brought the Palestinian
death toll to more than 130, may complicate the efforts of the Hamas
government to persuade people, especially rival factions, to abide a
cease-fire.
If the first casualties to come were "militants" as she calls them, this
wasn't a retaliation but rather an attack to neutralize a cell that was
targeting civilians. Also she provides excuses to Hamas. Hamas is the
governing authority in Gaza. "Rival factions" wouldn't have weapons if
Hamas didn't allow it. Though it is a common journalistic conceit that
Hamas "largely observed" ceasefires, ceasefires are either observed or
they're not.
What's remarkable about Rudoren's effort here is the degree to which she
confirmed Israel's narrative and then, through naivete or malice, chose
to obscure the implications of what she wrote.
On the campus of Hebrew University on Tuesday, a group of Arabs and Leftists protested Operation Pillar of Defense and the damage it has inflicted on Hamas. Then the air raid siren went off. What happened?
Let's go to the videotape (Hat Tip: Shy Guy via Jihad Watch).
Too bad the rocket missed that group of cowardly hypocrites.
Reporter admits Hamas fired Fajr-5 at Jerusalem from right outside Shifa Hospital UPDATED
I wasn't able to embed this clip, but it's worth clicking through to watch it here.
It's a Canadian television interview with Phoebe Greenwood, a reporter for the London Daily Telegraph, who is in Gaza.
At about 1:50 of the interview, she says that the Fajr-5 rocket that was shot at Jerusalem earlier on Tuesday was shot from right outside Shifa Hospital. That's a violation of the Geneva Conventions if I ever heard one.
Listen to the interview here (it's a telephone interview).
UPDATE WEDNESDAY 1:28 AM
I am mildly surprised, but not totally shocked to find that the video is no longer available. Ms. Greenwood described the rocket that hit Jerusalem as having been launched across the street from the hospital. My guess is that Hamas did not want that description sitting out there, and therefore it bullied Canadian Television into taking the video down.
Jodi Rudoren wrote something similar in the New York Times, which has now been up long enough that it will appear in Google cache even if the Times is eventually forced to take it down. Here's some of what she wrote (emphasis mine).
Suddenly, just after 2 p.m., the crowd was startled skyward as militants
near the hospital fired a missile — most likely one that landed near
Jerusalem. In an instant, anticipation gave way to fear, and horror, as Israel fired back, explosion after explosion in the distance.
...
First six ambulances, one after the other, unloading the bodies of men
identified as militants, at least two of them decapitated. Then three
more, this time with children, dead and injured. Another ambulance
rushed in, then quickly sped back out to collect more wounded.
Even the medics unloading the bodies grimaced.
“There’s a real massacre now,” said Fawzi Barhoum, the Hamas spokesman, who was at the hospital waiting for the diplomatic delegation. “At the same time when the Arab leaders came to Gaza,
10 persons are killed. At this moment, kids playing soccer are hit. It
is a clear reflection of the mind and the thought of the occupation,
thinking how to kill more and more Palestinians.”
It remains unclear whether the intense afternoon bombing was in retaliation for the Jerusalem strike, the second in five days, or an effort to take out as many targets as possible while final details of a cease-fire deal were being discussed. A frenzy of some 200 rockets also flew from Gaza into Israel on Tuesday, hitting the southern cities of Beersheba and Ashdod as well as the Tel Aviv suburb of Rishon LeZion; an Israeli soldier was killed in a week of cross-border battles, along with a civilian, bringing the Israeli death toll to five.
...
Dr. Mads Gilbert, a professor at the University Hospital of North
Norway, said things were better organized this time than during
Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s three-week assault on Gaza in 2008-9, also
waged to try to stop rocket attacks. “They have learned a lot from the
last attack,” Dr. Gilbert said. “So far the capacity is up to the
numbers. But I think we haven’t seen the peak.”
From what's been written here, it should be clear that (a) the rocket was launched in close proximity to the hospital, (b) there were also children in the area from which the rocket was launched, (c) the rocket was launched in close proximity of a children's soccer field, (d) Israel retaliated at the location from which the strike was launched, and (e) (for good measure) Mads Gilbert - who famously lied to the BBC during Operation Cast Lead - is back again.
Two rockets fired from the Gaza Strip toward Jerusalem on Tuesday
landed in the Gush Etzion area Tuesday, with one hitting an open area of
a Palestinian village in the West Bank, police and the IDF reported. It
was unclear if the rocket caused any damage or injuries, although AFP
reported Palestinian paramedics were making their way to the scene.
The
rocket set off the warning siren in the nation's capital for the second
time since the start of Operation Pillar of Defense. The two rockets
that set off the first such siren on Friday also landed outside the city.
Meanwhile,
the IDF embarked on a series of major strikes in the Gaza Strip,
striking 11 terrorist cells and 30 concealed rocket launchers in Gaza,
and engaged in a wave of artillery strikes, an IDF Spokesman's Office
statement said.
One of the strikes hit a rocket launching cell responsible for firing on the Jerusalem area.
The rockets fired
from Gaza toward Jerusalem may have caused injuries when they landed in
Palestinian Authority-controlled territory in the West Bank.
MDA
offered support to the Palestinian Red Crescent, which said it
appreciated the offer, but was able to deal with the situation on its
own, MDA said.
The best show in town: Israelis come to Tel Aviv to watch Iron Dome in action
I was about to label this an 'only in Israel' phenomenon until I remembered American soldiers on the roof of their barracks in Dharan, Saudi Arabia during Gulf War I.
In any event, the best show in town these days is on a hill overlooking Tel Aviv, where Iron Dome is in action.
They don't expect anyone to believe this, do they?
"We deny having delivered the Fajr-5 to the Palestinian resistance," Allaeddine Boroujerdi, head of the Iranian parliament's
foreign affairs committee, reportedly told Iran's Al-Alam television.
"The
aim of such accusations is to portray the resistance as weak whereas it
is perfectly capable of producing the arms it needs," he concluded.
Right.... And the sun comes up from the West....
Actually, they didn't deliver the Fajr-5 - it wouldn't fit in the tunnels. They delivered all the parts with assembly instructions.
Video: The Fajr-5, the rocket that threatens millions of Israelis
The Fajr-5, an Iranian-made rocket in Hamas' arsenal, has a range that
threatens more than 3.5 million Israelis. Since the beginning of
Operation Pillar of Defense, the IDF has destroyed a significant portion
of Hamas' Fajr-5 arsenal.
Isn't this exciting? An air raid siren in Tel Aviv!
You'd never know that these people might even be in danger from watching their behavior in this video. This was filmed in Tel Aviv on Friday afternoon.
Let's go to the videotape (Hat Tip: BenBak3R via Twitter)
Surreal, isn't it? And my son wonders why people just kept going when the siren went off during the Welcoming the Sabbath service in Jerusalem? No one this far away from Gaza seriously expects to be hit.
The tweets above are from Kim Kardashian's Twitter account. They are in reverse chronological order beginning around the time that those two Hamas rockets went off around Jerusalem.
Kim seems to have a problem making up her mind, doesn't she?
Here's Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler for Thursday, November 15.
1) Al Hayat on the Hudson
No country should have to endure the rocket attacks that Israel has
endured from militants in Gaza, most recently over the past four days.
The question is how to stop them permanently.
This sympathetic sounding boilerplate starts the New York Times editorial, Another Israeli-Gaza War?. The editorial continues:
On Wednesday, Israel launched one of the most ferocious assaults on
Gaza since its invasion four years ago. At least 20 targets were struck
and a Hamas military commander, Ahmed al-Jabari, was killed. Israeli
leaders also threatened another ground war.
Hamas has controlled Gaza since Israel withdrew in 2007. The group has
mostly adhered to an informal cease-fire with Israel after the war there
in the winter of 2008-09. But, in recent months, Hamas has claimed
responsibility for participating in rocket firings, and last week it
took credit for detonating a tunnel packed with explosives along the
Israel-Gaza border while Israeli soldiers were working nearby.
Actually Israel withdrew in 2005; Hamas launched a coup to expel Fatah
in 2007 and took over Gaza then. Given that even the editors admit that
in recent months Hamas has claimed credit for terror attacks against
Israel, why do they cling to the false notion that Hamas "mostly
adhered" to a ceasefire? Either one ceases fire or one doesn't. (The escalation of a few weeks ago
did not prompt an outraged editorial, leading me to conclude that the
editors of the New York Times, despite a reasonable sounding opening,
are more offended by Israel's self defense than by Hamas's terror.)
Israel has a right to defend itself, but it’s hard to see how
Wednesday’s operation could be the most effective way of advancing its
long-term interests. It has provoked new waves of condemnation against
Israel in Arab countries, including Egypt, whose cooperation is needed
to enforce the 1979 peace treaty and support stability in Sinai.
Obviously Israel deemed the threat to its citizens of rockets in Gaza to
be greater and more immediate than the threat presented the predictable
outrage of the Arab world for defending itself. Of course, the point
that the editors miss is that Egypt's failure to support stability in
the Sinai is one of the factors that emboldened Hamas.
The action also threatens to divert attention from what Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly described as Israel’s biggest
security threat: Iran’s nuclear program.
Isn't this rich? In recent months the Times has featured numerous
articles mocking Netanyahu's concern over Iran's nuclear program. Now it
takes that threat seriously, in order to criticize Netanyahu! Just
because a country faces two threats, doesn't mean it ought to ignore
one.
Engaging in a full-scale ground war is especially risky. Israel’s
last major military campaign in Gaza was a three-week blitz in 2008-09
that killed as many as 1,400 Palestinians, and it was widely condemned
internationally. It did not solve the problem. Hamas remains in control
in Gaza and has amassed even more missiles.
Yes Cast Lead was condemned. Unjustly. News accounts that exaggerated
the destruction gave cover to those making the outrageous charges
against Israel. Of those 1400, roughly half were members of Hamas
(as admitted by Hamas). It did not solve the problem, because Hamas
still controls Gaza, but it did set reduce some of Hamas's capabilities,
forcing them to rebuild. International pressure on Israel to relax the
blockade of Gaza played a major role in allowing the rebuilding. The New
York Times can be proud of the role it played in helping Hamas re-arm.
Some Israeli commentators have suggested that Mr. Netanyahu’s
decision to order the operation is connected to elections in January.
But there are other options. Israel could have asked Egypt, whose new
Islamist-led government has close ties to Hamas, to mediate a more
permanent cease-fire. On Monday, Hamas hinted that it was open to that.
Or Israel could have responded as it usually has in recent years,
avoiding high-profile assassinations while attacking rocket-launching
squads, empty training sites and weapons manufacturing plants.
As noted about, Egypt is part of the problem. By striking at leaders of
the terror war and arms caches, Israel reduced Hamas's capabilities. Do
the editors of the New York Times object to that?
Hamas is a dangerous adversary that may never accept Israel’s right
to exist. But it would be easier to win support for retaliatory action
if Israel was engaged in serious negotiations with Hamas’s rival, the
Palestinian Authority, and working toward a durable peace agreement.
Mahmoud Abbas the head of the Palestinian Authority is not welcome in
Gaza. Any deal with him will necessarily be limited. If Israel makes a
deal with him and cedes even more control, what is to prevent Hamas from
taking over on the West Bank too? Then most of Israel's population
would be under threat from Hamas. Of course that assumes that Abbas even
wants a deal. His history - including an op-ed in the New York Times
threatening to join international bodies for the purpose of initiating a
legal assault on Israel - suggests otherwise.
I would like to say that the editors of the New York Times are
exceedingly ignorant and illogical. But their regular opposition to
Israeli self-defense has to prompt the question whether they are
anti-Israel.
Israel Matzav observes that TechCrunch is unimpressed by the IDF's efforts.
To my mind, the most important numbers are 25% and (for now) 822. 25%
is the amount of Israeli territory currently under threat to Hamas
rockets. The Israel Project provided a map for the sake of comparison. 822 is the latest number of rocket attacks that Israeli has suffered from this year alone.
"We strongly condemn the barrage of rocket fire from Gaza into
southern Israel, and we regret the death and injury of innocent Israeli
and Palestinian civilians caused by the ensuing violence," State
Department Deputy Spokesman Mark Toner said in a statement. "There is no
justification for the violence that Hamas and other terrorist
organizations are employing against the people of Israel. We call on
those responsible to stop these cowardly acts immediately. We support
Israel's right to defend itself, and we encourage Israel to continue to
take every effort to avoid civilian casualties."
Toner placed the blame for the new violence squarely on Hamas for
initiating a campaign in recent weeks that has included firing hundreds
of rockets into Israeli territory.
"Hamas claims to have the best interests of the Palestinian people at
heart, yet it continues to engage in violence that is counterproductive
to the Palestinian cause. Attacking Israel on a near daily basis does
nothing to help Palestinians in Gaza or to move the Palestinian people
any closer to achieving self determination," Toner said.
One would hope that siding with Hamas was unthinkable for the State Department.
Residents in Gaza said militants have begun firing rockets at Israeli
targets from inside teeming Gaza city, making direct Israeli strikes on
the populous city likely.
This is disappointing:
Representatives of Hamas, which Israel and the United States consider
a terrorist organization, said they also have no intention of backing
down. The assassination of Ahmed al-Jabari, the Hamas military
commander, “is a serious crime, and they crossed the red line,” said
Fawzi Barhoum, a Hamas spokesman. “It’s time to declare war.”
Hamas, by its ideology and actions is a terrorist organization; no "considering" is necessary.
It was the first time that a building in Kiryat Malachi had been
struck and the farthest north a projectile had landed in the current
violence. With schools closed after Wednesday’s turmoil, residents said,
many people had stayed home with their children.
Residents said people living on the lower floors of the apartment house
had taken cover in stairwells, as the police urged residents to do when
they heard warning sirens, but those on the top floor apparently had
not. Police said 180 rockets had been fired at southern Israel since
Wednesday.
In Gaza, the death toll rose to 11 as Israel pummeled what the military
described as medium- and long-range rocket and infrastructure sites and
struck rocket-launching squads. The military said it had dispersed
leaflets over Gaza warning residents to stay away from Hamas operatives
and facilities, suggesting that more was to come.
Much of the Times article deals with the damage Israel is doing to its
"fragile relations with Egypt, " without faulting the Muslim
Brotherhood. Establishing "closer ties with Hamas" is a reason that
Israel's relations with Egypt have become so fragile.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
