'Never before seen' video from Hezbullah of the outbreak of the Second Lebanon War
On Wednesday, July 12, 2006, seven IDF soldiers were killed on the Lebanese border - three in an attack by Hezbullah on their 'Hummer' and four when their tank drove over a mine. That attack was the outbreak of the Second Lebanon War. (One soldier from the 'Hummer' survived - in the video below he's in the light blue checked shirt with the trimmed beard. His name is Tomer Weinberg). Hezbullah grabbed two of the bodies - those of Ehud Goldwasser (who was driving the 'Hummer' and seated in the front left seat) and Eldad Regev (who was sitting on the right). They may have been dead when they were grabbed. Their mutilated bodies were returned to Israel in 2008 in exchange for child murderer Samir al-Kuntar (later targeted by Israel and killed) and a few lesser lights.
On Saturday night, Hezbullah's Al Mayadeen television showed the first part of a three-part documentary on the 2006 war. The program contained video never before seen from the planning of the attack and the attack itself. Hezbullah has disclosed that the attack was planned by Imad Mughniyah, who thankfully is no longer among the living.
I'm posting the video (could not figure out how to post part of it). The 'never before seen' footage of the attack itself, which runs about 10 minutes, runs from 42:52 to the end. For those who want to see the entire program, there's a link after the video.
The video is in Arabic with some Hebrew from Israeli television (interviews). Sorry, no English.
Alwaght- Egyptians were shocked when the Arabic
language newspaper, Youm7, revealed that the co-founder of Egypt’s
Salafist Nour Party has met with the Israeli Regime's former foreign
minister.
The influential daily revealed on the weekend that
extremist Nour Party's Nader Bakkar has hold secret meeting with
notorious Tzipi Livni in April at Harvard University.
The meeting that was reportedly held at Bakkar’s request has sparked a storm of controversy in Egyptian media.
...
Salafism is an ultra-conservative movement within Sunni
Islam that advocats a return to the traditions of the "devout
ancestors". The doctrine can be summed up as taking "a fundamentalist
approach to Islam".
The Nour Party's co-founder and deputy chairman, Bakkar,
Bakkar was awarded a scholarship to pursue a master’s in public
administration at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.
Muslim Brotherhood accused the aspiring young politician of
unjustly winning a fellowship to attend the prestigious Harvard
University in return for his party’s betrayal of former President Mohamed Morsi in 2013.
The Salafi party sided with the Armed Forces against the
Brotherhood during Morsi’s ouster, and since then has continued to
support President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s administration.
...
A few months before his graduation, however, Livni visited
Harvard on 16 April to give a lecture on the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict.
Sources reportedly told the Egyptian newspaper that after
finding out that Livni was coming to speak, Bakkar contacted the society
to arrange a closed meeting with Livni.
She agreed and the meeting took
place inside the university after her lecture.
According to Youm7, Nader Bakkar’s meeting with Tzipi
Livini lasted around 40 minutes, in which Bakkar talked about the
strength of the Nour Party and its popularity, that he was the main
reason for the (Muslim) Brotherhood’s success after the 25 January
revolution…
Livni- who has reportedly conducted sexual relations with
Arab officials during her years as a Mossad agent in an attempt to
entrap them- did not reveal the meeting at the time, but sources close
to her confirmed to the Israel Broadcasting Authority (IBA) that the
meeting took place.
You gotta love Alwaght's style "Israeli Regime" and "Livni- who has reportedly conducted sexual relations with
Arab officials during her years as a Mossad agent in an attempt to
entrap them..." as if they were totally defenseless against her, even if you assume it's true (For many reasons, I don't believe Livni did this, and I won't allow comments discussing it).
And you thought Livni hated religious people... oh... wait... it's only religious Jews she hates.
But yes, I do believe Livni met with Bakkar. I doubt anything came of it. Much ado about nothing.
Netanyahu’s hard-line coalition partner, Education Minister Naftali
Bennett added: “Today a terrorist nuclear superpower is born, and it
will go down as one of the darkest days in world history.”
Yeah, but that's only because he's hardline, right? Hmmm. Maybe not.
Israeli social media accounts were filled with images of former
British prime minister Neville Chamberlain, who pushed a policy of
appeasement toward Adolf Hitler and the Nazis on the eve of World War
II.
Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders blasted the deal even as
negotiators in Vienna were still making the announcement and providing
details.
“Israel will defend itself,” Bennett warned, vowing
that military action is still an option for the Jewish State.
Like-minded Israelis feel they are in the crosshairs of a belligerent
enemy, where last week protesters in Tehran were chanting “Death to
Israel!”
Israel’s security cabinet unanimously rejected the Iran
deal, also saying that Israel reserves the right to take action to
protect the state.
But an Israeli attack seems unlikely right now....
Opposition leaders were united in condemning the Iran deal, but they
also called its signing a major diplomatic failure for Netanyahu.
Speaking
on Israel Radio, Efraim Halevy, former head of the Israeli intelligence
agency Mossad, said that perhaps it would have been better to avoid a
head-on clash with Obama and, instead, seek to apply pressure through
more discreet channels and have more of a role in shaping the
negotiations.
Because after all, former Mossad heads have just been so helpful in helping the government deal with this. Nearly as helpful as Israel's 'loyal opposition.'
Yair Lapid, a top opposition figure and leader of an Israeli
political party, said there is “no daylight” between Israelis in
condemning the Iran deal. But he said Netanyahu bungled the diplomacy.
On
the evening news in Israel, a rough consensus among political
commentators concluded that Netanyahu has been rendered irrelevant,
dismissed by the U.S. administration.
The United States remains
Israel’s closest — and sometimes only — ally in the world, supplying
diplomatic cover and billions of dollars in military aid over the years,
including some of the most sophisticated U.S. arms technology.
In
an interview with Israel’s Army Radio, main opposition leaders Isaac
Herzog and Tzipi Livni both criticized Netanyahu for allowing the deal
to be reached.
“If you go to a deal, as bad as it may be, the way
to minimize its damage is by arriving at an agreement with the U.S. on a
very significant security package,” said Herzog.
And that could still happen after (and when and if) the deal is signed. But Obama wouldn't talk about that before the deal with Iran was done.
President Hussein Obama must be wondering what hit him. Former Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren continues to hammer away at the President, publishing two more op-ed pieces in the US media on Friday, one of which really gets into Obama's kishkes.
In Foreign Policy, Oren took Obama to task for not joining the
solidarity march in France after the attack on Charlie Hebdo or the
kosher supermarket earlier this year, nor for sending two senior
officials who were in Paris at the time to the march. He also took the
president to task for not admitting that the attack on the kosher
market was directed a Jews, but rather an act perpetrated by “vicious
zealots who... randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli.”
“Obama’s
boycotting of the memorial in Paris, like his refusal to acknowledge
the identity of the perpetrators, the victims, or even the location of
the market massacre, provides a broad window into his thinking on Islam
and the Middle East. Simply put: The president could not participate
in a protest against Muslim radicals whose motivations he sees as a
distortion, rather than a radical interpretation, of Islam,” he wrote.
“And if there are no terrorists spurred by Islam, there can be no
purposely selected Jewish shop or intended Jewish victims, only a deli
and randomly present folks."
During his first year in office,
Obama, Oren argued, offered in essence “a new deal in which the United
States would respect popularly chosen Muslim leaders who were
authentically rooted in their traditions and willing to engage with the
West.”
...
Oren
attributed this orientation to the intellectual milieu in which Obama
grew up, as well as his personal history. “I could imagine how a child
raised by a Christian mother might see himself as a natural bridge
between her two Muslim husbands. I could also speculate how that
child’s abandonment by those men could lead him, many years later, to
seek acceptance by their co-religionists.”
The tragedy, he said, was that Obama’s outreach to the Muslim world was rejected.
“Historians
will likely look back at Obama’s policy toward Islam with a
combination of curiosity and incredulousness,” he wrote. “While some
may credit the president for his good intentions, others might fault him
for being naïve and detached from a complex and increasingly lethal
reality.”
In the LA Times piece, headlined “Why Obama is
wrong about Iran being 'rational' on nukes,” Oren quoted Obama’s
comment in a recent interview that being anti-Semitic, or racist,
doesn't preclude one from from being interested in survival, and that
just because Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei is anti-Semitic
“doesn't mean that this overrides all of his other considerations.”
Oren
wrote that the dispute whether Iran was a rational or irrational actor
was “ever-present” in the discussions between the US and Israel when
he was ambassador. While the American view the Iranians as logical
actors, Israel could not rule out the idea that “the Iranians would be
willing to sacrifice half of their people as martyrs in a war intended
to ‘wipe Israel off the map.’”
“Obama would never say that
anti-black racists are rational,” Oren argued. “And he would certainly
not trust them with the means – however monitored – to reach their
racist goals. That was the message Israeli officials and I conveyed in
our discreet talks with the administration. The response was not, to
our mind, reasonable."
Oren, while he served in Washington, was
considered very cautious and diplomatic, and rarely caught flack for
comments deemed “undiplomatic.”
Oren has been blasted by opposition MK's Tzipi Livni (goes without saying), Avigdor Liberman and Yair Lapid (the latter also goes without saying). But Lee Smith wrote some similar things in Tablet Magazine last week, but from a slightly different angle.
Whether Obama is an honorary Jew or not, the evidence suggests that
he keenly understands certain peculiarities of the Jewish communal
psyche—survival strategies that distinguish the Jews from other American
minority groups. The president’s use of Jewish aides and organizations
to advance his policies with the Jewish community shows that Obama is
correct in believing that Jewish politics are often motivated by fear,
which can range from the existential fear of mass extermination to the
more prosaic fear of looking shabby in front of the goyim. And Obama
isn’t using his energy and inspiring leadership skills to help these
people rise above their fear; he is instead capitalizing on
it—masterfully, ruthlessly—by manipulating American Jews in ways that
other minority groups would find unbelievably insulting.
Consider recent statements from Jewish aides to the president.
Netanyahu is the kind of politician, said David Axelrod, “who run[s] for
public office because they want to be somebody.” Israel doesn’t know
what’s best for it, Obama’s former envoy to the Palestinian-Israeli
peace process Martin Indyk told Israeli media last week. “You are an
emotional nation, not a rational nation,” he sniffed. “You work from
your gut and not your mind.”
It’s very hard to imagine Catholic policymakers helping a U.S.
president undermine and insult the Vatican and then defending the
president when he says that he understands what the church stands for
better than the pope does. During the darkest moments of the AIDS
crisis, there were no gay organizations that encouraged U.S.
policymakers to cut funding for a cure. There are no transgender
activists who argue that the real threat to the community comes not from
people who fear and hate transgendered people, but from within the
transgender community itself. Eric Holder doesn’t scold people of color
that they’re an emotional, not a rational, people, or imply that black
officeholders get into politics because they “want to be somebody.”
The issue in America today is clearly not that pro-Obama people or
organizations are leading the American Jewish community to destruction.
Yet at the same time, it is also clear that two millennia of diasporic
dependence and insecurity have left a deep and probably permanent
imprint on the Jewish communal psyche. Even in America, a free country
in which Jews have never been subject to European-style mass oppression
or persecutions, the role performed by “court Jews’ still makes
structural and emotional sense to people who like to think of themselves
as independent thinkers. Otherwise, it would be hard to explain why
Obama still has the support of the majority of the Jewish community for
policies that from any rational perspective—the perspective of any other
minority group—cannot be seen as anything other than detrimental to the
Jewish state.
In other words, Oren is right about Obama's bad treatment of Jews as compared with any other ethnic group. Obama isn't playing any other ethnic group - only Jews. And according to Smith, Obama is playing the Jews like a master.
But what about the Jews who speak for the administration? None of
several former high-ranking Jewish officials was willing to speak on the
record on this subject, but every single one of them agreed that this
moment was an extraordinary one. “No administration will always do what
the Jewish community wants or what Jews think best for Israel, just as
none will ever always do what Catholics want or Greek Americans or
farmers,” said a former Jewish American policymaker who served in
high-level positions in several administrations. “When you are in an
administration you know this is coming. If the variance is in the
particular area you cover, it can be painful. If it gets repeated, you
need to change jobs or leave the government. That’s normal.”
But: “The Obama situation is not normal,” he continued, “due to the
length and depth of the confrontation with Israel and the harm that’s
being done. It should give rise to soul searching by Jewish appointees.
In my view they’ve become enablers, in the worst sense of that word.
That not one single Jew has left in protest is remarkable considering
that relations have not been worse in a long, long time.”
By not resigning in protest, Obama’s Jewish aides have arguably not
only harmed their community; they weakened their own position—which was,
in a sense, ultimately far more detrimental. In a town where the
appearance of power is power, Obama’s Jewish defenders had no idea which
way the president was actually going. They got played, and now everyone
knows it. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew wasn’t in the room when Obama was
making Iran policy with Ben Rhodes and Valerie Jarrett. Martin Indyk
didn’t know that a central part of Obama’s Middle East policy—without
which the Iran deal would be impossible—was to weaken AIPAC,
the cornerstone of the pro-Israel community. AIPAC, in turn, didn’t see
itself as a target of the Obama Administration. Instead, it kept
telling itself that bipartisan support for Israel was the very premise
of its power. Had these actors actually participated in helping the
president pull a fast one on the Jewish community, at least they’d have
showed they had connections to power. The biggest problem with the Jews
around Obama is not that they spoke up on behalf of policies that may
very well turn out to be harmful to the Jewish state; it’s that they
were so clearly out of the loop—a status quo they will now bequeath to
future administrations.
In this regard, even AIPAC’s ostensible rival J Street got played. As
one senior official in the pro-Israel community told me, he believes
that “their standing has diminished a lot. The administration used J
Street and included them, and went to their conferences, because they
believed they would be a useful tool.” But J Street is weakened not, as
the pro-Israel official believes, because it plowed its own field
recklessly. If you describe yourself as a pro-Israel organization then
your power is directly proportional to how important a role Israel plays
in American foreign policy. If your actions, like J Street’s,
contribute to making Israel about as important to American foreign
policy as Malaysia is, then you aren’t very important either.
What Smith is describing is what I have called the Poritz Syndrome.
Oren is an historian and he has an historian's perspective. I'm sure he sees everything that Smith sees and has many more facts and data points to prove what Smith is saying. Unfortunately, Oren is getting no support here in Israel, other than Netanyahu's refusal to disown him.... Yet Oren disowned Netanyahu by running for the Knesset with Kahlon's party. Perhaps there's a lesson there for the historian too.
In the meantime, my copy of Oren's book is on order. Can't wait to read this one.
Oh my... Israeli opposition demands US commit in advance to support Israeli strike on Iran
Either Tzipi Livni and Buzi Herzog finally figured out which way the Israeli political winds are blowing, or there's been a massive double cross of US President Hussein Obama. Or perhaps it's a combination of both. In any event, Livni and Herzog, who were backed by Obama in our recent Knesset elections, have issued a position paper which demands that the United States commit in advance to supporting an Israeli strike on Iran.
The crux of Herzog and
Livni's plan is a call on the American administration to commit in
advance to approve an Israeli military strike on Iran's nuclear
facilities if Iran violates the framework agreement signed a week and a
half ago by trying to produce nuclear weapons.
The document was split
into three sections: In the first section, the Zionist Union criticizes
Israel's current official position, which takes serious issue with the
framework agreement reached between world powers reached and Iran, but
fails to articulate improvements.
Their own position paper, they claim, constitutes a practical and detailed proposal to what is considered a "good deal".
"Incessant criticism without constructive suggestions could
leave us at a loss," Herzog told Ynet. "To prevent that we must have a
brave and comprehensive dialogue with the US, down to the last detail,"
he said.
The second part of the position paper presents suggestions on
how to "close the loopholes" in the framework agreement and improve upon
its different sections. The proposed improvements mostly focus on the
conditions and limitations on easing the sanctions on Iran.
The Zionist Union demands that "the removal of sanctions will
only be done gradually in a predefined framework coinciding with the
Iranian deal," the document said demanding that should Iran fail to make
good on its part of the deal sanctions will be automatically reinstated
in full force.
The document also calls for enhanced oversight capabilities for
the UN nuclear watchdog – the IAEA – including access to officials,
documents and sites in which alleged Iranian nuclear activity is taking
place.
The third part of the document focuses on rehabilitating
US-Israel ties, and improviing coordination over Iran while the deal is
being implemented.
According to the opposition leaders, "Israel must change its
regional strategy… and work to strengthen ties with the moderate forces
in the region," a move they say will curb not only Iran's nuclear
program, but its destabilizing activates in the area through local
proxies.
"We must act quickly to change the final deal, and raise the
price of its infringement," Herzog said, indicating the deal itself was
not the true problem, but the aforementioned 'loopholes'. He said that
only a "painful" cost to Iran in the case of a breach in the agreement
would safeguard Israel's security.
The position paper was released after party members received
requests to issue the Zionist Union's official position on the framework
agreement.
Has the 'Zionist Union' finally understood that Israelis won't accept Obama's position on Iran? Or are they just trying to position themselves for what they hope will eventually be a 'unity government'? Either way, this is a massive defeat for the Obama administration, which has tried to depict Prime Minister Netanyahu as a lone wolf in opposing the Iranian nuclear deal.
So much for the Prime Minister's expected bounce in the polls as a result of his address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday: Channel 2 is reporting that it was 'modest' at best.
Israeli
Channel 2 news said Netanyahu’s Likud party had increased its likely
support by one seat in the parliament. On rival Channel 10, Likud had
gained two seats to tie its main challenger.
In answer to Channel 2’s question, “Did the speech strengthen or weaken
support for Netanyahu?” 44 percent of the respondents said it
strengthened support, 43 percent said it had no influence, and 12
percent said it weakened support for the premier.
Israeli political analysts had predicted that Netanyahu and Likud would
probably see at least a small bump in support after he warned U.S.
lawmakers to reject President Obama’s draft deal to curb Iran’s nuclear
program.
...
It is too soon to know whether any electoral boost that Netanyahu gains from the speech will be sustained.
The real scrum of the election has just begun.
Likudniks are hoping the boss’s address to Congress will pull them
ahead of their main challenger, Labor Party leader Isaac Herzog and his
running mate, former justice minister and peace negotiator Tzipi Livni,
who are running under the banner of the Zionist Union.
Herzog and the Zionist Union plan to hammer away on the theme that
Netanyahu’s address to Congress may do nothing to change the Iran
nuclear deal but has spoiled relations with Washington.
Israeli newspapers and TV were filled Wednesday with images of House
Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi looking vexed during Netanyahu’s address.
“I was near tears throughout the prime minister's speech — saddened by
the insult to the intelligence of the United States,” Pelosi said
afterward.
You don't think the newspapers and TV are pulling for Herzog, do you?
The
leadership of the most powerful pro-Israel lobby in the U.S. publicly
broke Sunday from the White House over the issue of Iran policy during
the first of a three-day policy conference in Washington attended by
16,000 of its members.
Leaders
of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or Aipac, outlined a
strategy moving forward of working through Congress to disrupt any
nuclear agreement with Tehran that is deemed too weak in denying the
country a nuclear weapons capability.
This
would be achieved, they said, both by seeking to impose new sanctions
on Iran and to block the White House’s ability to lift standing U.S.
sanctions, which would be required as part of any comprehensive
agreement.
“Congress
has a critical role” in determining this deal, Howard Kohr, Aipac’s
executive director, said in opening remarks aimed at rallying the
group’s membership. “Congress’s role doesn’t end when there is a deal.
Congress must review this deal.”
Mr.
Kohr and other Aipac leaders believe any final agreement with Iran must
involve the complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure,
something Obama administration officials have said is no longer on the negotiating table.
Aipac
also is seeking to impose new sanctions on Iran if there is no
agreement by a late March deadline and to legislate an up-or-down vote
in Congress. The White House is opposing both legislative actions.
AIPAC's position sounds a lot like Netanyahu's position. Waiting to hear whether Herzog and Livni disagree.
Hmmm.... Lapid: We won't recommend Left form next government
לפיד טוען שדבריו הוצאו מהקשרם אך הקלטת הראיון למקור ראשון מוכיחה שהוא אכן אמר: ״לא תמצאו אותי ממליץ על השמאל״, ובוזי זה שמאל?, שאלנו. "כן״
— חגי סגל (@haggai_segal) February 26, 2015
For the Hebrew impaired, the tweet above from Makor Rishon columnist Haggai Segal says "[Yesh Atid party leader Yair] Lapid claims that his words were taken out of context, but the recording of the interview with Makor Rishon proves that he said 'you won't find me recommending [that] the Left [form the next government].' 'And Buzi [Herzog] is the Left,' we asked. 'Yes.'
The way Israel's government works is that after the elections, the President calls in the leader of each party and asks who should be given the first opportunity to try to form a government. The President then charges the leader of the party who seems most likely to succeed to form a coalition. That's why sometimes, even if a party has the most votes, it will not be asked to form the government.
במחנה הציוני מתחיל לחץ על לבני להודיע שהיא מוותרת על הרוטציה. המטרה: שיקום מנהיגות הרצוג שנפגעה מעניין אם אדלר יצליח. @moshegaon64
— Mazal Mualem (@mazalm3) February 16, 2015
Hmmm... In the 'Zionist Union' party (the combined Labor-Tzipi Livni party) pressure is growing on Livni to waive the rotation to which she and Labor party leader Yitzchak Herzog agreed.
Fat chance that will ever happen. More than any other politician in Israel, Livni is all about 'me me me.'
Tonight on i24news:Daniel Abrahams one of the main backers of v15 is donating to Isaac Herzog,despite denies of both labor party and v15
— lucy aharish (@lucyaharish) February 9, 2015
But of course, V-2015 has nothing to do with the Labor party.... Right....
Livni-Herzog-Obama One Voice Movement keffiyeh says 'the land is ours'
This is the true intent of those who would unseat Prime Minister Netanyahu. And apparently, no one else in Israel is getting it (Hat Tip: Ronn Torossian).
One of the main logos currently being used by “One Voice” is of a man in
keffiah scarf, with his hand outstretched to form the map of the whole
of Israel. Underneath is written “The land is ours."
The source is here but it may be taken down soon. The picture above is a screen cap.
One Voice is part of the V-2015 movement that is promoting the candidacy of Tzipi Livni and Buji Herzog's 'Zionist' movement. They are backed by President Hussein Obama of the United States.
This is the philosophy of Tzipi Livni and Buji Herzog.
This is the ad campaign planned by President Hussein Obama's campaigners.
Israelis to Obama: 'The hell you'll tell us whom to vote for'
President Hussein Obama's efforts to influence Israel's upcoming election may be backfiring. This is Anshel Pfeffer, one of Haaretz's more Leftist writers.
Tonight's @haaretzcom poll is the worst for Labor in a long while: Leaves Herzog with no option for a coalition. Ensures Netanyahu 4th term.
— Anshel Pfeffer (@AnshelPfeffer) February 2, 2015
Haaretz - for those who have forgotten - is Israel's Hebrew 'Palestinian' daily, probably the most Leftist rag among Israel's better known Leftist rags. (By the way, only about 5% of Israelis read Haaretz - they have a much wider audience among the elites in the US and Europe).
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud would win 25 seats and the Labor Camp would secure only 23 if elections were held today, a new poll conducted by Haaretz-Dialog found on Monday.
The poll, which was conducted under the supervision
of Professor Camil Fuchs with a representative sample of 514
respondents, showed Netanyahu gaining three more seats than what his
party was predicted to win in the last poll conducted in January. The
margin of error in the poll was 4.2 percent.
Naftali Bennett's Habayit Hayehudi weakened in this poll to receive 14 seats, compared to 16 in the last survey.
The Joint List (Hadash and Arab parties) strengthened, predicted to win
12 seats, while Yesh Atid weakened from 12 to nine seats.
Kulanu and United Torah Judaism were both slated
for eight seats, while Yisrael Beiteinu and Shas were predicted to
receive six seats. Respondents gave Meretz five seats and Yachad was
predicted to get four.
That would put the Right at 25+14+8+6+6+4 = 63, the Left at 23+9+5 = 37, the Arabs (who have never been in any coalition at 12 and Kulanu (which really could go either way) at 8.
In its efforts to avoid running afoul of Israel's strict campaign finance laws, V-15 has argued that they are 'non-partisan' and that their sole message is that the 'Left and Center' should form the next government. Really? Then why was a Knesset candidate from Tzipi (Livni) and Buzi (Herzog)'s party listed as an officer on the organization's web site until Saturday?
Former MK Yoel Hasson,
formerly of Kadima and now number 16 on the joint Labor-Hatnuah (Zionist
camp) list, claims that he holds no post in the umbrella organization
called OneVoice, whose activities are linked with V15. But until this
weekend, Hasson's name and picture appeared on the organization's Web
page as a member of the board. On Saturday, the picture was removed.
According to Hasson, "I never held any
position in OneVoice. I have no involvement with V15 -- I didn't know it
existed until I read the media reports. What matters is not what it
says on a website, but what is written in the Registrar of Associations'
records, and there I obviously don't appear, and never have appeared,
as holding any kind of position."
For the record, according to current polls, number 16 is a very realistic position for the 'Zionist camp' list - Hasson could well be in the next Knesset.
But as a matter of law, he's wrong, at least if the Registrar of Associations works like the Companies Registrar (a bureaucracy with which I deal fairly regularly). The registrar's records don't control. While it's required to notify the registrar, what's controlling is actually the entity's books.
In the meantime, one cannot escape the feeling that V-15 expects to be barred. Otherwise, why would they be behaving like the elections are next week when they're six weeks away.
V15's website reveals the
scope of its activities: On Friday, dozens of volunteers around the
country went door to door in efforts to convince Israeli citizens not to
vote for Netanyahu face to face. The activity was overseen by fully
paid field coordinators. According to assessments, the group's payroll
includes dozens of paid staff. The total cost is estimated at 10 million shekels.
The group's objective is to reach more than 150,000 homes before election day.
It shouldn't take six weeks for 'dozens' of volunteers to reach 150,000 people.
Livni-Herzog campaign being financed by 'Palestinian-Americans'
This should tell you all you need to know about the ideology and financing behind the effort to unseat Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Yes, it's being run by Barack Hussein Obama's Presidential campaign. But it's being paid for by 'Palestinian-Americans.' This came by email from Ronn Torossian.
Do prospective
voters in Israel of “The Zionist Camp” identify with ideological
backing from Hamadeh? One thinks that his ideology is most likely not in
line with the mainstream voters that
Issac
Herzog and Tzipi
Livni are chasing.
Well, maybe. But Sumka and Hamdeh definitely appear to be in line with Livni's and Herzog's ideology. And those 'mainstream voters' aren't sophisticated enough to know the difference, because they likely get their news from the likes of Haaretz and Yediot (YNet's Hebrew side).
It's been less than a week since the Obama administration started seething over a surprise invitation extended to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress by Speaker of the House John Boehner. The Obama administration whined to anyone who would listen that the invitation was a 'breach of protocol.'
The Obama administration is reinventing diplomatic protocol. It is sending a team to Israel - led by Obama's own campaign manager from the 2012 elections - to defeat Netanyahu in Israel's March 17 election. I hope that all Israelis are outraged by this patronizing interference in our country's election. Yet another reason to vote against Livni and Herzog's non-Zionist party (as if you needed one).
This is from the next to last link.
The anti-Netanyahu, left wing Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports a
group called “One Voice,” reportedly funded by American donors, is
paying for the Obama campaign team. That group is reportedly being lead by Obama’s 2012 field director Jeremy Bird.
As Jerusalem Post columnist and putative Knesset candidate Caroline
Glick reported on her Facebook page, “Obama won’t meet Benjamin
Netanyahu in Washington when he addresses the Joint Houses of Congress
in March because of Netanyahu’s visit’s proximity to the Israeli
elections. And Obama, of course believes in protocol and propriety which
is why he won’t get involved.” And yet, Glick adds, “He’s just sending
his 2012 field campaign manager to Israel to run a campaign to defeat
Netanyahu.”
For all the harsh accusations of foreign interference currently being leveled against GOP Speaker John Boehner, Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer, reports
of Obama operatives actively working to unseat a democratically elected
leader of a strong U.S. ally is hardly the news it might appear to be.
The Obama White House has aggressively worked to defeat allied
leaders it has not liked and to elect or re-elect foreign leaders it
does like. As the Times of Israel recently reported, the list of Obama Administration meddling in foreign elections is a long one.
Rivlin will be in New York this week to speak at
UN Headquarters, for an International Holocaust Remembrance Day event. The
President’s Residence had informed U.S. Ambassador Dan Shapiro in early December
of Rivlin’s planned visit, and the information was conveyed to the White
House.
A senior Israeli official said that at first
Rivlin did not want to impose himself on Obama, and that he would be happy to go
to Washington if invited by the White House. The deputy spokesman for the White
House National Security Council, Alistair Baskey, said that Rivlin had asked in
December about the possibility of a meeting as part of his visit to New York,
and that there had been contacts between the two presidential bureaus over the
matter in recent weeks.
The White House did not suggest a date for the
meeting for some time, but on Saturday night contacts became more concrete. The
White House suggested that Rivlin come to Washington toward the end of the week,
after Obama returns from his trip to India and Saudi Arabia. The White House
also updated the Israeli Embassy in Washington.
Journalist Chico Menashe first reported the
talks regarding the visit on Sunday.
After consultations, Rivlin finally declined the
American suggestion. His advisers explained to the Americans that the two
leaders’ schedules do not overlap, because Rivlin is expected to return to
Israel before Obama gets back to Washington.
However, beyond scheduling conflicts, it may be
assumed that the high tension between the White House and Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu’s bureau over the latter’s planned speech to Congress contributed to
Rivlin’s decision to forego a meeting at this time. Rivlin did not want a
meeting to be perceived by either side as a political move.
The President’s Residence and the White House
released coordinated statements last night identical in their wording, that
there had been contact between the relevant parties in Israel regarding a
meeting while Rivlin was in New York.
“At this stage, it has been agreed not to hold a
meeting during his visit, due to the schedule constraints of both leaders, and
that a meeting would be scheduled at a later date,” the statement
said.
In other words, the White House wasn't interested in a meeting until it became a useful tool to 'get' Netanyahu. Rivlin didn't take the bait.
The only two politicians in this country who might meet with Obama are Tzipi Livni and Yitzchak Herzog. Right now, I'm not sure even they want to risk the fallout.
If Obama wants to destroy the US-Israel relationship, let him try. But let him suffer the consequences.
The assailant, a 23-year-old male from the West Bank city of
Tulkarem who entered Israel illegally, was shot in the leg by an Israel
Prison Service officer on Hamasger Street, near the scene of the
incident, and taken into custody.
The attack took place on Bus number 40 on Menachem
Begin Road, a major thoroughfare in Tel Aviv, near the Ma'ariv Bridge.
Three other people were moderately wounded, and five of the casualties
were in light condition, according to Magen David Adom emergency
services. A further five were suffering from shock.
The stabbing is being treated as a "terror attack," Israel Police foreign press spokesman Micky Rosenfeld wrote on Twitter.
The terrorist's name is Hamzeh Matrouk, and although he was from Tulkarm, he actually lives in Ramallah.
Hamzeh Matrouk is the name of the stabber in Tel Aviv. From Tulkarem but lived in Ramallah.
— Khaled Abu Toameh (@KhaledAbuToameh) January 21, 2015
Prime Minister Netanyahu blamed 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen for inciting this attack, while Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman went even further and blamed the entire 'Palestinian' and 'Israeli Arab' leadership. Hamas is celebrating, while Israel's Left notes that Israelis don't feel safe. No kidding. Do you think we'll feel safer if the 'Palestinians' can enter our cities freely?
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
