Is a hostage deal in Israel's best interest?

 

 

The released terrorists will incentivize future kidnappings, pour gasoline onto the terrorist fires already raging, and catapult Hamas towards its intended takeover of Judea and Samaria.

According to government sources, the deal currently under discussion between Israel and Hamas would see between 500 and 1,000 Palestinian terrorists, 100 of them considered "heavy" terrorists (i.e., bloodthirsty butchers), released from Israeli jails in exchange for 22 live Israeli hostages, mainly women and other civilians, alongside the bodies of another dozen deceased hostages.

The plan also theorizes second and third tranches of terrorist/hostage exchange, but nobody really believes this likely. Too many conditions apply to the supposed next stages, ranging from international supervision of Gaza's borders (against Hamas's wishes) to IDF withdrawals. And nobody in Israel can say for sure that additional hostages are still alive/will still be alive for a second or third stage.

Many Israelis will say that the deal under discussion is sad but necessary and that it is the government's moral obligation to free as many hostages as possible as soon as possible despite the high price. The suffering of our hostages and their families is intolerable on personal and national levels. Giving freed hostages one big national hug will be the greatest triumph of all, something so necessary for Israel's collective spirit and its resilience over the long term. 

Many Israelis might feel this to be so even if the deal entails the complete withdrawal of the IDF from Gaza. In other words, even if Hamas retains power and essentially wins the war.

Some Israelis will argue that the IDF can be sent back to continuously crush Hamas in Gaza after the deal is done (although manifestly, this will not be possible given inevitable diplomatic restraints). Some will say that the need for further strikes will be obviated by better border technologies, more IDF sentries, and allied foreign forces (although this is patently ridiculous in the near term). Some will add that the deal will collapse the current government (which, in their view, may be more important than hostage release).

Oh, what a horrible situation! How can the heart not bleed in pain? However one finesses the moral and strategic dilemmas here, there is one additional grand security calculus that seems absent from public discourse. This is the piercingly high price of releasing so many Palestinian terrorists.

The released terrorists assuredly will strike again, with God-only-knows how many Israeli casualties in the future. Their release certainly will incentivize future kidnappings, pour gasoline onto the terrorist fires already raging in Judea and Samaria, and catapult Hamas towards its intended takeover of Judea and Samaria, too.

I know this to be a fact because this has been the case with every previous terrorist release. Israel repeatedly has erred by letting terrorists loose to murder more Israelis. And each time, in advance of every deal, the Israeli "security establishment" arrogantly and falsely has assured Israeli politicians and the public that it "would know how to manage the situation," i.e., how to track the terrorists and crush any nascent return to terrorist activity without too much harm done. But this has never proven to be true. Every deal involving the release of terrorists has led to much bloodshed, planned and carried out by these released terrorists.

There are no exact statistics on this (because, unsurprisingly, the security establishment refuses to release such statistics). Still, estimates range from 10 to 50 percent of released terrorists swiftly return to hard-core terrorist activity, with devastating effects.

The 1,150 Palestinian prisoners released by Israel in the 1985 Jibril deal in exchange for three Israeli soldiers proceeded to fuel the First Intifada. According to the Ministry of Defense, about ten percent of the released Palestinian terrorists returned to active terrorist duty.

Then came the Oslo Accords when Israel mistakenly allowed at least 60,000 (!) Palestinians from "abroad" into the territories, including 7,000 card-carrying PLO terrorists. Between 1993 and 1999, Israel released many additional Palestinian terrorists as "gestures" to the PLO, which fueled the Second Intifada.

In 2004, Israel released more than 400 Palestinian prisoners and some 30 Lebanese prisoners, including leaders of Hezbollah, for one civilian captive, Elhanan Tannenbaum, and the bodies of three IDF soldiers. The Second Lebanon War against Hezbollah followed not long after.

The 2011 deal for Gilad Shalit was the worst. Among the more than 1,000 Palestinian security prisoners released in exchange for a single staff sergeant were Yihye Sinwar, Warchi Mushtaha, Ahmed Andor, Abdulah Barghouti, Izzadin Sheikh Khalil, Musa Dudin, Jihad Yamour, and Hassan Salameh – today's Hamas leaders. In fact, almost the entire Hamas command structure that planned last year's Simchat Torah assault on Israeli towns and cities, which killed over 1,200 Israelis in one day, was made up of terrorists released in the Shalit deal.

Other Palestinian terrorists released in the Shalit deal proceeded to carry out the most notorious terrorist murders of the past 13 years: Baruch Mizrachi by Ziad Awad, Dr. David Applebaum and his daughter Navah (on the eve of her wedding) by Ramez Sali Abu Salim, Malachi Rosenfeld by Ahmas Najjar, Rabbi Miki Mark (a father of ten kids) by Mohamed Fakih, and more.

Mahmoud Qawasameh, another terrorist released in the Shalit deal, planned the kidnapping and murder of the three teenagers Naftali Fraenkel, Eyal Yifrach, and Gilad Shaer in Gush Etzion in 2014. Jasser Barghouti, also released from Israeli prison in the Shalit deal, directed from Gaza the murders of Yosef Cohen and Yuval Mor-Yosef and a child, Amiad Israel.

After the kidnapping and murder of the three boys, the IDF acted to rearrest many of the terrorists freed in the Shalit deal. Col. (res.) Maurice Hirsch, who was chief prosecutor of the IDF in the territories, says that half of the 130 "heavy" terrorists released into Judea and Samaria in the Shalit deal had returned to terrorist activity and were rearrested. Many others, he says, also reactivated their terrorist ties in the territories and engaged in terrorist support activities outside of Israel, but Israeli authorities could not always get to them for operational or legal reasons.

Dr. Gadi Hitman of Ariel University, who has studied terrorist releases, says that numbers count, not just the identity of "key" terrorists with known terrorist records. The more terrorists released, even "pedestrian" ones, the more likely that some of them will become "key terrorists" themselves and ignite the territories.

There is some debate among experts as to whether Israel has a better chance of interdicting terrorist activity of released terrorists in the territories or abroad, meaning whether it is preferable to keep terrorists under surveillance in Gaza and Judea and Samaria (where they can be eliminated, if necessary), or to "exile" terrorists to Turkey, Lebanon, and Syria (where targeting them is politically and operationally more difficult).

Lt. Col. (res.) Baruch Yedid, former adviser on Arab affairs to the IDF's Central Command, and Moshe ("Mofaz") Fuzaylov, former Israel Security Agency investigations chief, say that the current terrorist free-for-all in Jenin and Tulkarem, for example, proves that released terrorists must be expelled as far away as possible. Otherwise, they will bolster the already solid, Iranian-backed military machine that terrorists have built in these areas and will expand them.

Either way, the danger of mass-releasing Palestinian terrorists is clear. A deal that frees vicious murderers of Israeli Jews, including the Nukhba killers and rapists of October 7, in exchange for Israel's innocent suffering hostages endangers even more Israeli lives down the road – and that road is not notably long.

Dvora Gonen, whose son Danny was murdered near Dolev in 2015 by a terrorist released in the Shalit deal, told journalist and researcher Nadav Shragai last month, "The difference between the hostages currently held in Gaza and the next generation of Israeli victims who will be murdered by those released in the impending Hamas hostage deal – is that the hostages have faces and names, while future victims remain as yet unknown. On the other hand, the previous generation of terrorist victims like my son Danny, murdered by Palestinian terrorists released in previous deals, have both faces and names."

What Dvora Gonen is saying, I think, is beware and be aware. Making deals for the hostages held in Gaza now might be the most humanitarian and morally necessary thing in the world to do. Yet, it also may be the most dangerous and potentially disastrous thing Israel can do. The cost will pay out over a prolonged period and will be steep. An agonizing dilemma for Israel, indeed.

 

https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/terrorists-for-hostages-the-agonizing-dilemma/

Understand The Vile Scam Targeting The Most Vulnerable Amongst Us! Once Yad L'Achim Gets Your email & Phone# (FREE TEFILLA & BRACHA), they will never let you go until they $queeze the life out of you forever!

 

At the same time as Klal Yisrael davens, each in their part of the world, there will be a minyan of Talmidei Chachamim in Amuka, davening for all who submit their names for tefillah (it’s free) through Yad L’Achim.

​

Visit TuBavTogether.com (or call 1-718-690-2944 we are here to help!)   

Tu B’Av Together is a Yad L’Achim initiative founded in 2015. Shidduchim is a topic that truly brings the entire spectrum of Klal Yisroel together. Tu B’Av Together, a day for tefillah—for shidduchim—is recognizing the need to daven for this important aspect of the Jewish people. We have been zoche to have millions of Yidden involved in tefillah, and with every year, one Jewish tefillah at a time, we’ll bring shidduchim closer to those yearning.

“The irony is that the Rabbinate has managed to alienate tens of thousands of couples from the institution of marriage, leading them to prefer cohabitation without formal marriage. Thus, the Rabbinate has become the greatest threat to the institution of marriage in Israel.”

 “The stance of the Jewish public in Israel is clear: a large majority rejects the policies of Israeli governments that have succumbed to the blackmail of the ultra-Orthodox parties since the founding of the state, and imposed the authority of the Orthodox Rabbinate on the entire Jewish public”

 

Half of Israeli Jews would prefer to marry in non-Orthodox wedding ceremonies

 

Two-thirds of public backs lifting Chief Rabbinate’s monopoly on Jewish weddings to include Reform, Conservative, civil ceremonies; only ultra-Orthodox, far-right voters oppose

Illustrative - An Orthodox Jewish wedding

A poll released on Sunday ahead of Tu B’Av, the “Jewish holiday of love,” found that half of Israeli Jews would choose not to marry in an Orthodox ceremony if they could, with 22 percent opting for civil marriage and 13% preferring a Conservative or Reform marriage.

The Smith Research Institute for Hiddush, an organization that promotes freedom of religion, found that the vast majority of those who said they would choose an Orthodox ceremony identified as ultra-Orthodox or Modern Orthodox. Among secular respondents, only 15% said they would choose an Orthodox ceremony.

The poll found that women were less likely (44%) to choose an Orthodox ceremony than men (55%) and expressed more support for other marriage options including through an online marriage service provided by Utah County, in Utah.

Among the requirements to legally marry in Israel, women must attend at least one “kallah (bride) class” where they are taught about Jewish law surrounding menstrual cycles and they must immerse themselves in a mikveh (ritual pool) before the wedding. There are no such requirements for men.

Regardless of which ceremony they would personally choose, 67% of Israeli Jews responded that they would support the legalization of more types of marriage, including civil, Conservative, and Reform Jewish weddings.

Ninety-two percent of the secular public and 31% of the religious public supported broadening the types of marriage allowed in the country.

Illustrative: A luxury mikveh (ritual bath) for women

 

The survey noted that these figures include 68% of people who vote for the ruling Likud party and 41% of far-right Religious Zionism and Otzma Yehudit party voters. Only 9% of ultra-Orthodox party voters voiced support for other types of marriage.

Religious parties have long fought efforts to institute civil marriage in Israel, citing their religious objections to the state sanctioning interfaith marriages and other unions prohibited by Jewish law.

Israeli law only allows for marriage through established religious institutions like the Orthodox rabbinate for Jews and sharia courts for Muslims, meaning that hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens cannot get married in Israel due to various religious barriers.

Although couples have been able to get married in civil ceremonies abroad and have their marriages registered by the Population Authority for nearly six decades, this process involves considerable expense and inconvenience.

Since December 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, several Israeli couples have been married through the online marriage service in Utah.

Israel also offers a common-law marriage option for couples who cannot legally marry in Israel such as same-sex and interfaith couples or people who don’t legally qualify as Jewish by Rabbinate standards. While common-law marriage is not fully cemented into Israeli law, couples who choose this option have almost all the rights that legally married couples do with a few exceptions.

A chuppah at a Jewish wedding.

“The stance of the Jewish public in Israel is clear: a large majority rejects the policies of Israeli governments that have succumbed to the blackmail of the ultra-Orthodox parties since the founding of the state, and imposed the authority of the Orthodox Rabbinate on the entire Jewish public,” said Hiddush CEO Rabbi Uri Regev about the poll.

“The irony is that the Rabbinate has managed to alienate tens of thousands of couples from the institution of marriage, leading them to prefer cohabitation without formal marriage. Thus, the Rabbinate has become the greatest threat to the institution of marriage in Israel.”

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/half-of-israelis-would-prefer-to-marry-in-non-orthodox-wedding-ceremonies-poll/?utm_source=The+Daily+Edition&utm_campaign=daily-edition-2024-08-18&utm_medium=email

When rabbis promise blessings such as babies, marriage, or financial success without a basis in reality or achievable means, it can lead to significant psychological and emotional harm.

EDITORIAL:

There has been an onslaught of hucksters online with YouTube videos, public gatherings, and "divrei chizuk" with contrived lies,  stories that never happened,  suggesting nonsensical cures for every physical, personal and emotional ailment. DO NOT BUY INTO THIS INSANITY! You never hear about the 99.9999% failure rate!

 

THE MAGGID WILL TELL YOU HOW - VIA PAYPAL

MAKE BELIEVE DOCTORS WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE OR BORDERS

THE JACK OF ALL TRADES - FROM GENITALS TO GEHINOM

WOULD YOU BUY A USED CAR FROM THIS GUY?

I LEFT THE FIVE TOWNS WITH $20,000 IN ONE DAY!

 

 

False hopes, particularly in the context of religious or spiritual leadership, can have profound and sometimes damaging effects on individuals and communities. In the Jewish tradition, rabbis hold a position of immense respect and authority, often serving as spiritual guides and counselors. However, when rabbis promise blessings such as babies, marriage, or financial success without a basis in reality or achievable means, it can lead to significant psychological and emotional harm.

False hope is the belief in an outcome that is unlikely or impossible to achieve. It often stems from a desire to offer comfort or encouragement but can result in deep disappointment when expectations are not met. In the context of religious promises, this can be particularly harmful because the trust placed in religious leaders is often profound and deeply rooted in faith.

Rabbis are traditionally seen as spiritual authorities in the Jewish community. Their role is to provide guidance based on Jewish law (Halacha), ethics, and religious traditions. They also often serve as counselors, offering advice and support in times of personal difficulty. However, when rabbis overstep their bounds by guaranteeing specific outcomes such as having children, finding a spouse, or achieving financial success, they risk fostering a reliance on divine intervention over practical action.

One area where false hope can be particularly damaging is in the realm of fertility. For couples struggling to conceive, the promise of a child can be both a source of hope and potential despair. When a rabbi assures a couple that they will have a baby, especially when no medical or practical intervention is suggested, it can lead to prolonged emotional distress. The couple may continue to wait and hope, delaying medical treatment or other avenues of support that could help them address their fertility issues in more practical ways.

Similarly, the promise of marriage can be problematic. Marriage is often viewed as a critical milestone in life, especially within the Jewish community, where family and continuity of tradition are highly valued. When a rabbi assures someone that they will find a spouse, it can create unrealistic expectations. This can lead individuals to overlook practical steps they could take to find a partner, such as social engagement, self-improvement, or even seeking professional matchmaking services. Moreover, when these promises fail to materialize, it can lead to a loss of faith, not only in the rabbi but also in the religious tradition itself.

Financial success is another area where false promises can have devastating effects. In difficult economic times, people often turn to religious leaders for hope and guidance. While faith and positive thinking can be powerful motivators, they are not substitutes for sound financial planning, education, or hard work.

 When rabbis promise financial success without encouraging practical steps, individuals may make poor financial decisions, believing that divine intervention will solve their problems. This can lead to financial ruin and a deep sense of betrayal when the promised success does not materialize.

The ethical implications of providing false hope are significant. While the intention may be to provide comfort or encouragement, the result can be the opposite. Individuals may delay taking necessary actions, avoid confronting difficult realities, or even lose faith in their religion when promised outcomes do not occur. This can lead to a sense of betrayal, disillusionment, and a deepening of the very problems the rabbi sought to alleviate.

While faith and hope are important aspects of religious life, it is crucial that they are balanced with practical guidance. Rabbis should provide spiritual support while also encouraging their followers to take realistic and actionable steps towards their goals. For example, in the case of infertility, a rabbi might offer prayers and blessings while also encouraging the couple to seek medical advice. Similarly, when discussing marriage or financial success, rabbis should offer both spiritual support and practical advice that aligns with the individual's situation.

1. Promises of Children

• Example: A rabbi might tell a couple struggling with infertility that they will conceive a child within a certain time frame, perhaps after performing a specific religious ritual or giving charity to a particular cause.
• Impact: The couple may cling to this promise, postponing medical treatment or other avenues of support, only to experience deep disappointment and emotional distress if the promise doesn't come true.

2. Promises of Marriage

• Example: A rabbi might assure a single individual that they will meet their future spouse within a year, possibly after following certain religious practices, such as reciting specific prayers or attending certain religious events.
• Impact: The individual might focus solely on these spiritual practices, neglecting other important aspects of social interaction and self-development that could help them find a partner. If no marriage occurs, they could feel disillusioned or even blame themselves for not being devout enough.

3. Promises of Financial Success

• Example: A rabbi might promise someone struggling financially that they will soon experience great wealth, perhaps after donating to the synagogue or performing a specific mitzvah (good deed).
• Impact: The individual might make risky financial decisions or ignore practical steps like budgeting, saving, or seeking employment, believing that a miraculous financial turnaround is imminent. When the wealth doesn't materialize, they could face even greater financial hardship and a loss of faith.

4. Promises of Healing

• Example: A rabbi might tell a person with a serious illness that they will be cured if they engage in particular religious acts, such as reciting certain prayers daily or participating in a pilgrimage.
• Impact: The person might forego or delay necessary medical treatment in favor of these religious practices, potentially worsening their condition. If the healing doesn't happen, they may experience not only physical deterioration but also a crisis of faith.

 False hopes, particularly in areas as significant as family, marriage, and finances, can lead to profound disappointment and harm. Don't buy it.

Why are so many black leaders so anti Israel?.... The "Talking Dogs"at CNN.

 

Alan: Read The Bell Curve: https://lesacreduprintemps19.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/the-bell-curve.pdf

When Rav Shraga Feivel heard the UN’s decision to establish a Jewish state, he recited the bracha of hatov v’hameitiv. Without losing sight of the anti-religious nature of the leaders of the state, he still saw the creation of the Jewish state as an act of providence and as a cause for rejoicing. At the very least, there would now be one country in the world whose gates would be open to the thousands of Holocaust survivors still languishing in displaced persons camps in Germany and Austria.

 

ON THE LAST TISHA B'AV OF HIS LIFE (1948) - BY MINCHA SHEMONA ESREI - AT V'YERUSHALYIM IRCHA B'RACHAMIM TASHUV - HE BROKE DOWN WEEPING AND NEVER RECOVERED. (PM)

ת.נ.צ.ב.ה

The ‘Anti-Zionism’ of R’ Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz and Others

Zionist Zealots

On Friday, November 29, 1947, the United Nations debated the issue of partitioning the British mandate for Palestine into two countries—one Arab and one Jewish. R’ Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz (1886–1948) prayed fervently for partition. He had no radio in his house but that Friday, he borrowed one and set it to the news, leaving it on for Shabbos. He waited with such intense anticipation to hear the outcome of the UN vote that he didn’t come to shalosh seudos (“the third Shabbos meal”).

When he heard the UN’s decision to establish a Jewish state, he recited the bracha of hatov v’hameitiv.[1] Without losing sight of the anti-religious nature of the leaders of the state, he still saw the creation of the Jewish state as an act of providence and as a cause for rejoicing. At the very least, there would now be one country in the world whose gates would be open to the thousands of Holocaust survivors still languishing in displaced persons camps in Germany and Austria. R’ Shraga Feivel once said that even though Eretz Yisrael is controlled by non-religious and anti-religious Jews, one must still admit the good that Hashem had done in causing the gates to the Land to be open once again to Jewish immigration.

R’ Shraga Feivel compared the new State of Israel to a breech birth. When a baby is born normally, head-first, the delivery is easiest and safest for the mother and promises the best for the future development of the infant. In the context of the establishment of Jewish political sovereignty in Eretz Yisrael, a “head-first” birth would have been one in which the great Torah leaders—the real heads of the nation—led the way. But even in a breech birth, despite the danger to the infant, one can still hope that it will live and be healthy.[2]

 A response written in 1948 to a Jew in Iraq posits that it definitely is a mitzvah to move to Israel nowadays, as it is full of yeshivos and Torah.[6] Yet he advised that if someone was unsure of which path he would take once arriving in Israel, it’s better to remain a religious Jew in the Diaspora.[7]

Hearing R’ Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz’s criticisms of Zionism, someone once said, “I too hate the Zionists. They should be cursed.” R’ Shraga Feivel retorted, “G-d forbid. To the contrary, they should be blessed, along with all those who are building up our Holy Land. I only pray that they observe mitzvos but G-d forbid to curse or hate them. They are tinokos she’nishbu[8] (people who never received a Jewish education and were led astray).”[9]

---

[1] In 1948, after the Arabs attacked the new Jewish state and soldiers were dying on the battlefield, some Roshei Yeshiva criticized R’ Shraga Feivel for having recited the bracha. R’ Shraga Feivel turned to R’ Aharon Kotler who agreed with him that the favorable UN resolution was indeed worthy of a bracha.

[2] In the 1930s and 40s, there was virtually no event or simcha in the religious Jewish world that didn’t begin with the playing of the Zionist national anthem, Hatikvah. During its playing, R’ Shraga Feivel would sit fixed in his place. He explained, “their hope (tikva) is not ours because it doesn’t include the Beis Hamikdash or the coming of Moshiach.”

MORE:

https://www.hyehudi.org/the-anti-zionism-of-r-shraga-feivel-mendlowitz-and-others/

State of Israel to Men In Black --- We had Enough Of Your Lies, Perversion of Torah Ideals and Money Theft --- Move To Uganda or Brooklyn!

All of a Sudden, Women & Children are of Great Concern to these Twisted Brain-Thieves!

דברים כ׳:א׳-ט׳

(א) כִּֽי־תֵצֵ֨א לַמִּלְחָמָ֜ה עַל־אֹיְבֶ֗יךָ וְֽרָאִ֜יתָ ס֤וּס וָרֶ֙כֶב֙ עַ֚ם רַ֣ב מִמְּךָ֔ לֹ֥א תִירָ֖א מֵהֶ֑ם כִּֽי־יְהוָ֤ה אֱלֹהֶ֙יךָ֙ עִמָּ֔ךְ הַמַּֽעַלְךָ֖ מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃ (ב) וְהָיָ֕ה כְּקָֽרָבְכֶ֖ם אֶל־הַמִּלְחָמָ֑ה וְנִגַּ֥שׁ הַכֹּהֵ֖ן וְדִבֶּ֥ר אֶל־הָעָֽם׃ (ג) וְאָמַ֤ר אֲלֵהֶם֙ שְׁמַ֣ע יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אַתֶּ֨ם קְרֵבִ֥ים הַיּ֛וֹם לַמִּלְחָמָ֖ה עַל־אֹיְבֵיכֶ֑ם אַל־יֵרַ֣ךְ לְבַבְכֶ֗ם אַל־תִּֽירְא֧וּ וְאַֽל־תַּחְפְּז֛וּ וְאַל־תַּֽעַרְצ֖וּ מִפְּנֵיהֶֽם׃ (ד) כִּ֚י יְהוָ֣ה אֱלֹֽהֵיכֶ֔ם הַהֹלֵ֖ךְ עִמָּכֶ֑ם לְהִלָּחֵ֥ם לָכֶ֛ם עִם־אֹיְבֵיכֶ֖ם לְהוֹשִׁ֥יעַ אֶתְכֶֽם׃

 

Haredim vs. AG: Unfortunate decision, child abuse

 

Haredi parties criticized the decision to stop subsidizing daycares for yeshiva students eligible for enlistment. "A direct blow to Haredi women who go out to work for their livings."

---

SubsidiesHaredi Draft LawGali Baharav-Miara

Deri, Baharav-Miara, and Goldknopf, right to left

Haredi parties have denounced the decision by Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara that families with a member eligible for enlistment who has not reported for duty are no longer eligible for daycare subsidies.

Shas stated, "The decision to deny working haredi mothers the subsidization of daycares, three weeks before the start of the school year, just because the husband studies Torah, is cruel legal bullying and abuse of helpless children. This is a disgraceful mark on a legal system that is supposed to be the protector and supporter of women who decided to enter the labor force and contribute to the Israeli economy."

"The purpose of the subsidy is to encourage the employment of women. Haredi women have the highest rate of female employment in the state. This unfortunate decision will set them back. The status of yeshiva students is currently being discussed in the Knesset, and efforts are being made to reach a legal arrangement in cooperation with the security system. The abuse of working haredi women as a means of pressure is complete foolishness that will not remove even one yeshiva student from the Beit Midrash and will drive away any solution to the issue. Shas, led by Chairman Rabbi Aryeh Deri, will examine the legal tools at its disposal to overturn this scandalous decision, which is obviously illegal," Shas stated.

Minister Yoav Ben-Tzur announced that he has begun holding emergency consultations with professional and legal advice bodies in the Ministry of Labor to examine the issue of canceling the subsidization of daycares.

The Ministry of Labor stated, "Unfortunately, the significant legal arguments that the Minister presented to the Attorney General to the government did not receive professional and substantive attention in the letter as published in the media. The minister views the severe and direct harm to helpless infants who will be left without supervised educational frameworks as severe. He sees the decree as a severe blow to the economy of families since thousands of mothers will leave the labor pool and turn from normative families to supported families. He will continue the just and moral struggle for these infants with all legal tools and will not stop the fight until justice for them comes to light."

United Torah Judaism Chairman Minister Yitzhak Goldknopf, said, 'The decision of the Attorney General to exclude the children of yeshiva students is scandalous and discriminatory. This is a direct blow to haredi women who go out to work for a living and seek to maintain a Torah-based way of life."

'It goes without saying that the Attorney General would not have published a similar decision against the Arab population that does not serve or towards the children of foreign workers and infiltrators who enjoy services and allowances as if they served in the IDF. This is another attempt to harm the haredi public in various cruel ways. An attempt doomed to failure. United Torah Judaism will use all means at its disposal to cancel this oppressive decree and ensure that yeshiva student families do not get harmed. We will demand an urgent discussion in the government and the Knesset on the issue and act to rectify the situation as soon as possible," added Goldknopf.

Jerusalem Minister Meir Porush responded, "The Attorney General reveals the truth - they are not interested in the needs of the army, but only in obsessive pursuit against the Torah world and the haredi family. The legal system is dragging small children into a political battle and acting to starve them; they have no boundaries."

The Attorney General wrote earlier in her letter to the Minister of Labor that "under the current legal situation, the state is no longer authorized to encourage through government funding the religious studies of draft-age students. That is, the lack of authority no longer allows funding based on the fact that one of the family members is studying in a religious institution while he is eligible for military service."

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/394440?utm_source=activetrail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Many people, and especially men, overestimate their strength and skills as swimmers. So experts urge people engaging in aquatic fun to wear life jackets.

Adult Drownings  of experts last year recommended better access to swimming lessons for pe The rate of drownings in the U.S. increased in nearly all adult age groups between 2020 and 2022, the latest year for which data exist, and nearly three-quarters of the people who drowned in that time period were adults, reports journalist Erica Westly. It is unclear what is causing this shift, a reversal of trends in the past two decades, but it could be related to people spending more time outdoors during the peak COVID pandemic years. Alcohol is often involved in adult drownings and boating fatalities (most of which are due to drowning). Drinking alcohol impairs breathing and muscle coordination. What the experts say: "Drowning prevention has been entirely too focused on the child, and that's a weird thing coming from a pediatrician. It's terrible to lose a child, but it can also be devastating for a child to lose a parent. It affects the whole family," says Lina Quan, a pediatric drawing expert.  What to do: Many people, and especially men, overestimate their strength and skills as swimmers. So experts urge people engaging in aquatic fun to wear life jackets. An interdisciplinary coalitionople of all age groups and particularly for groups with disproportionately high fatal drowning rates, such as Native American, Alaska Native and Black people.

Amanda Montañez; Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Even El Rachum Had Enough Of These Guys! יְה, יְה, אֵל רַחוּם וְחַנּוּ

As Political Deadlock Leaves Israel Without Chief Rabbis, High Court Sets September Deadline

Israel's Chief Sephardi Rabbi Yitzchak Yosef (left) and Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi David Lau at a Western Wall

 

Israel’s High Court of Justice on Thursday ordered a committee responsible for choosing the country’s Chief Rabbis to convene and fill positions left open by a political stalemate.

For the first time in the country’s history, Israel is without Chief Rabbis after Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi David Lau and Sephardic Chief Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef’s 10-year terms expired on July 1.

The Chief Rabbinate has jurisdiction over issues of personal status, such as marriage, divorce and conversions, as well as burials, kosher certification, holy sites, rabbinical courts and religious seminaries known as yeshivas. The Chief Rabbis often represent Israel abroad as well.

Chief rabbis, including for local municipalities, are elected by an election assembly consisting of 80 rabbis representing local religious councils and 70 public officials representing the Knesset and local authorities. By law, replacements are supposed to be elected at least 21 days before the end of their term.

The assembly also appoints local rabbinic authorities as well as members of Chief Rabbinate Council, which oversees the rabbinate’s day-to-day affairs.

The High Court instructed the assembly to meet by September 30.

The chief rabbis, local rabbis and public officials on the national and local levels each select a certain number of members to the assembly. But disagreements over the assembly’s makeup persisted and the Ministry of Religious Affairs never convened the assembly.

A vote was originally supposed to be held in August 2023. But the Knesset postponed the vote, at the behest of Religious Affairs Minister Michael Malkieli who argued that the timing would interfere with municipal elections scheduled for October 31. Critics accused Malkieli of trying to get individuals onto the assembly with more favorable views of certain candidates. The municipal elections were postponed to February when war with Hamas broke out.

Matters became more complicated when the Attorney General said both Rabbis Lau and Yosef could not be involved in selecting members of the statutory body over conflicts of interest. 

 Both come from rabbinic families and have brothers seeking positions in the rabbinate, raising accusations of nepotism. Rabbi David Lau’s father, Rabbi Israel Meir Lau, was Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi from 1993-2003. Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef’s father, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, was Chief Sephardi Rabbi from 1973-1983.

In another twist, the High Court of Justice in January ruled that women were under-represented in the election assembly and ordered the Chief Rabbis to include women among their selections.

No clear front runners to replace Rabbis Lau and Yosef have emerged.

 

https://www.jewishpress.com/news/the-courts/as-political-deadlock-leaves-israel-without-chief-rabbis-high-court-sets-september-deadline/2024/08/08/

---

“It is not your duty to finish the work, but neither are you at liberty to neglect it” — is generally taken as a reassurance to those facing monumental or seemingly unreachable goals. It has become a mainstay of Jewish activists

משנה אבות

ג׳

רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר, הַיּוֹם קָצָר וְהַמְּלָאכָה מְרֻבָּה, וְהַפּוֹעֲלִים עֲצֵלִים, וְהַשָּׂכָר הַרְבֵּה, וּבַעַל הַבַּיִת דּוֹחֵק:

הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, לֹא עָלֶיךָ הַמְּלָאכָה לִגְמֹר, וְלֹא אַתָּה בֶן חוֹרִין לִבָּטֵל מִמֶּנָּה

Josh Shapiro quotes Rabbi Tarfon in statement about not being Kamala Harris’ VP pick - My faith teaches me that no one, no one is required to complete the task, but neither are we free to refrain from it. That means that each of us has a responsibility to get off the sidelines, to get in the game and to do our part.”

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro

 

When he was elected governor of Pennsylvania in 2022, Josh Shapiro declared victory by quoting a famous adage from Pirkei Avot, an ancient code of Jewish ethics.

Now, after losing the battle to be Kamala Harris’ running mate, Shapiro has turned to the same adage, attributed to Rabbi Tarfon, a sage who lived nearly 2,000 years ago.

“Since I first ran for State Representative 20 years ago, I’ve been called to serve because I want to leave our community, our Commonwealth, and our country better off for our children – and because my faith teaches me that no one is required to complete the task, but neither are we free to refrain from it,” Shapiro, who is Jewish, said in a statement Tuesday morning, following reports that Harris had chosen Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her vice presidential nominee.

The quotation — “It is not your duty to finish the work, but neither are you at liberty to neglect it” — is generally taken as a reassurance to those facing monumental or seemingly unreachable goals. It has become a mainstay of Jewish activist circles across the political spectrum.

Shapiro’s statement came after a two-week period when he was thought to be one of the frontrunners in Harris’ veepstakes. By Monday, he and Walz were reportedly the final two contenders. The distinction between them had been framed as a choice between one swing-state governor — Shapiro — with a reputation for centrism and bipartisanship, and another — Walz — with a folksy demeanor and cachet with the party’s progressive wing.

Rumors that Shapiro was the leading candidate ignited a campaign by progressives to sink his bid, focused on his support for Israel, his criticism of pro-Palestinian college student protesters, and his positions that buck Democratic norms. Several of Shapiro’s Jewish allies, noting that Walz also has a pro-Israel record, suggested that the anti-Shapiro effort was antisemitic. No parallel anti-Walz campaign emerged in the public eye.

Shapiro, who went to Jewish day school and remains involved in his Philadelphia-area Jewish community, didn’t address those allegations in his statement, which said he had gone through Harris’ vetting process and “was grateful to have the opportunity to speak with the Vice President directly about her vision for the role and the campaign ahead.”

He added, “As I’ve said repeatedly over the past several weeks, the running mate decision was a deeply personal decision for the Vice President and it was also a deeply personal decision for me.”

He congratulated Walz and his wife, whom he referred to as “Tim and Gwen,” and whom he called “good friends of ours.” He wrote that Harris “has my enthusiastic support,” and he pledged to campaign for her in Pennsylvania, seen by many analysts as a must-win state. He said he would appear at a rally with Harris later on Tuesday in Philadelphia, where she will publicly appear with Walz as her running mate.

Shapiro took office at the beginning of last year, and recommitted in his statement to serving as Pennsylvania’s governor, referring back to the Rabbi Tarfon passage.

“Pennsylvanians elected me to a four-year term as their Governor, and my work here is far from finished there is a lot more stuff I want to get done for the good people of this Commonwealth,” he wrote. “In just 19 months, we’ve made a meaningful, positive impact in peoples’ lives, and I’m proud of how Americans all across the country have taken notice of what we’re accomplishing here. 

https://www.jta.org/2024/08/06/politics/josh-shapiro-quotes-ancient-rabbi-in-statement-about-not-being-kamala-harris-vp-pick?

“The reaction of the world was extraordinary. By eliminating two mass murderers, they’re saying Israel has jeopardized peace. You can’t make this stuff up,”

 

Rejoining IDF, Ex-Envoy Michael Oren Warns: ‘We’re Fighting the Wrong War’

Former Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren in IDF uniform.

Israel’s former Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren has traded his diplomatic credentials and suits for a dog tag and combat uniform by joining an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) rapid response counter-terrorism unit in a northern kibbutz, warning that the fall of the embattled north would pose the most significant threat to Israel’s central heartland.

Oren recently returned from Washington, DC, where he accompanied a delegation of displaced Israelis from the north for a series of talks and high-level meetings in the US capital. The former envoy criticized Biden administration officials for lacking adequate answers for the evacuees they met with, implying they expected the evacuees to simply accept living in close proximity to a terror threat.

“No one is going to go back to living, say, in Metulla, which is literally a war zone with 150 houses destroyed and with Hezbollah on the other side of the fence,” he said, referring to the powerful Iran-backed terrorist organization in Lebanon. Oren cited army estimates that as much as 40 percent of Israel’s evacuated north, numbering some 80,000 people, would not return home in the event of a ceasefire with Hamas in Gaza.

“We now know what terrorists on the other side can do to Israelis,” he added.

Oren asserted that Israel was misdirecting its focus with the fighting in Hamas-ruled Gaza to the south, investing its manpower and resources against the wrong enemy. “We’re fighting the wrong war. We should focus our main energy on the north, which is a strategic threat. Hamas was and is a tactical threat. It’s not going anywhere.”

Hezbollah, which wields significant military and political influence across Lebanon, has been firing drones, missiles, and rockets at northern Israel daily since October, when the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza began. The onslaught has forced Israelis living near the Lebanon border to flee to other parts of the country for safety.

Oren assailed the response by world leaders and global press to last week’s targeted assassinations of Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut and Hamas terror chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, and rejected claims that the killings would make hostage negotiations tougher and foil the chances for regional quiet.

“The reaction of the world was extraordinary. By eliminating two mass murderers, they’re saying Israel has jeopardized peace. You can’t make this stuff up,” Oren said. “What foils the chances for a hostage agreement [with Hamas] and for regional stability is not standing up to terror and not fighting.”

“Leaders of the United States and the world should thank Israel for eliminating the murderer of not just Israelis, and of Palestinians, but the murder of Americans,” he added.

Oren rejected claims that Israel was not operationally or logistically prepared for a full-scale war with Hezbollah, asserting that Israel had untapped resources ready for deployment. “We have conventional means that we’ve never used before, and we could use them now, like our submarine force,” he said, declining to elaborate further.

Kobi Levy, a resident of Kfar Blum who is part of the rapid response team alongside Oren, hailed the former envoy’s decision to dust off his uniform for the first time in over a decade. Oren fought in the First Lebanon War in 1982 in the Paratroopers Brigade.

According to Levy, many lawmakers and politically-affiliated groups, including the Brothers in Arms anti-government protest group, have briefly visited the kibbutz for what he termed “photo ops and empty promises.”

Oren, he said, “came with all his heart to listen. To us, the people of the north. He’s the only politician who understands exactly what the residents want.”

Levy also said that Oren wasn’t above doing whatever was needed for the team, from early morning drills to overnight guard shifts. He predicted that Oren, who also served as a deputy minister in Israel’s 19th Knesset, had a “bright future” ahead of him should he make a return to Israeli politics.

Asked if such a scenario was on the cards, Oren was coy. “Whether in a suit or a uniform, I’ve always been about service to our country and our people, and I’ll continue serving in any way I can.”

Former Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren in IDF uniform.

For the meantime, Oren was happy to be the “oldest guy by far” in the rapid response squad. “I knew that if I wanted to advocate for the north, I needed to see it firsthand,” he said.

That experience has led him to discover things he would never otherwise have known. One example he gave is the lack of financial support for Kfar Blum, which was not evacuated by the IDF and therefore receives no compensation. More than 60 percent of the kibbutz’s residents have self-evacuated, including Levy’s own family which evacuated only last week over fears of a reprisal after last week’s double assassination. The kibbutz, once known for being the cultural center of the north with several music festivals, has hosted thousands of soldiers passing through in the past ten months of war, and authorities have yet to pick up the tab, Oren said. “They do it with love of course, but even just the water bill is a tremendous burden on this community.”

“I’m deeply impressed by the people here and their commitment to the north and to Israel,” he said.

“I’m not being sentimental; they are the embodiment of the Zionist ideal,” Oren added. “But the sense is that they’ve been forgotten.”

https://www.algemeiner.com/2024/08/05/rejoining-idf-ex-envoy-michael-oren-warns-were-fighting-wrong-war/

Why child abuse?

He Took His 68-Year-Old Secret to Court and Finally Confronted His Ghost

 

By the time Robin Davis testified at trial, nearly everyone involved in the events that led to his lawsuit was dead.

  AN ABBREVIATED VERSION OF THE NYT ARTICLE:

The 79-year-old man sat silently in the back of the courtroom on Long Island, 20 miles from his home in Queens. He wore a dark suit over his slim frame, as if back at his old offices in Manhattan’s financial corridors, at Merrill Lynch and Bank of America and other blue-chip firms.

Here the man, Robin Davis, settled in for what promised to be a strange trial in this mostly empty room. His lawsuit centered on the actions of a person long dead. His adversaries were Long Island bureaucrats who had never heard of that person or his reported misdeeds.

Generations had passed since the terrible acts that Mr. Davis described in his lawsuit, a dark stretch of weeks 68 winters ago, during the first Eisenhower administration. In this courtroom in 2024, he faced lawyers, a judge, a jury of strangers and a ghost who had haunted him for the better part of seven decades.

A ghost who had made him — for good and for bad — what he is today.

Mr. Davis had long been widely known for his philanthropy on behalf of one cause: fighting child abuse. Twenty-five years ago, he created a charity to raise money in the business community to fund boots-on-the-ground agencies in New York City and beyond that sought to treat and prevent the abuse of children.

Now, the trial would reveal the answer to a question about the charity that he’d been asked many times: Why? Why child abuse?

But the real reason he’d devoted himself to this singular cause would be made public in this courtroom in Mineola, when he could speak about what had happened when he was 10 years old and a new coach arrived at his school’s gymnasium.

He knew the poster boy for child abuse, all right. That boy had stared back at him in the mirror, ashamed, every day for going on 70 years.

‘I never got the words out’

Rob Davis was a student at the public Caroline G. Atkinson School in the Village of Freeport when, in the fifth grade, he brought home a permission slip to join an evening basketball clinic at the school. His mother signed it, and the boy showed up on the first night, short and scrawny and hardly able to throw a basketball with enough force to reach the basket.

But a coach he’d never seen before, Vernon Alleyne, was encouraging, and praised him when Rob finally made a basket. The coach offered him a ride home later and pulled over around the corner of the school to give him candy, Mr. Davis recalled in sworn testimony and in an interview.

“‘Have you ever seen a big man’s penis?’” Mr. Davis recalled that the coach asked. “I said, ‘My father.’ He said, ‘Well, we’re going to be friends. I’d like you to see mine.’”

The coach went on to touch the boy’s privates and, later, during a series of escalating encounters in the same car, parked in the same spot, forced him to perform oral sex, Mr. Davis said.

During the weeks of abuse, the coach gave the boy money to buy himself candy, and Mr. Davis said he ate so much that he developed a mouthful of cavities that made his father, a spendthrift facing new dental bills, angry.

No one realized that his mouthful of decay was a clue that something was wrong. It was the only clue. Because he said nothing.

“I never told my mother and father,” he said in an interview. “I never got the words out of my mouth.”

And for the rest of his life, he has lived with guilt and shame over that silence.

“He never got caught,” he said of the coach. “Because of me, how many people did that guy nail? Because I didn’t tell my mother? That’s crushing to me.”

But all along, he carried a thinly hidden obsession. It was understandable, even noble. But it was self-destructive. He could not tolerate any situation in which he believed someone — especially a child, but anyone, really — was being mistreated or treated unfairly. Or, of course, abused.

His revulsion to it was physical, as if he was trying to compensate for his inaction that winter when he was a 10-year-old boy who did not speak up when it mattered. As an adult, he spoke up all the time.

During his brief career teaching, he became convinced that three of his fourth-grade students were probably being abused at home. He reported his suspicions to the school nurse and the principal. We’ll handle it, he was told. But he didn’t stop there.

Taking the stand

In 2019, the New York State Legislature passed the Child Victims Act, which allowed a window during which victims of childhood abuse could sue those they felt were responsible, regardless of whether the statute of limitations had passed. Thousands of lawsuits were filed, many involving abuse dating back to the 1990s, the 1980s and earlier.

Mr. Davis decided it was time to go public: “It’s just a way of trying to get even with life a little bit.”

His lawsuit in 2021 would become among the oldest on file, with the abuse having happened in 1956. As a result, the case brought unique challenges.

“Do you have any documentation or paperwork regarding this basketball program?” Mr. Davis was asked during the deposition in 2022.

“I don’t.”

The trial began on July 17. Freeport officials said they had found no trace of a Vernon Alleyne coaching basketball or anything else in the 1950s, and only a few mentions of him in old payroll ledgers in the early 1960s.

Vernon Alleyne is not a defendant in the case, and no one was called to testify on his behalf. Little was revealed about the man besides a home address on an old payroll entry, on Colonial Avenue in Freeport. Public records indicate that a man with that name who once lived at that address died in 2008.

Mr. Davis took the witness stand and faced the jury to tell his story. He explained how the details of the abuse returned to him in his dreams, and said that only exhausting himself by running and bicycling long distances eased his anxiety. He said he is haunted by the fact that he didn’t speak up.

“I could not get the words out,” he testified. “It’s horrifying, the fact I didn’t tell my mother — it would have stopped him in his tracks. She knew the police, she knew everybody in town.”

A psychologist hired by Mr. Davis’s lawyers testified about the effects of trauma on a person. The judge paused testimony when he noticed a juror sleeping and called for a coffee break. But Mr. Davis, listening in court, was riveted.

But he kept his own story a secret. He told The New York Times in 2007 that his interest in the area emerged from his brief time as a teacher. “There are so few big organizations that do child abuse work,” he said in that interview. “There’s no poster child for the movement, because it’s such a painful subject.”

He later renamed the charity Help For Children. Now 25 years old, it has given away some $61 million and has chapters in five countries.

A verdict, and an absolution

After a weeklong trial, the jury reached a verdict. It found that Mr. Davis had been molested by Mr. Alleyne. But it also found that the Village of Freeport was not responsible for or liable for what had happened.

Mr. Davis had wanted to hit the village in its wallet to send a message. Instead, he left court crestfallen.

“That seems to be the height of irresponsibility,” he said while driving home to Queens. His lawyers, Jared Scotto and Nicholas Wise, had asked for whatever financial damages the jurors found appropriate, and their answer was zero.

Mr. Davis said he’d hoped to pump whatever money he was awarded into the charity.

But something else had happened during that trial, something that felt to him like a different kind of verdict. It was during the dry testimony of the psychologist, Valentina Stoycheva, which had put a juror to sleep.

She had been explaining that besides the familiar “fight or flight” responses to trauma, there is another — “The three F’s,” she called them.

“The ‘freeze’ response,” Dr. Stoycheva said. “Which is, basically, your nervous system tells you stop whatever else you are doing, just endure, just survive, just make sure you get through this.”

Mr. Davis, listening, silently wept into his hand.

That single word, “freeze,” was like a pardon, handed down upon a 10-year-old boy who had lived with the weight of having said nothing. To the 79-year-old man he became, that word swept in feelings altogether new to him. Absolved. Not guilty.

“That was something of — relief is the wrong word. But explanation,” he said later. “I’ve never been able to explain that, even to myself.”

He drove toward home, the city skyline before him, the village and the parked car and the ghost at his back.

MORE:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/nyregion/robin-davis-child-abuse-trial.html

 

Why Are We Playing Defense - Again? This persistent threat – also an existential one – demands proactive measures. Israel cannot afford to wait passively for attacks. The country must take preemptive action or respond swiftly and decisively to secure its future and survival.

 

Is Israel too passive in waiting for the Iranian response?

 

Israel faces a tense period of anxiety and preparation, reminiscent of 1967, as it braces for potential retaliation from Iran and Hezbollah after recent high-profile assassinations.

DAVID RUBINGER’S iconic photo of the IDF paratroopers at the Kotel during the Six Day War in 1967.

One of the most tense periods in Israeli history was the three weeks preceding the Six Day War in 1967, a period known as the “waiting period” or tekufat hahamtana.

This was a period of anxiety, uncertainty, and preparation within Israel as the country faced the imminent threat of an all-out regional war. Egypt had closed the Straits of Tiran, an act of war, and the rhetoric from the Arab lands was chilling.

Only 19 years old and isolated internationally, there was genuine concern that the country might not survive. Anxiety was palpable, with mass graves being dug in parks as a grim precaution.

This anxiety-filled period ended on June 5, 1967, when Israel preempted its enemies, destroying the Egyptian Air Force on the ground in a matter of hours and changing the course of history.

That period comes to mind today as the country is again gripped by apprehension, waiting for a response from Iran and Hezbollah – either together, separately, or with other non-state actors in the “axis of resistance” – to the twin high-profile assassinations last week of Hezbollah’s Chief of Staff, Fuad Shukr in Beirut, and Hamas’s leader, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran.

An anti-Israel billboard is seen next to the Iranian flag

It would be wrong to say that the country is panicking – it most definitely is not. Brisk sales on home generators, bottled water, canned tuna, and salami are signs of preparedness, not panic.

Panic comes in the form of people clamoring to leave the country, refusing to leave their homes, or seeing daily life come to a standstill. That is not what Israel is experiencing.

It is, however, experiencing anxiety. And who can blame it? With Hezbollah and Iranian leaders threatening retaliation and with the media full of endless speculation about what kind of retaliation to expect and when, the nervousness is understandable.

The question, however, is whether similar anxiety is being felt in Beirut and Tehran. Are they, too, stocking up on tuna, bottled water, and salami? Are they wondering when Israel will hit, how, and from what direction?

If not, why not?

Something about the current situation feels off. Two arch-terrorists are eliminated – one in Beirut with a US-issued bounty on his head, the other in Tehran without Israel even claiming responsibility – yet Israel is the one adopting a defensive posture, what is called in Hebrew, konnenut sfiga, bracing for an attack.

Instead of Israel being in a defensive posture for eliminating the terrorists, Beirut and Tehran should be the ones worried – since they harbored them.

Even more than this period being reminiscent of the tekufat hahamtana, it is reminiscent of early April after Israel killed Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Mohammad Reza Zahedi in Damascus when Israel braced for an Iranian response that came in the form of over 300 drone, cruise, and ballistic missiles fired at the country.

Watching television broadcasters announce on a Saturday night in mid-April when the drones, missiles, and rockets were scheduled to arrive was like monitoring the arrival screen at Ben-Gurion Airport. It was a bizarre feeling: you saw a bullet headed in your direction and just prayed that the country’s defenses would work and the bullet would either be intercepted or miss its mark. In other words, someone was trying to kill you, and you just prayed they would not succeed.

One problem with the current situation is that it engenders a feeling of powerlessness among the population: waiting for the second shoe to drop, waiting for the inevitable.

But Israel is far from powerless. Rather than just waiting to see what happens – or how many people are killed – before responding, it should already be projecting its power. If it does not want to exacerbate the situation or is being held back by the US from taking further action, the country should at least make it clear that any type of attack will be met with immediate and overwhelming force. Planning for such a response should, as it certainly is, already be well underway.

This time the threats need to be backed up with immediate action, not, as has been the case up until now, with empty rhetoric from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, or Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi about “sending Lebanon back to the Stone Age” – threats issued so often it is doubtful anyone takes them seriously. This time, the response needs to be immediate and devastating.

PROJECTING POWER is also crucial for the country’s morale. Israel is not helpless. It has one of the strongest militaries in the world. The population needs to be reminded of this and see it to maintain psychological well-being. Feeling powerless is detrimental, and this defensive crouch in the face of Iranian and Hezbollah threats saps morale.

The hit on Shukr came only after 12 children and youth were killed by Hezbollah rocket fire at Majdal Shams. Only after this atrocity was Shukr assassinated, and that reinforces a bad pattern: if an attack is “successful” and causes casualties, Israel responds; if not, it will let it slide.

This approach is flawed. Had Israel acted to destroy Hamas’s capabilities after the terrorist organization fired countless rocket attacks since 2001, rather than waiting for a mass casualty event before responding, the current situation might have been quite different.

Why are we on the defensive?

It is a mistake for the country to be in this defensive crouch. It sends the wrong message to Israel’s enemies and to its own people.

That said, there are similarities and differences between the current waiting period and the one that preceded the Six Day War.

First, in 1967, there were doubts about whether the Israeli army could withstand a coordinated attack by neighboring Arab states. Today, while there is concern about potential damage, there is greater confidence in the army’s ability to manage the threat.

Israel’s military capabilities were more limited in 1967; today, it has a much mightier force and the most formidable missile defense system in the world.

Second, in 1967, Israel felt completely isolated in the world, especially after Egypt demanded the removal of UN peacekeeping forces from Sinai, to which the UN acquiesced. There was also skepticism about the level of support Israel could expect from the world.

Today, the US has sent warships to the region to assist Israel in batting drones, rockets, and missiles out of the sky, as it did in April. Additionally, there is coordination with a regional defense alliance established after the Abraham Accords under the leadership of the US Army Central Command (CENTCOM). This represents a significant regional alliance.

Finally, there’s a significant difference in the nature of the existential threat facing Israel now compared to 1967.

Back then, there was a genuine fear that a war could lead to Israel’s destruction – that enemy armies would invade, conquer, and eradicate the Jewish state. Today, while Israel still views itself as engaged in an existential battle, the immediacy and nature of the threat have changed.

The current concern is not that an immediate attack by Iran, Hezbollah, and their allies would destroy the state outright, at least not until Iran gets nuclear capabilities. Instead, the fear centers on the potential for a prolonged war of attrition if Israel fails to decisively defeat or deter its enemies now. Such a war could gradually grind down the country, making life increasingly difficult for its citizens, destroying the economy, and threatening Israel’s long-term viability.

This persistent threat – also an existential one – demands proactive measures. Israel cannot afford to wait passively for attacks. The country must take preemptive action or respond swiftly and decisively to secure its future and survival. 

 

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/defense-news/article-813267?