Displaying posts published in

June 2017

Some European Countries Take Firmer Stance Against Anti-Israel NGOs A glimmer of hope in the darkness. Joseph Puder

The recent terrorist attacks in Europe by Muslim jihadists using car (truck) ramming’s and knifings to kill innocent civilian bystanders may have jolted some European governments to recognize that Israel is indeed “the canary in the coal mine.” The car ramming’s and knifings first occurred in Israel with Palestinian jihadists using this method to kill Israelis. It has been emulated by Jihadists in France, Germany, and Britain. It was however, the regime of Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah and Hamas in Gaza who have used their mosques, media, and educational systems to spread incitement and hate of non-Muslims, particularly Israelis and Jews, in what amounts to blatant anti-Semitism.

Some European governments have finally awakened to the reality that their charities, particularly those funding Palestinian NGO’s, are in essence supporting incitement to hate and anti-Semitism. The Swiss parliament decided to change the country’s policy with regards to funding Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) that are involved in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The new policy would bar funding of organizations that participate in incitement and spreading of hate propaganda, racism and anti-Semitism. The measure was introduced by Christian Imark, a National Council deputy from the conservative Swiss People’s Party. It passed 111 – 78.

The Swiss Council of States or Upper House of Parliament passed the resolution with modest modifications of the bill introduced by MP Christian Imark, which was previously approved in the Lower House of Parliament three months ago. The passing of the bill will result in ending official Swiss funding of NGO’s that participate in incitement against Israel, and use anti-Semitic language

Professor Gerald Steinberg, President of NGO Monitor, a Jerusalem based NGO, which analyzes and reports on the output of the international NGO community, had this to say…This decision marks a fundamental change. When we first approached the Swiss government officials, including the Foreign Ministry, their response was denial. For the first time now, a European country has passed legislation to end funding for NGO’s that are vehicles for incitement and hate speech, specifically including anti-Semitism.”

NGO Monitor has shown that the primary channel for Swiss funding of NGOs involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict is the Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Secretariat, which is a joint funding mechanism involving the governments of Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands. The Secretariat has funded over 40 Israeli and Palestinian NGO’s, including groups that engage in “lawfare” against Israeli officials and companies that do business with Israel. It also funded NGO’s that promote Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) campaigns against Israel, and exploit the false analogy of “apartheid” to vilify Israel in what amounts to anti-Semitic propaganda. The NGO Monitor has moreover, documented the extent to which the Secretariat disbursed over $14 million to NGO’s in 2014-2016 that supported the BDS campaigns. For example, 15 out 24 core funding recipients, and 11 out 20 project funding grantees promoted BDS.

The newly enacted Swiss law has set the criteria against funding NGO’s that have ties to terrorist organizations or promote anti-Semitism, as well as those organizations with connections to BDS. The net result of the law is likely to impact on anti-Israel Palestinian organizations such as Badil, which is the Resource Center for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights, based in Jerusalem. Badil (pronounced in Arabic as Badeel, meaning Alternative) supports Palestinian “right of return” and refuses to recognize Israel as the Jewish state. Badil is also engaged in anti-Israel and anti-Semitic propaganda.

Two Alleged Hezbollah Jihadists Arrested In U.S. Immigration (naturalization) was the key to their terrorist activities. June 19, 2017 Michael Cutler

On June 8, 2017 the Department of Justice issued a press release, Two Men Arrested for Terrorist Activities on Behalf of Hizballah’s Islamic Jihad Organization.

As you will see, terrorists understand that naturalization enables them to act as “Sleepers” and hide in plain sight in the United States and facilitate their movement around the world where they threaten our allies and other countries.

While it is reassuring that these two terror suspects have been taken into custody, charged with an extensive list of terror-related crimes, the criminal complaints, filed in conjunction with this case note the extremely disturbing fact that these defendants as well as others, both known and unknown, committed overt acts in support of Hezbollah that are enumerated in the complaints concerning Samer el Debek, a/k/a Samer Eldebek and Ali Mohamad Kourani, a/k/a Jacob Lewis, a/k/a Daniel

In other words, while these two are out of action, others are still “out there” and may not all be known to law enforcement. That chilling prospect is certainly not conducive to getting a good night’s sleep.

The press releasee, important to read in its entirety, also included this excerpt:

Ali Kourani, 32, of the Bronx, New York, and Samer el Debek, 37, of Dearborn, Michigan, aka, “Samer Eldebek,” were arrested on Thursday, June 1, on charges related to their alleged activities on behalf of Hizballah, a designated foreign terrorist organization.

Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security Dana Boente, Acting U.S. Attorney Joon H. Kim for the Southern District of New York, Assistant Director in Charge William F. Sweeney Jr. of the FBI’s New York Office, and Commissioner James P. O’Neill of the NYPD made the announcement.

Acting U.S. Attorney Kim said: “Today, we announce serious terrorism charges against two men who allegedly trained with and supported the Islamic Jihad Organization, a component of the foreign terrorist organization Hizballah. Recruited as Hizballah operatives, Samer El Debek and Ali Kourani allegedly received military-style training, including in the use of weapons like rocket-propelled grenade launchers and machine guns for use in support of the group’s terrorist mission. At the direction of his Hizballah handlers, El Debek allegedly conducted missions in Panama to locate the U.S. and Israeli Embassies and to assess the vulnerabilities of the Panama Canal and ships in the Canal. Kourani allegedly conducted surveillance of potential targets in America, including military and law enforcement facilities in New York City. Thanks to the outstanding work of the FBI and NYPD, the allegedly destructive designs of these two Hizballah operatives have been thwarted, and they will now face justice in a Manhattan federal court.”

It is important to note that, allegedly, they were both given military training overseas, tasked with conducting surveillance at military bases, law enforcement facilities and critical infrastructure in New York City and elsewhere and with establishing contacts who could provide them with weapons.

Recently I wrote about the ENLIST Act: When “Compassion” Endangers National Security. This ill-conceived legislation would reward illegal aliens with a pathway to lawful immigrant status and put them on the pathway to U.S. citizenship if they serve in the U.S. military.

Aliens who are involved with terrorism could exploit this program to gain access to military bases, military training and military weapons in the United States.

Is Bob Mueller the Establishment’s Stalking Horse? The threats to our constitutional posed by the special counsel investigation. Bruce Thornton ****

The appointment of Robert Mueller, James Comey’s BFF, as special counsel stinks to high heaven. Forget the bipartisan encomia to Mueller’s “ethics” and “professionalism” and “integrity” and all the other usual question-begging praise the elite shower on each other to justify their power and privilege. Such mutual admiration and reciprocal puffery is just one of the ways that DC is “Hollywood for ugly people,” given that both industries are in the business of selling sows’ ears as silk purses. We heard all the same praise about Comey, who has been exposed as self-righteous, conniving, and cowardly, his ethics trimmed to his careerism. He proves that all political appointees and “public servants” should be judged guilty until proven innocent.

And right now Mueller demands particular scrutiny and suspicion. Why should we ordinary citizens, who don’t know him from Adam, believe that he can set aside his friendship with Comey and be fair and objective? Especially after Comey confessed he leaked his memo about Trump’s comments because he “thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel,” and he is likely to be a witness? And mirabile visu, that special counsel just happens to be his close friend? And a Democrat, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, just happens to be the one making the appointment of a man under whom he served from 1990-93? And what about new information that Mueller was interviewed by Trump to replace Comey? Was the topic of why Comey was fired part of the interview, which could make him a witness in his own investigation?

Worst of all, this same DOJ, along with the FBI and maybe Mueller’s team, is still springing leaks that are poisoning the integrity of the nascent investigation. It seems to me that a man of such high integrity as Mueller would have put the investigation on hold until the leakers were rooted out, in order to insure the integrity of the investigation. But then, a man of integrity wouldn’t agree to head up an investigation that involves one of his closest friends, who has an axe to grind against the target of the investigation. Nor is Mueller’s past record of substituting his will for the law reassuring. In 2006 he raided the offices of Representative William Jefferson without getting permission from the legislative branch. He seized documents not pertinent to the investigation, and refused to return them when asked by the executive. As the Wall Street Journal writes, Mueller “let his prosecutorial willfulness interfere with proper constitutional and executive-branch procedure,” a bad habit he shares with Comey.

ABOUT REP. DOUG LAMBORN (R-COLORADO)

Rep. Lamborn is an active conservative patriot ready to repeal Obamacare, change job killing regulations, and one of the greatest supporters of Israel in the American Congress. This column was published in the fall of 2016.
Congressman Lamborn Op-ed: Settlements Are Not the Obstacle to Peace

The argument that “settlements” are the obstacle to peace is based on the notion that if Jews continue to build on the land of Israel, then this will somehow predetermine the final status of borders and will therefore derail the sacrosanct “Two-State Solution.” This worry over predetermining the “final status” ignores two facts: 1) Jewish settlement of its land is legal, and 2) because of Israel’s desire for peace, both Jews and Arabs have settlements.

Millions of Christians, including myself, believe the creation of Israel was prophesied in the Bible. It should be no surprise that many Jews believe this as well. But the argument for the legality of settlements goes beyond faith. Nothing in the Oslo Accords, the Israel-Palestinian Interim Agreement, or U.N. resolutions prohibit Jewish settlement. It was clear in the Balfour Declaration, the San Remo Peace Conference and the Mandate for Palestine, among others, that there was to be the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people on this land.

As a result of the Arab armies’ resounding defeat in the six-day 1967 war, Israel gained all of Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, all of the Sinai Peninsula and what is conventionally known as the West Bank. I prefer the term Judea and Samaria because that is its historical name and the name by which it is known in Israel. The West Bank was Jordan’s name for the land. Jordan’s short-lived annexation and occupation of the land from 1948 to 1967 was never even legally recognized. A state should have sovereignty over land in order to name it.

Jews and Arabs, since before Oslo, both have continued to build and “settle” the land. The State Department of all past administrations since President Lyndon B. Johnson seem determined to maintain a “status quo” based on no new settlements that is as unrealistic as it is impractical. What’s worse is that the pressure to be stagnant is applied only to the Israelis, and specifically the Jewish communities.

The constant refrain that Jewish settlements are an “obstacle to peace” is what led to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent address, which stated that “ethnic cleansing for peace is absurd.” But why is it that the international community and the Obama administration bristle only at the thought of Jewish expansion within its own country? Israel has not only tolerated but incorporated the 1.75 million Arabs within Israel, where they are entitled to become citizens, vote, serve in the Knesset, armed forces and even the Supreme Court. In contrast, the international community pronounces the idea of 420,000 Jews continuing to live in Judea and Samaria an “obstacle to peace.”

In addition, it is utterly hypocritical that no one makes the slightest peep about Arabs who continue to live, build, and settle the land — with international funding, no less.

There are approximately 150 Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. Since 1967, Israel’s Jewish population has increased from about 2.3 million to about 6.1 million as of 2014. Israel has every right, and in fact a duty, to provide infrastructure and housing for its increasing population. Do not forget that this is the only Jewish homeland in the world.

There are 350 Arab communities in the Palestinian Authority-controlled territories and between 1.7 and 1.8 million Arabs living there. This number is in addition to the approximately 1.75 million Arabs living within Israel as citizens, not including Jerusalem. It must be noted that in the 350 Arab communities in the Palestinian Authority, and of course also in Gaza, there are no Jews living among them.

Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.District 5): ‘Nothing’ Will Make Palestinians ‘More Conciliatory’ Toward Israel By Nicholas Ballas

WASHINGTON – Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) told PJM that “nothing,” including President Trump’s decision to delay moving the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, is going to make the Palestinians “be more conciliatory” toward Israel.

Trump, who pledged to move the embassy during the presidential campaign, decided not to order its relocation at this time.

“President Trump made this decision to maximize the chances of successfully negotiating a deal between Israel and the Palestinians, fulfilling his solemn obligation to defend America’s national security interests,” White House press secretary Sean Spicer said in a statement.

Lamborn said the embassy should not be “linked” to the peace negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and Israel.

“I was sure hoping he was going to follow through and I’m disappointed that he signed a waiver. He hinted at the fact that he might be letting it go through the next time around or in the future, and I sure hope he does that. I think it’s futile to refrain from doing the right thing in the hopes that it makes the Palestinians more willing to negotiate; they’ve unfortunately taken a hard line up until now and nothing will make them be more conciliatory,” he said.

“So let’s just do what we have to do, let’s just do the right thing. Let the chips fall where they will and then hopefully have negotiations with them in the future, but do not link the capital and the embassy to negotiations,” he added.

Lamborn argued that relocating the embassy to Jerusalem would actually help the peace process move forward.

“You can even make the argument that by showing strength and resolve to do the right thing, even though there will be an outcry, that strengthens the position of the U.S. and Israel to send a message that, ‘Hey you better start negotiating or the train is leaving the station,’” he said. “I don’t see real hope for breakthroughs in the Middle East until the Palestinians have a change of heart and I don’t know what would cause that.”

The Department of Justice is Privileging Mosques By Karen Lugo

The Department of Justice has become an advocate for the establishment of mosques in America. It is as if there were some congressional affirmative action mandate. The DOJ’s own statistics reveal a sharp escalation in intervention efforts on behalf of Islamic complainants, mostly involving mosque disputes with local zoning authorities. Alarmingly, these interventions reveal a pattern of generous settlements that benefit mosques while bypassing municipal laws and disregarding legitimate neighborhood concerns.https://amgreatness.com/2017/06/16/department-justice-privileging-mosques/

During the Obama Presidency, DOJ lawyers ran roughshod over local officials, as long as the complaining party was a mosque. Trump’s Justice Department must reverse these tendencies.

The atmosphere of DOJ intimidation cannot be overstated. Negotiated settlements between the DOJ, local zoning authorities, and mosque officials take place against a backdrop of DOJ threatening long, prohibitively costly litigation. The drive for ever more concessions, and more cash, confronts communities whose small governments cannot compete with DOJ’s $28 billion budget and legions of lawyers. Importantly, DOJ treats these settlements as if they were precedents even though, by sidestepping the courts, the settlements bypass judicial precedents that could protect legitimate community interests.

In two recent cases, mosque applicants in Sterling Heights (Michigan) and Basking Ridge (New Jersey), received cash settlements because they were denied permits according to local zoning procedures. These settlements failed to protect vital neighborhood interests in traffic safety, parking limits, and livability concerns.

Just one example of neighborhood hardships that result from deferential permit agreements, the Dar al Farooq mosque in Bloomington, Minnesota is currently holding services for the entire month of Ramadan with overflow parking and lighted lots until 1:00 and 3:00 a.m.—in a residential neighborhood.

The Sterling Heights settlement is illustrative of abusive DOJ meddling.

The atmosphere of DOJ intimidation cannot be overstated. Negotiated settlements between the DOJ, local zoning authorities, and mosque officials take place against a backdrop of DOJ threatening long, prohibitively costly litigation.

The mosque had applied to build a 28,000 square foot facility on 4.35 acres of land. The building’s dome was to be 58 feet high and the minarets 66 feet high. The surrounding neighborhood has been settled by many Chaldean Christians who fled Iraq and Islamist oppression. An imposing Islamic structure was not met with enthusiasm to put it mildly. But federal law focuses on whether the decision-makers are biased. It demands that local government officials give all sides equal consideration. It does not require that neighborhood residents greet this kind of application with enthusiasm.

The proposed mosque for Sterling Heights, Michigan.

In this case, there were many legitimate concerns that the local planning commission investigated, concerns that contributed to the unanimous conclusion that the mosque was ineligible for the indicated property. Indeed, the major disputes arose because mosque representatives provided incomplete information and they were unwilling to address zoning concerns.

Trump’s Way Out of the Progressive Labyrinth by Victor Davis Hanson

In every single week of the Trump presidency, the investigators and attorneys of FBI Director James Comey or, subsequently, of special counsel Robert Mueller, have leaked information that President Donald Trump was under investigation for either colluding with the Russians or obstructing justice—allegations so far without any substantiating evidence.https://amgreatness.com/2017/06/19/trumps-way-progressive-labyrinth/

In the case of Comey, we now know that his office or sympathetic third-parties leaked to the press false stories that Trump was under FBI investigation at precisely the time that the careerist Comey was privately reassuring the president himself that he was in fact not being investigated.
The appointment of Mueller was a concession to opposition demands that Trump appoint a Lawrence Walsh-type Special Prosecutor. The Comey-Mueller investigations and leaks occur simultaneously with House Intelligence member Adam Schiff’s passive-aggressive and often pompous announcements of evidence of Russian collusion—including raising the specter of a Grand Jury investigation—that are never followed by any evidence.

Since January 2017, the Congress ceased being a legislative body. It is now a Star-chamber court determined to decapitate the presidency.

Never in the history of the republic have there been so many legislative and political simultaneous efforts to 1) sabotage the Electoral College, 2) sue to overturn the presidential vote in key swing states, 3) boycott the Inauguration, 4) systematically block presidential appointments, 5) surveille, unmask, and leak classified or privileged information about the elected president, 6) nullify federal law at the state and local level, 7) sue to remove the president by invoking the Emoluments Clause, 8) declare Trump unfit under the 25th Amendments, 9) demand recusals from his top aides, 10) cherry-pick sympathetic judges to block presidential executive orders, 11) have a prior administration’s residual appointees subvert their successor, and 12) promise impending impeachment.

And that is only the political effort to remove the president.

Simultaneously, the media, Hollywood, popular culture, street theater, and the universities hand-in-glove seek to remove Trump from office through the dissemination of fake news as well as deep state leaks—coarsening the culture to such a degree that Trump is reduced to an impotent pariah.

In terms of losing state legislatures and governorships, the Congress, the Supreme Court and the presidency, the Obama progressive project has all but ruined the Democratic Party. And with such catastrophic losses of political power, the left grows less introspective and only more venomous—as if invective can do what appeals to voters have not.

The hydra-headed Resistance issues both explicit and metaphorical threats of presidential assassination, descends to scatological and obscene smears, cheers on campus disruptions and street theater, and persists in constant harangues in the press that Trump is unfit to remain President.

Why the unhinged furor?

Mueller’s Real Mandate By Jared E. Peterson

The Washington D.C. nomenklatura advanced forward last week with its slow-moving coup d’état against America’s constitutionally elected President.

But even after the federal bureaucracy’s further progress toward undoing the 2016 election, I confess to a faint hope that Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III — supposed embodiment of upper class, non-partisan, lawyerly virtue — might actually conduct a fair, focused and swift inquiry into the matter assigned him.

In the end, though, the sensible old lawyer’s voice in my head whispers that this hope is more pipedream than prediction of events.

Here’s the latest state of affairs, no doubt soon to be out of date:

After staffing up during the week preceding last with heavy Democrat contributing lawyers of dubious objectivity, last week Mr. Mueller appeared to abandon, or at least heavily downgrade, the alleged raison d’etre for his office — investigating the Russia collusion fantasy. Now, per the Washington Post — always eager to provide a stage for someone leaking ill about the President — Mr. Mueller will focus on whether the President “obstructed justice” and on the business dealings of the President’s close advisor and son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

So already, almost before his army of lawyers has swung into battle, the Special Counsel’s inquiry has metastasized from its original focus — sleuthing out whether President Trump or his campaign “colluded” with the Russian government during the election — into entirely new subjects.

Keep in mind the language of Mr. Mueller’s assignment, as articulated on May 17 by Rod Rosenstein: To investigate:

“any links and/or coordination between Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump, and any matters that arose or may arise directly from that investigation.”

The new subjects of Mueller’s inquiry are not only remote from that recent but apparently forgotten assignment, but they begin to sketch the outline of a lawyer who is stocking up on matters of inquiry for a long-haul investigation.

In sum, as each week passed following Mr. Mueller’s May 17 appointment, the man has behaved less like an independent counsel and more like the designated agent for America’s Trump-despising Washington-New York would-be rulers — like someone who knows he is charged with providing a colorable legal predicate for a long-ago decision by America’s elites to destroy the President and prevent him from serving out the term he was accorded by America’s electorate and Constitution.

As of, today, Monday June 19, 2017, here is where matters stand for the President of the United States:

Though constitutionally and decisively elected to office, President Trump must carry out his duties — that include sole responsibility for protecting the American homeland in a world where North Korea fires missiles every month and Islamic fanatics commit atrocities on a near daily basis — while a former FBI Director, unrestrained by budget, personnel, duration of authority, or substantive area of inquiry, deliberately harasses, hounds, and distracts him and his appointed officials while attempting to find something — after last week, apparently anything — that could be twisted into a warrant for the President’s impeachment and removal from office.

Scorching the Earth By David Prentice

“Watch out that no poisonous root of bitterness grows up to trouble you, corrupting many.”

That’s a compelling verse – call it a proverb – from the New Testament. It’s a great admonition for all of us. It’s one the left will pay for not knowing.

During the early days of the Clinton impeachment, then-“journalist” George Stephanopoulos gave an insider threat to the world, clearly from the Clintons. He said that if Republicans continued their attempts against them, the earth would be scorched. If they went down, everyone else would, too.

Here is the exchange, from 1998.

Sam Donaldson: “Are you suggesting for a moment that what they’re beginning to say is that if you investigate this too much, we’ll put all your dirty linen right on the table? Every member of the Senate? Every member of the press corps?”

George Stephanopoulos: “Absolutely. The president said he would never resign, and I think some around him are willing to take everybody down with him.”

It is now safe to say the Democrats have followed that scorched earth promise, that they now fully embrace the Clinton bitterness and corruption. It’s beyond anything we have witnessed.

Take a look around. This absurd quest to dehumanize Trump, to form narrative after narrative fabricated on lies to try to destroy him, to destroy his ability to govern, to make him into a criminal, comes from the bitter wells of the Clintons. After all, he ended Hillary’s (and Bill’s) dream of regaining the Clintons’ glory. Make no mistake: the Clintons and their team are ravaging everything in a concerted effort to punish anything or anyone that took them down. Trump is the symbol, but anyone moderate, or right of center, is now the target. We, all of us on the right, are the target as well. Just like in Stephy’s quote.

Look at the poisoned fruit they have grown. Any celebrity that dared even hint to give Trump a chance was destroyed by the liberal Twitter-verse, having to grovel at the feet of the left. Multiple episodes of violence have erupted against non-leftist speakers on campus. Any attempt by any congressional Democrats to help Trump is seen as treason to the cause, provoking virtually all of their party members to ever angrier statements and over-the-top efforts to bring Trump down. Kathy Griffin feigns cutting off the head of Trump as a comedy act, and it took 24 whole hours (rather than minutes) to fire her. Violence from the left is condoned and encouraged, and no Democrat adult has come against it until today.

Israel Gives Secret Aid to Syrian Rebels Fighters near Golan Heights in Syria receive cash and humanitarian help By Rory Jones and Noam Raydan see note please

Huh? How is it a “secret” if the WSJ has a headline about it? rsk

Israel has been regularly supplying Syrian rebels near its border with cash as well as food, fuel and medical supplies for years, a secret engagement in the enemy country’s civil war aimed at carving out a buffer zone populated by friendly forces.

The Israeli army is in regular communication with rebel groups and its assistance includes undisclosed payments to commanders that help pay salaries of fighters and buy ammunition and weapons, according to interviews with about half a dozen Syrian fighters. Israel has established a military unit that oversees the support in Syria—a country that it has been in a state of war with for decades—and set aside a specific budget for the aid, said one person familiar with the Israeli operation.

Israel has in the past acknowledged treating some 3,000 wounded Syrians, many of them fighters, in its hospitals since 2013 as well as providing humanitarian aid such as food and clothing to civilians near the border during winter. But interviews with half a dozen rebels and three people familiar with Israel’s thinking reveal that the country’s involvement is much deeper and more coordinated than previously known and entails direct funding of opposition fighters near its border for years.

“Israel stood by our side in a heroic way,” said Moatasem al-Golani, spokesman for the rebel group Fursan al-Joulan, or Knights of the Golan. “We wouldn’t have survived without Israel’s assistance.”

Israel’s aim is to keep Iran-backed fighters allied to the Syrian regime, such as the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, away from the 45-mile stretch of border on the divided Golan Heights, the three people said.

But its support for rebels risks heightening tension with President Bashar al-Assad’s government, which has long accused Israel of helping rebel groups. Mr. Assad has said Israel supports rebel groups and launches airstrikes in Syrian territory to undermine his hold on power. Israel has said it doesn’t favor any one outcome in the civil war.

Israel captured part of the Golan Heights from Syria in the 1967 war and later annexed it—a move the international community doesn’t recognize. CONTINUE AT SITE