Displaying posts categorized under

ISRAEL

The Third Lebanon War: Not A Matter Of ‘If,’ But ‘When’ Israel reflects on history and weighs its options. Ari Lieberman

In the weeks preceding the Six-Day War, Israel was faced with ever increasing existential challenges which warranted resolute action. Israel’s generals correctly argued to the political echelon that with each passing day, Israel’s strategic position became more compromised. The situation was particularly acute on Israel’s southern border with Egypt where the Egyptian army deployed seven divisions including three armored divisions. Official Arab government pronouncements, with ever increasing shrill and belligerence, made clear that the intention was to wipe Israel off the map.

On June 5th 1967, Israel launched a preemptive strike aimed at destroying the Arab armies before they could launch their own attack (some historians have argued that the Arabs fired the first salvo by closing the Tiran Straits). Codenamed Operation Focus, the Israeli Air Force implemented its well-rehearsed plan of action and struck first, catching most of the Arab air forces on the ground and destroying the bulk of them. Contemporaneous with the air assault, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) sprang into action, quickly routing the Arab armies in a matter of days.

It was a complete and decisive Israeli victory with few parallels in military history. Israel’s success in the Six Day War was attributed to many factors but chief among them was the fact that Israel had robbed the enemy of the initiative. Had the Arab’s attacked first, Israel would have still emerged triumphant but at a much higher cost in terms of men and material.

The doctrine of preemption is one that is ingrained in Israel’s military thinking. Israel is a small country with little strategic depth and a vulnerable civilian population. Preemption, the concept of striking the enemy first when there is a clear, present and imminent danger coupled with intent to injure, is a strategically sound doctrine and this is especially true in Israel’s case given its unique vulnerabilities, regional challenges and genocidal enemies.

In addition to exercising its right of military preemption, Israel has also acted preventative manner. Conceptually, this doctrine differs slightly from preemption as the threat while real, is not necessarily imminent. In 1981 and 2007, Israel destroyed the nuclear facilities of Iraq and Syria – both implacable foes – after intelligence confirmed that those facilities were capable of manufacturing atomic bombs. Israel has also struck Sudan and Syria dozens of times in efforts to thwart weapons transfers to Hamas and Hezbollah.

Hezbollah is currently mired in Syria’s civil war with 1/3 of its forces actively engaged in Syria to prop up Assad. In light of this, most Israeli experts agree that the probability of war breaking out in the near future is low. The last thing Hezbollah needs now is a two-front war. Nevertheless, Hezbollah’s raison d’être is to serve the Islamic Republic’s interests and do battle with Israel. A showdown with the terror group is therefore inevitable. The only question is “when,” not “if.”

Confluences of several factors make the probability of war more likely in the intermediate term. First, thanks to Iranian, Russian and Hezbollah assistance, Assad’s grip on power is the strongest it’s been since the beginning of the civil war while rebel groups opposing Assad are divided and often battle each other. This development will enable Hezbollah to shift its emphasis and resources toward Israel.

Second, though Hezbollah has suffered substantial casualties since it began its military entanglement in Syria – at least 2,000 of its members have been killed – the group has emerged militarily stronger. It has been lavishly equipped by Iran with modern weapons, including T-72 tanks, weaponized drones, Konkurs anti-tank missiles and Yakhont anti-ship cruise missiles, and thanks to the Russians, improved its electronic warfare and special operations capabilities.

Third, in 2006, Hezbollah was believed to have possessed 11,000 rockets and missile of various calibers and guidance systems. Today, Hezbollah is believed to possess between 100,000 and 150,000 missiles and rockets. To place things in proper perspective, that figure is more than the combined arsenal of all NATO countries, with the exception of the United States. Moreover, with Iran’s assistance, the terror group has managed to build subterranean factories buried 50 meters below ground. These factories are capable of producing everything from small arms to Fateh-110/M-600 surface-to-surface missiles, making Hezbollah partially self-sufficient in arms, a capability that it lacked in 2006. If Iranian claims are to be believed, the Fateh-110 has a range of 300km and carries a payload of 500kg. The missile is believed to possess an accuracy level of 100 m CEP, which means that there’s a 50/50 chance that the missile will fall within 100 meters of its intended target. Hezbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah has made clear on numerous occasions that his missiles would target a vulnerable ammonia plant in Haifa, Israel’s nuclear research facility in Dimona and other critical civilian infrastructure in any war with Israel.

NIDRA POLLER: TEMPLE WALL PSYCHODRAMA

Act 1 July 14th: three Arab Israelis pick up weapons previously stored by an accomplice in the al Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount and gun down two Israeli Druze policemen. Being courageous jihadis, they shoot the policemen in the back. Israeli authorities step in where the Waqf, guardians of the mosques, had failed to exercise due diligence. They bar entry to the Temple Mount, gather evidence, install metal detectors to prevent further killing-this type of crime often comes in waves-and then reopen the Temple Mount. This normal exercise of Israeli sovereignty provokes violence in Jerusalem and recriminations from Western media onlookers that echo the war cry: Israel is not respecting the status quo. Prime Minister Netanyahu remarks that stashing weapons in the mosque is a violation of the status quo, but chronology loses its bearing whenever Islam is concerned. Steps taken to restore that status quoi are presented by Western media and commentators as provocative measures that led naturally to rioting, murderous attacks, and diplomatic aggression.

Thousands of Muslims prostrate themselves outside the gates, defiantly refusing to pass through the metal detectors. In between prayer sessions they unleash their fury on law enforcement, throwing firebombs, firecrackers, allahu akhbars, and threats of extermination. The genocidal war cry khaybar khaybar ya yahud, jaish muhammad sawfa ya’ud! ricochets in the steep narrow lanes of Jerusalem’s old city. We know that tune. It was on the hit parade in the summer of 2014 when our local jihadis stomped through the streets of Paris bellowing khaybar khaybar (“Remember Khaybar [dirty] Jews, Mohamed’s army is coming [to exterminate you] again.”) [cf Poller, The Black Flag of Jihad Stalks la République]

Act 2: our French media, undoubtedly guided and fed by Agence France Presse, report fulminatingly on the distress caused to Muslim worshippers by the installation of metal detectors at entries to l’esplanade des mosquées [mosque compound]. Commentators, never at a loss for words, lock into default position: The problem is the colonies. The problem is far and further right wing Netanyahu, gobbling up Palestinian land, making peace impossible. The problem is, he won’t make a 2-state solution.

N.B. factual mistakes, careless mistakes, incomplete information and sloppy reporting of every sort are the hallmark of news makers. However, honest mistakes are random. Deliberately failing to mention that the two Israeli policemen were shot with weapons smuggled into the al Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount is not sloppy reporting. It’s a lie.

The metal detectors become an arbitrary gesture of humiliation and, far worse, they’re one step away from the total destruction of the al Aqsa mosque. Yes, our ladies and gentlemen of respectable media automatically identify with the most bloodthirsty of the ranting raging rioters. They integrate the rage and the rationale. It’s so natural they don’t miss a step. Metal detectors, they’re tearing down the mosque, the Israelis have turned this into a religious war, au secours, help! What about the hundreds of thousands of Muslims in Israel and the disputed territories that are not chanting khaybar khaybar kill the Jews? Enlightened Muslims publish op-eds denouncing the counterproductive uprising fueled by Islamic extremists. Our opinion makers don’t seem to be aware of their existence. Seventeen years since the al Dura blood libel triggered an unending wave of atrocities, the sky is still falling, the mosque is in danger, and kill the Jews seems like a reasonable response to a few metal detectors.

The State Department’s Report on Terrorism Should Be Discredited by A. Z. Mohamed

At the top of the list of supposed “continued drivers of violence” in the Palestinian Authority (PA) is an assertion even more fabricated: “a lack of hope in achieving Palestinian statehood…”

It is not “lack of hope” that drives Palestinian violence. On the contrary, it is precisely the propping up of hope — that intimidation and terrorism work and deliver concessions, such as UNESCO’s fraudulent rulings that try to strip the Jews of their history, or Israel’s recent removal of metal detectors and cameras from the Temple Mount — that keeps the Palestinians on the offensive.

The report’s allegations are perceptibly false. The PA has absolute control over the content of school books, print and broadcast media pieces, and sermons in mosques, all of which are rife with blatant anti-Semitism and glorification of terrorism and terrorists. This means that the incitement to spill Jewish blood is approved by the PA leadership, when not directly planted by it.

A newly-released report on terrorism by the US State Department so completely distorts the situation in Israel and the Palestinian Authority — the areas it refers to as “the West Bank and Gaza, and Jerusalem” — that one can assume the rest of its findings are equally inaccurate.

To set the stage for its unfounded and biased claim that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has been engaged in a serious effort to combat terrorism, the report equates “extremist” Palestinians, who “continued to conduct acts of violence and terrorism in the West Bank and Jerusalem,” with “[e]xtremist Israelis, including settlers, [who] continued to conduct acts of violence as well as ‘price tag’ attacks (property crimes and violent acts by extremist Jewish individuals and groups in retaliation for activity they deemed anti-settlement) in the West Bank and Jerusalem.”

At the top of the list of supposed “continued drivers of violence” in the Palestinian Authority is an assertion even more fabricated:

“a lack of hope in achieving Palestinian statehood, Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank, settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, the perception that the Israeli government was changing the status quo on the Haram Al Sharif/Temple Mount, and IDF tactics that the Palestinians considered overly aggressive.”

It is not “lack of hope” that drives Palestinian violence. On the contrary, it is precisely the propping up of hope — that intimidation and terrorism work and deliver concessions, such as UNESCO’s fraudulent rulings that try to strip the Jews of their history, or Israel’s recent removal of metal detectors and cameras from the Temple Mount — that keeps the Palestinians on the offensive.

The metal detectors and cameras had been put there by the Israelis to provide security for the Muslims who worship there, as well as to prevent weapons being brought in with which to attack Jews, or so that the al-Aqsa mosque can be destroyed and the blame then falsely placed on Israel.

To arrive at this conclusion, which essentially holds Israel accountable for Palestinian violence, the report falsely describes Mahmoud Abbas as a leader who has been committed to counter-terrorism efforts and works tirelessly to thwart the “lone-wolf” stabbing attacks that were rampant from the end of 2015 and throughout 2016.

The report states:

“The PA has taken significant steps during President Abbas’ tenure (2005 to date) to ensure that official institutions in the West Bank under its control do not create or disseminate content that incites violence. While some PA leaders have made provocative and inflammatory comments, the PA has made progress in reducing official rhetoric that could be considered incitement to violence. Explicit calls for violence against Israelis, direct exhortations against Jews, and categorical denials by the PA of the possibility of peace with Israel are rare and the leadership does not generally tolerate it.”

This is perceptibly false. The Palestinian Authority has absolute control over the content of school books, print and broadcast media pieces, and sermons in mosques, all of which are rife with blatant anti-Semitism and glorification of terrorism and terrorists. This means that the bombardment of incitement to spill Jewish blood is approved by the PA leadership, when not directly planted by it.

The only terrorism that Abbas actively tries to prevent is that committed by members of Hamas against the Fatah faction, which he heads. It is solely this security cooperation with Israel that Abbas seeks, participates in and boasts about before the international community — although he repeatedly threatens to put a stop to it, as he did recently over the placement of metal detectors on the Temple Mount.

Israel vs. Jordan Why Israel needs to be tougher. Mordechai Kedar

Reprinted from en.mida.org.il.

In 1994, Israel signed a peace agreement with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. In this agreement, Israel granted “special status” (Article 9) to the Jordanian government on the Temple Mount (‘Muslim Holy Shrines in Jerusalem’). This concession to the Jordanians was totally unnecessary since King Hussein needed peace with Israel more than Israel needed it with Jordan, and a peace agreement was achievable without it. Even ignoring this, what normal country grants another country ‘special status’ in its capital city and in the place most holy to its nation. This special status that recognizes a degree of Jordanian sovereignty on the Temple Mount has been disastrous for Israel and the devastating effects of this blunder have played themselves out once again in the wake of the latest terrorist attack on the Temple Mount, where two Israeli border policeman were killed.

The biggest mistake Israel has made with regard to Jordan is the ‘insurance policy’ it has given to the Hashemite Kingdom for the past 23 years under the baseless assumption that Jordan can deliver on its part. This insurance policy is that Israel would protect the Hashemite Kingdom if in danger of being overthrown, and in turn, Jordan would serve as a buffer zone protecting Israel from the potential dangers threatening it from the east: Iraq falling apart, Iran and the Ayatollahs, ISIS and Al-Qaeda. As a result, the Hashemite Kingdom, whose origins are in Saudi Arabia, continues to rely on the minority Bedouin population to rule the majority Palestinian population, which thus prevents the natural process of Jordan becoming a country which is ruled by the Palestinian majority, or Jordan being split into a Palestinian and Bedouin state.

The continued rule of the Hashemite Kingdom in Jordan and the failure to establish a Palestinian state there is the source of the demand to establish a Palestinian State in Israel’s heartland, which would extend over the Judean and Samarian hills, the ancient homeland and birthplace of the Jewish people. This proposed Palestinian state in Israel’s heartland would have the greater part of Israel in its crosshairs, from just south of Tiberias in the North to Be’er Sheva and Dimona in the South, and along the coastal plains from Haifa in the North to Ashkelon in the South. All of these areas would be well within the range of Palestinian missiles, mortar shells, field intelligence and more. In short, Israel would be establishing a Palestinian state – a strategic threat within its borders – so that it can achieve an uncertain tactical achievement outside of it. Is there any absurdity greater than this?

Israel handling of the security measures it instituted on the Temple Mount vis-à-vis Jordan should have been completely different. Instead of surrendering to Jordanian demands and removing all the security measures, Israel needed to tell Jordan in no uncertain terms: “The terrorist attack on July 14th proves that you are not living up to your obligations concerning the Temple Mount, and thus you have violated the article in the peace agreement that grants Jordan a special status on the Temple Mount, which Israel gave to your father in 1994. Furthermore, regarding , you have one hour to return the Israeli embassy security guard, that defended himself in Amman after being stabbed, unharmed to Israel, and until he is returned Israel will withhold transferring the tens of millions of cubic meters of water that it committed to your father in the peace agreement.” It is the type of message that Israel must convey to the King of Jordan, especially in light of his leading the anti-Israel UNESCO resolution regarding Jerusalem. Israel cannot allow a country that has a peace agreement with it to act that way.

But it’s worse than that.

When Israel placed magnometers and security cameras at the Temple Mount entrance about two weeks ago, the King of Jordan, Abdullah, contacted America and European countries and warned that the security measures Israel implemented on the Temple Mount could potentially undermine his government. Since Jordan has a special status regarding Jerusalem, Israel’s actions will spark the rage of Muslims in Jordan and throughout Middle East against his government, because his inaction to influence Israeli policy on the Temple Mount would be seen by the Muslim world as collaborating with Israel. Therefore, in order for Abdullah to maintain his already unstable government, he demanded that the Israeli government remove the security measures it had recently installed on the Temple Mount. This request is unthinkable, and one wonders how Abdullah musters the chutzpah to demand such a request which implies that Israel should endanger its own police and citizens, so that he can remain secure in the monarchy inherited from his great grandfather who received it illegitimately from the British after World War I.

“The Battle over Jerusalem Has Just Begun” by Bassam Tawil

The Palestinians, feeling triumphant now that Israel has complied with their demand to remove the metal detectors and security cameras, have been clarifying that it is only the first step in their fight to eradicate any Israeli presence in the Old City of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount.

They admit that this is a battle over sovereignty on the Temple Mount and Jerusalem. For the Palestinians, the real battle is over who controls Jerusalem and its holy sites. The real battle, in their eyes, is over the Jews’ right to live in their own state in the Middle East. Many Palestinians have still not come to terms with Israel’s right to exist, and that is what this battle is really about.

The Palestinians have added it up just right. In their own words, they aim at an escalation of violence because they believe that what Israel did is the first step toward even more concessions and even further retreat.

The Palestinian “victory” celebrations that took place after Israel removed metal detectors and surveillance cameras from the entrances to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem bode badly for the future of stability and peace in the Middle East.

To the Palestinians and many Arabs and Muslims, the Israeli move is viewed as a sign of weakness. In their eyes, the removal of the security cameras and metal detectors is capitulation, pure and simple.

How do we know this? Easy: look at the Palestinian response. Rather than acknowledging the conciliatory nature of the Israeli government’s decision, aimed at easing tensions and preventing bloodshed and violence, the Palestinians are demanding more.

As far as the Palestinians are concerned, the controversy over the Israeli security measures at the Temple Mount, which came after three terrorists murdered two Israeli police officers at the holy site on July 14, is part of a larger battle with Israel.

We have reached a new level in this discourse: Palestinian Authority (PA) officials are now openly admitting that it is not the metal detectors or security cameras that are at issue.

Instead, they admit, this is a battle over sovereignty on the Temple Mount and Jerusalem. For the Palestinians, the real battle is over who controls Jerusalem and its holy sites. The real battle, in their eyes, is over the Jews’ right to live in their own state in the Middle East. Many Palestinians have still not come to terms with Israel’s right to exist, and that is what this battle is really about.

The Palestinians, feeling triumphant now that Israel has complied with their demand to remove the metal detectors and security cameras, have been clarifying that it is only the first step in their fight to eradicate any Israeli presence in the Old City of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount.

No one explained this Palestinian position better than the PA foreign minister, Riad Malki, who announced on July 27 that the Palestinians consider the Israeli decision to dismantle the metal detectors and security cameras as surrender. He also confirmed what many Israeli and Palestinian political analysts have been saying for the past few weeks — that the conflict over Israel’s security measures was merely an excuse used by the Palestinians to force Israel to make political and territorial concessions.

In a speech before the Arab League foreign ministers in Cairo, Malki explained: “The issue is not metal detectors or cameras, but who is in charge and who has sovereignty over the Al-Aqsa Mosque.” Malki went on to explain that the Palestinians do not see the recent conflict as a security issue, but rather as a purely political matter. “The battle over Jerusalem has just begun,” he said, adding that the wave of Palestinian protests over the Israeli security measures had succeeded in “thwarting” Israel’s “conspiracy” to change the historical and legal status quo at the Temple Mount.

Israel anti-boycott bill does not violate free speech By Eugene Kontorovich

The Israel Anti-Boycott Act is a minor updating of a venerable statute that has been at the center of the U.S. consensus on Israel policy — the laws designed to counteract Arab states’ boycott of Israel by barring Americans from joining such boycotts.

Now, the American Civil Liberties Union has dropped a bomb: It says the proposed actunconstitutionally abridges free speech. Although the ACLU is only lobbying against the current bill, its argument is against the entire system of federal anti-boycott law, including the anti-boycott provisions of the 1977 Export Administration Act, a consequence that the group seems unwilling to admit (see Eugene Volokh’s post). Indeed, the ACLU’s position would make many U.S. sanctions against foreign countries (Iran, Russia, Cuba, etc.) unconstitutional.

The ACLU’s claims are as weak as they are dramatic. I should note that I have been involved withstate-level “anti-BDS” (boycott, sanctions and divestment) legislation and have advised on some of the federal bills. Although well-crafted measures avoid First Amendment problems, there are ways such laws can get it wrong, and I have been open in calling out measures that go too far. (For example, the application of such laws to prevent a Roger Waters concert is quite problematic.)

Current law prohibits U.S. entities from participating in or cooperating with international boycotts organized by foreign countries. These measures, first adopted in 1977, were explicitly aimed at the Arab states’ boycott of Israel, but its language is far broader, not mentioning any particular countries.

Since then, these laws and the many detailed regulations pursuant to them, have been the basis for a large number of investigations and prosecutions of companies for boycott activity. The laws are administered by a special unit of the Commerce Department, the Office of Antiboycott Compliance.

The existing laws cover not just participation in a boycott, but also facilitating the boycott by answering questions or furnishing information, when done in furtherance of the boycott. For example, telling a Saudi company, “You know, we don’t happen to do business with the Zionist entity” would be prohibited. It is no defense for one who participates in the Arab League boycott to argue that they happen to hate Israel anyway. Nor is it a defense to argue that one loves Israel and is simply being pressured by Arab businesses. It is the conduct that matters, not the ideology.It is easy to invent absurdly broad readings of statutes that would make them unconstitutional. The real question is if the statute would ever be applied and interpreted in that way. With the current bill, one need not wonder how it would be enforced: There are decades of administrative regulations and enforcement policies under the existing law that would apply to the new one. These all confine the prohibition to commercial conduct.

Such updating of the 1977 anti-boycott measures could not be more timely. Several United Nations agencies have initiated secondary boycotts of Israel — that is, boycotting non-Israeli companiesbecause of their connection to the Jewish state. In support of such secondary boycotts, the U.N. Human Rights Council is preparing a blacklist of Israeli-linked companies (using such a broad definition of “supporting settlements” that the blacklist could sweep in any Israeli-linked firm).

The UNHRC’s blacklist of Israeli companies is unprecedented — the organization has never made lists of private companies or entities for any purpose. Indeed, as has been shown in a recent report I authored, the Human Rights Council clearly does not regard businesses “supporting” settlements to be a human rights issue except when Israel is involved.

The blacklist is not a mere research project. It will serve as the basis for economic action against the listed firms. Indeed, the UNHRC has not been coy about its motives; a year after passing the resolution calling for the database, it passed a resolution that in effect calls for a partial boycottagainst Israel. (Existing federal boycott regulations make clear that a regulated boycott call need not be explicit.) It is quite likely that U.N. agencies will begin avoiding business with companies because of those companies’ business with Israel.

Western Media Eliminating ‘Temple Mount’ By Susan D. Harris

“In short, we are to think of it primarily as a sacred Islamic Jerusalem shrine that the Jews falsely lay claim to. In order to accomplish this, the term “Temple Mount” must be stealthily eradicated.”

There is a subtle repositioning in process by the mainstream media to influence the way people think – or don’t think — about the Temple Mount. In short, we are to think of it primarily as a sacred Islamic Jerusalem shrine that the Jews falsely lay claim to. In order to accomplish this, the term “Temple Mount” must be stealthily eradicated.

Drudge Report first caught my attention with the July 14th headline: “2 Israeli policemen killed in shooting near Jerusalem shrine.” I wondered, “What Jerusalem shrine?” Surely if it were the Temple Mount it would say so. The headline linked to an AP story which told me in the first paragraph that it was a “major Jerusalem shrine,” (at this point I wondered why they were hedging about the location.) The second paragraph told me it was a “sacred site” … which in American lingo is starting to sound like an Indian burial ground somewhere in the Old West. The next thing I read is that it is known to Muslims as the “Noble Sanctuary.” Huh. I guess that would be…yep…now the article tells me it’s known to Jews as the “Temple Mount.” There you have it! It took three paragraphs but the Associated Press finally connected this vague sacred site to the Jewish people — after first telling us it is revered by Muslims.

The same day, British daily The Guardian told us by their second paragraph that the attack occurred “in the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif complex.” Before the paragraph is over however, Muslims again get first dibs as it’s described as being “revered as a holy site by both Muslims and Jews.”

Two days later, CNN took a more serious tone as they reported the Israeli policemen were killed “just outside one of the world’s most important religious sites.” In keeping with framing the Temple Mount as firstly a Muslim site and secondly a Jewish site, CNN falls in step saying the attack was “next to what Muslims call the Noble Sanctuary and Jews the Temple Mount.”

July 21st Reuters followed suit. In their article titled, “Jerusalem on alert as religious tensions rise over holy site,” the first paragraph dips its toe in the water referencing only a “sensitive holy site.” By the second paragraph we’ve waded into the pool as we’re told the “shrine” is the Muslim’s “Noble Sanctuary,” followed by a mention of the Jew’s “Temple Mount” — as if they were second in line with squatter’s rights. Now officially drowning in chaos, the London based news service decides to go with “Noble Sanctuary-Temple Mount compound.”

Also July 21st, Fox News joined the club with a headline about the “holy shrine tension.” Almost laughably, it tells it’s apparently not too worldly-wise readers about a “long-contested shrine near the Lion’s Gate in Jerusalem.” Once again, Muslims are named first when discussing the “volatile Jerusalem shrine, revered by Muslims and Jews alike.”

The same day, Britain’s Telegraph chased its tail as it reported, “Palestinian gunmen ambushed and killed two Israeli police officers at the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem on Friday, bringing bloodshed and chaos to a religious site that is sacred to both Jews and Muslims.”

VOA (Voice of America) News got the memo as well.

It seems obvious that the site formerly called the “Temple Mount” by Western media is not the preferred name of the “holy site,” “sacred site,” “holy place,” “holy shrine,” “Jerusalem shrine,” that is known to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary.

A search on an American/Canadian newspaper archive – holding nearly 40 million newspapers dating back to the 1800’s — returned 1,933 “Temple Mount” results, and only 86 “Noble Sanctuary” results. The phrase “Temple Mount” spanned the years. However, while a few of the “Noble Sanctuary” results were from the late 19th Century, the rest were mostly from the year 2000 onward.

(And it wasn’t just websites and newspapers. I heard numerous radio news reports referencing it as the Muslims’ Noble Sanctuary before mentioning it was “also a Jewish holy site.”)

While the United Nations has been pushing the narrative that the Jerusalem holy site is “Muslim, not Jewish” for years, it should be troubling to those who support Jewish claims to the site that even the most conservative Western media are now falling in lockstep with UN talking points.

GOOD NEWS FROM AMAZING ISRAEL FROM MICHAEL ORDMAN

A molecule that restores heart function. Scientists at Israel’s Weizmann Institute have uncovered a molecule called Agrin, that appears to control the cardiac repair process. It was discovered in the surrounding supportive tissue of the heart known as the extracellular matrix, or ECM. In lab tests, Agrin healed scar tissue in a month.
https://wis-wander.weizmann.ac.il/life-sciences/young-heart-restoring-cardiac-function-matrix-molecule
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v547/n7662/full/nature22978.html
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-scientists-successfully-regenerate-damaged-hearts/

Good results in acne dual-treatment trials. Israeli biotech Sol-Gel has announced positive interim results in its Phase II clinical trial for its “Twin” treatment for acne. “Twin” combines two known acne treatments with a unique method of molecular wrapping that makes it easier to penetrate the skin.
http://www.globes.co.il/en/article-sol-gel-reports-positive-phase-ii-acne-trial-1001198353

Alzheimer’s disease can be seen in the eyes. Researchers at Israel’s Sheba Medical Center have discovered a connection between mild cognitive impairment and the response of that person’s eye pupil to red and blue light. More tests will check if loss of retina function is an early warning of Alzheimer’s disease.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-researchers-look-into-eyes-for-early-signs-of-alzheimers/

Eye-Control: life-changing technology. Latest video about Israel’s Eye-Control, a compact and affordable invention that gives a voice to locked-in patients who were unable to communicate, due to diseases such as ALS. With Eye-Control individuals use their eyes to spell out words and statements, proving that the eyes really are the window into the soul. https://www.youtube.com/embed/_VaPBIViS7o?rel=0

£7 million for UK-Israel joint research. (TY Hazel) The Britain Israel Research Academic Exchange (BIRAX) has funded over £7 million in 15 bilateral research programs including stem cell treatments for multiple sclerosis and Parkinson’s disease and therapies for Type 1 diabetes.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/uk-israel-science-program-has-invested-7m-in-5-years/

Surgery for Fijian children. (TY Hazel) More than 50 children will undergo free surgery and health screening in Suva, capital of Fiji, by an Israeli team of three doctors and a nurse. The team is part of Mashav, an arm of the Israeli Foreign Ministry, which assists more than 60 countries to alleviate hunger, disease and poverty.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-07/24/c_136467199.htm

Nordic walking and pain. I reported previously (15 Jan) on the unique study led by Israel’s Dr. Donald Silverberg that showed Nordic Pole Walking (NPW) can alleviate chronic low back, hip and/or knee pain. In this video, Dr. Silverberg describes his study and its eye-opening (and back-straightening) results.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZEN_lKsrSEc?rel=0

Israeli surgeons save girl on Birthright tour. Kimberly Winkler, from the Dominican Republic, suffered a ruptured brain aneurysm whilst on a Taglit-Birthright tour of Israel. She was rushed to Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital in Jerusalem where surgeons performed three delicate operations to save her life.
http://www.israpundit.org/taglit-participant-saved-at-last-minute-after-brain-aneurysm/

Palestinians: The Metal Detector Scam by Khadija Khan

Metal detectors and are commonplace at most prominent mosques in the Middle East, and more than 5,000 surveillance cameras (and 100,000 security guards) monitor pilgrims to Mecca in Saudi Arabia during the annual Hajj.

While the Palestinian terrorist was being treated for his wounds in an Israeli hospital, the Palestinian Authority celebrated his actions and set in motion the mechanism according to which he will receive a salary of more than $3,000 per month for his attempt to become a “martyr” through murdering Jews.

It is time for the international community to stop enabling radicals to use the Palestinian people as pawns in their greater agenda, transparent to everyone, including all Muslims: to obliterate Israel through delegitimization.

After massive pressure from the Muslim world and international community, Israel removed all metal detectors and surveillance-camera infrastructure from the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the location of Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Possibly to obfuscate the reason that the metal detectors were installed in the first place — a terrorist attack on July 14, in which three Israeli Arab citizens killed two Israeli Druze police officers with weapons they had hidden inside the mosque — the Palestinian Authority (PA) called on Muslims to boycott the site and launch “days of rage” against the Jewish state.

Palestinians, claiming that the metal detectors were a “desecration” of the mosque — which is actually located on the holiest site in Judaism and the third-holiest in Islam – entered into violent clashes with Israeli security forces. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan denounced Israel and called on Muslims to “protect” Jerusalem.

Palestinians near Jerusalem’s Old City protest Israel’s installation of metal detectors at entrances to the Temple Mount, although the metal detectors had already been removed days before, on July 28, 2017. (Photo by Ilia Yefimovich/Getty Images)

A Palestinian teenager posted on Facebook his intention to become a “martyr,” before entering the home of a Jewish family in the West Bank and slaughtering three of its members. While this terrorist was being treated for his wounds in an Israeli hospital, the Palestinian Authority celebrated his actions and set in motion the mechanism according to which he will receive a salary of more than $3,000 per month for his attempt to become a “martyr” through murdering Jews.

RUTHIE BLUM: A TALE OF TWO ISRAELI HEROES

Last Friday night, an Israeli soldier on leave for the weekend acted coolly and courageously, ‎rushing to the rescue of neighbors he heard screaming. “Sgt. O.,” whose full name cannot be ‎disclosed due to the sensitive nature of the elite IDF special forces unit in which he serves, ran to ‎the home of the nearby Salomon family to investigate. When he saw through their window that ‎they were being butchered, he promptly grabbed his rifle and shot the perpetrator.‎

By the time the scene was over, Yosef Salomon, 70, his daughter Chaya Salomon, 46, and son ‎Elad Salomon, 36, were lying in pools of blood on the kitchen floor. Tova Salomon, 68, would ‎only learn of the death of her husband and two of her children upon awakening from the surgery ‎she underwent to repair the multiple injuries she sustained in the knife attack.‎

The terrorist who maimed and murdered the Salomons was evacuated to an Israeli hospital, ‎where he was treated for the bullet wound from Sgt. O.’s weapon.‎

The Salomons had been celebrating the birth of a grandson when 19-year-old Omar al-Abed from ‎a neighboring Palestinian village entered their home through the front door, which was left open ‎for the guests arriving for dinner. As soon as al-Abed began his stabbing spree, Elad Salomon’s ‎wife (now widow) ushered all the children who were present into a bedroom, then locked the ‎door and called police.‎

Sgt. O.’s swift action prevented a far more extensive blood-bath. While al-Abed, who had ‎written a Facebook post about his plan to kill Israelis, is being hailed in the Palestinian Authority ‎as a “heroic martyr” — and will receive a salary of more than $3,000 per month for his actions — ‎Sgt. O.’s commanders are recommending that he receive an official citation for bravery from ‎the IDF chief of staff. ‎

Such an honor would be more than well-deserved, as this is the second time that Sgt. O. ‎risked his life to save a family in his community. Three years ago, he physically restrained a ‎terrorist who had infiltrated another home in Halamish, holding him until the arrival of security ‎forces.‎

Sgt. O. is an Israeli hero whose identity cannot be published, but whose life is intact. A ‎different Israeli hero — one who has been a household name in the country for his decades of ‎musical prowess and gay-rights activism — was not so fortunate last weekend.

Amir Fryszer Guttman, 41, died on Saturday of organ failure, after rescuing his 9-year-old ‎niece from drowning off the coast of Atlit. Fryszer Guttman held the flailing child, his brother’s ‎daughter, above the surface of the waves, forcing himself to stay conscious while bobbing up and ‎down in the water until help arrived. It was not until he was told that the little girl was safe that ‎he passed out for good. He was rushed to the hospital in a coma, and died the following day.

Fryszer Guttman’s story gripped the nation more profoundly than the international crisis ‎surrounding the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The ongoing chaos, sparked by an Arab terrorist ‎attack on July 14 — in which two Druze Israeli Border Police officers were killed outside Al-‎Aqsa mosque — feels like yet another chapter in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. By now, the ‎matter-of-fact heroism displayed by people like Sgt. O. is something that the public has ‎come to take for granted.‎

But Fryszer Guttman’s death caused everyone — even the most secular of his peers in the ‎entertainment industry and LGBT community — to gasp at its eerily divine significance. This is ‎because he lost his life on the very day that he and his friends and family were celebrating the ‎anniversary of the beginning of his new life.‎

A year ago last July, Fryszer Guttman, a married father of a young son, received the news that he ‎had been misdiagnosed three months earlier with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. After undergoing ‎heavy doses of chemotherapy for cancer he did not have, Fryszer Guttman — whose career ‎suffered along with his health — was told that a mistake had been made. His joy was mitigated ‎only by the fact that the treatment had managed to wreak havoc on his body. A couple of weeks ‎ahead of the beach party he held in honor of his “first birthday” with a clean bill of health, ‎Fryszer Guttman filed a NIS 5 million ($1.4 million) malpractice suit against Tel Aviv ‎Sourasky Medical Center for the travesty. ‎

At his funeral on Tuesday, his brother, Eyal Perry — whose daughter’s life was saved by Fryszer ‎Guttman — said, “You ascended in a storm to the heavens, as only you know how. We thank you ‎for every moment you were with us.” ‎

In her heartfelt eulogy, actress Gila Almagor, who had performed Fryszer Guttman’s wedding ‎ceremony to his husband, Yanai, also spoke in religious terms. “The ways of God are beyond my ‎comprehension,” she said, expressing the sentiment of a nation shaken by the sense that the ‎timing and method of our death is predetermined. The only control we may have — as the tales of ‎Sgt. O. and Fryszer Guttman illustrate — is over how we choose to live. On that score, Israel ‎is doing pretty well.‎