Yesterday, Prime Minister Netanyahu said, with regard to his speaking to Congress:
“In coming weeks, the powers are liable to reach a framework agreement with Iran, an agreement liable to leave Iran as a nuclear threshold state.
“As prime minister of Israel, I am obligated to make every effort to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weaponry that will be aimed at the State of Israel. This effort is global and I will go anywhere I am invited to make the State of Israel’s case and defend its future and existence.” (Emphasis added)
Israel’s ambassador to the US, Ron Dermer, spoke yesterday as well, and he said (emphasis added):
The prime minister’s visit is “intended for one purpose: To speak up while there is still time to speak up. To speak up when there is still time to make a difference.”
Thus, it is Netanyahu’s “most sacred duty to do whatever he can to prevent Iran from ever developing nuclear weapons that can be aimed at Israel.
“For Israel, a nuclear armed Iran would be a clear and present danger. Iran’s regime is both committed to Israel’s destruction and working toward Israel’s destruction.”
Credit: Miriam Alster/Flash 90
Couldn’t be much clearer and unambiguous than this.
And then we have Boehner’s response to the flap that has ensued following his invitation to the prime minister:
There’s nobody in the world who can [better] talk about the threat of radical terrorism — nobody can [better] talk about the threat the Iranians pose, not just to the Middle East and to Israel… but to the entire world — than Bibi (Benjamin) Netanyahu.”
Boehner went on to say he did not believe Obama was giving that threat the attention it deserved.
“The president didn’t spend but a few seconds (in his State of the Union address last week) talking about the threat, the terrorist threat that we as Americans face.
“This problem is growing all over the world…the president is trying to act as though it’s not there, but it is there and it’s going to be a threat to our homeland if we don’t address it in a bigger way.” (Emphasis added)
Boehner has further said, by the way, that he did not “blindside” the White House, as he has been accused of doing. He gave Obama “heads up” before news about the invitation to Netanyahu hit the press.
But so insane is the election fever here, that everything is subject to attack. The following column by Uri Avnery written just two days ago is so shockingly perverse that I simply had to call attention to it:
“…Two Israeli drones have bombed (or missiled) a small Hezbollah convoy, a few miles beyond the border with Syria on the Golan heights. 12 people were killed. One was an Iranian general. One was a very young Hezbollah officer, the son of Imad Mughniyeh…
“The killing of the Iranian general was perhaps unintended….
“The intended victim of the attack was the 25-year old Jihad Mughniyeh, a junior Hezbollah officer whose only claim to fame was his family name.
“IMMEDIATELY AFTER the killing, the question arose: Why? Why now? Why at all?
“The Israeli-Syrian border (or, rather, cease-fire line) has been for decades the quietest border of Israel. No shooting. No incidents. Nothing.
“SO WHY did Israeli drones hit a small convoy of Assad’s allies – Hezbollah and Iran? It is very unlikely that they had any aggressive intentions against Israel. Probably they were scouting the terrain in search of Syrian rebels.
“The Israeli government and the army did not explain. How could they, when they did not officially admit to the action? Even unofficially, there was no hint.
“But there is an elephant in the room: the Israeli elections.
“We are now in the middle of the election campaign. Was there, could there be, any connection between the election campaign and the attack?
WHAT?!! We have here a prime example of the morally corrupt and totally perverse position of the far left. How shameful this is.
In terms of information, it is full of holes. Jihad Mughniyeh’s claim to fame was NOT just his family name: he headed a terrorist cell directly funded by Iran that had already launched attacks.
And to say that it was “very unlikely that they [the convoy] had any aggressive intentions against Israel. Probably they were scouting the terrain in search of Syrian rebels”? Does he truly imagine that even though a general from Iran’s Revolutionary Guards was present, there was no ill intent towards Israel? That Iran sends out a general to scout for rebels?
Nor is it true that the border with Syria has been consistently quiet. That was once the case, but no longer is.
Gush Shalom – which ran Avnery’s article – promotes “peace” based on all of the Palestinian Arab demands, including “right of return,” which means this is a group that supports the destruction of Israel. It is beyond the pale. Uri Avnery is a founding member.
And this is what our prime minister must contend with, on his far left flank, as he works to defend the State and keep her safe.
Now I turn to an article – “Israeli strike in Syria: A move in an unfinished game” – regarding that convoy in the Golan, written by the highly informed Jonathan Spyer (emphasis added):
”Firstly, the killings were a response to a clear attempt by the Iranians/Hezbollah to violate the very fragile status quo that pertains between these elements and Israel in Lebanon and Syria…
”Some analysis of the strike has suggested that the mission of the men killed in the attack involved preparation for placing sophisticated Iranian missile systems on the Syrian part of the Golan. Other accounts suggested that the mission was part of readying this area for the launch of ground attacks across the border against Israeli targets, perhaps using proxies.
”In either case, the mission was a clear attempt to change the arrangement of forces in the north, in such a way that could be expected to ensure an Israeli response…
”The Iran/Hezbollah/Assad side has long threatened to develop the Golan as a front for possible ‘jihad duties’ against Israel. Both Syrian President Bashar Assad and Nasrallah, in the course of 2014, made unambiguous public statements threatening the opening of military activity against Israel in this area. Israel in turn has been very keen to make clear that such a move would constitute a violation of the status quo.
”The strike on Sunday constituted a very kinetic further Israeli message intended to drive home this point.
”What this means is that despite the death of a senior IRGC commander in the Israeli strike, the action by Israel should not be seen as a general casting aside of the rules of engagement by Jerusalem on the northern border – but rather an insistence on maintaining these rules, and a warning of the consequences to the other side of continued violation of them…”
In the above article, Spyer refers to the great unease the Lebanese have about what Hezbollah is doing:
”Responses by Lebanese political leaders and media to the event have been characterized by a sort of nervous, veiled request to Hezbollah not to bring down Israel’s wrath on Lebanon…”
The Israeli government, mindful of this situation, has speculated that the “retribution” from Hezbollah may come not via a frontal attack across the border from Lebanon into Israel, but rather via terrorism unleashed on Israelis abroad.
Thus, according to Al-Hayat, Israel has relayed a message to Hezbollah, delivered via indirect channels, that warns against such action: “Israel would hold Hezbollah responsible for any attack against its institutions and nationals [abroad], including areas known to be frequented by Israelis in far-off places around the globe.”
Coming full circle here…
We see that the Lebanese, who have not forgotten the damage they endured during Israel’s last war against Hezbollah, are not willing to support an attack on Israel by Hezbollah initiated from Lebanese soil. And so the significance to Hezbollah (and to Iran, its sponsor) of establishing a base on the Golan for launching attacks on Israel from there becomes readily apparent.
Thus the necessity for Israel to forcefully “discourage” any such plans.
In other words, we did good. Do not allow yourself to be disabused of this understanding.
We will end with a good news piece:
“A breakthrough discovery by researchers at the Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem will allow early detection and possible prevention of colon and uterine cancers. According to the study, a genetic mutation related to Lynch syndrome has been shown to increase the risk of these types of cancers. The discovery of the mutation among members of certain population groups allows for a quick identification of at-risk patients.”
This discovery is being referred to as “of immense importance in the prevention and early treatment of cancer.”