Israel's Righteous Mission

Images of war (The Autralian)

So far, there are no boots on the ground. (Hopefully there never will be.) And yet, the damage inflicted on the terrorist Islamic regime of Iran is so severe that they seem to be in a daze at a loss for what to do next - other than continuing to launch missiles into Israeli civilian areas. So far, some of them have gottne trhough and did some serious damage including killing12 innocent people.

Israel has effectively crippled Iran’s military assets and significantly damaged its nuclear program by assassinating top military leaders and nuclear scientists. All of this had been meticulously pre-planned and prepared before the Israeli airstrikes last Friday. Some of Iran’s military installations were also targeted - carefully mapped out and, in some cases, booby-trapped with pre-planted sleeper drones in clandestine Mossad missions that successfully penetrated Iran’s military and scientific establishment.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has clearly stated that Iran can expect more. This morning, additional nuclear sites were hit by Israeli airstrikes, along with one of Iran’s oil fields.

Meanwhile, Iran is getting no help from its proxies. Hezbollah - once considered Israel’s most powerful enemy - has not joined in Iran’s retaliation. That’s because Israel has already reduced Hezbollah to a shadow of its former self. Syria is no longer a threat either. And need I mention how impotent Hamas has become over the past year and a half?

There is no doubt that Israel was fully justified in attacking Iran at this time. Iran had already enriched uranium to weapons-grade levels, and it was only a matter of a very short time before they would have had a working nuclear bomb. The Islamic Republic has made no secret of its goal: to annihilate Israel as a religious obligation. When the supreme leaders of a theocratic regime say they have a divine duty to wipe you off the map - believe them. It’s not a stretch to imagine that once they had ‘the bomb’, they would have used it to achieve their cherished goal.

Israel had no choice but to act. As much as they would have preferred a diplomatic solution, where Iran would completely dismantle its nuclear program - that was never going to happen. Those who claim Israel should have waited until negotiations were exhausted are living in a fantasy world.

There was no better time than now - when Iran’s terrorist proxies are at their weakest and Iran itself is in its most degraded military state since the Mullahs took over in 1979. This is in large part due to what Israel’s military and intelligence apparatus has accomplished over the past year and a half.

Israel’s goal is not just to destroy Iran’s nuclear program but to degrade its military to the point of total impotence. I believe they will succeed. They have already destroyed the Natanz facility, Iran’s primary site for uranium enrichment. However, Fordow - located deep under a mountain - presents a more difficult challenge. Israel lacks the heavy-duty ‘bunker-buster’ bombs needed to penetrate and destroy it.

That said, there is more than one way to skin a cat. I trust Israeli ingenuity to find ways to damage Fordow from the inside without dropping a bomb from the outside. Israel surprised both Iran and the world with their highly successful strike last Friday. I wouldn’t be surprised if they have more tricks up their sleeve. We’ll see.

Many pundits - mostly leftists, isolationist conservatives, and the mainstream media - are urging the U.S. president to stay out of the war, insisting that this is not America’s battle. I understand the fear. No one wants to see American blood spilled in distant wars. Even Israel’s staunchest supporters in Congress aren’t advocating for American boots on the ground.

But here’s the thing: a U.S. strike on Fordow would not mean American boots on the ground. And it would finish off Iran’s nuclear program. The U.S. has the bunker-busting bombs required. If there were ever a justification for using them, this is it. If Israel succeeds in every aspect of its mission except destroying Fordow, a U.S. airstrike becomes a no-brainer.

Of course, America may be drawn in regardless - if Iran attacks a U.S. base anywhere in the world. In Iranian theology, America is the ‘Great Satan ‘and Israel the ‘Little Satan’. The Mullahs might be fanatical enough to provoke the U.S. militarily. The president has already promised ‘hellfire and brimstone’ if that happens. We’ll see how that unfolds.

A word about regime change: The most ideal outcome set into motion by October 7^th would be if the freedom-loving people of Iran rise up and overthrow the Mullahs who have ruled their citizens with religious tyranny for over 45 years. The majority of Iranians despise what their government has done to their lives. They have lost their freedom. And they want it back. When large numbers have tried to protest in the past, the regime responded with brutal force - arresting, torturing, and even executing dissidents.

Right now, the Mullahs are in the weakest position they’ve ever been in. There has never been a more opportune time than now for the Iranian people to take back their country.

If Israel could somehow assassinate Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei - just as it eliminated Hezbollah’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Hasan Nasrallah - that might be the spark that ignites a revolution and restores freedom to the Iranian people. In that case, the U.S. and its allies could step in to help establish a democratic government, free of Islamic tyranny.

Regime change may seem like a pipe dream - but it’s a good one. And not an impossible one. If it were to happen… imagine the possibilities.

Operation Rising Lion

Another one bites the dust: IRG head, the late General Hossein Salami (News18)

I had a hard time falling asleep last night after hearing the news about Israel’s attack against Iran. But I’m feeling a little better this morning. Although there is still plenty to worry about - with a terrorist nation like Iran surviving Israel’s preliminary strike - I am encouraged by what Israel did accomplish, on so many levels.

First, there is the actual damage inflicted on its mortal enemy. As capable as I’ve always believed Israel’s military intelligence apparatus to be, I still underestimated just how effective they truly are. The Mossad had infiltrated Iran’s nuclear facilities, military installations, and missile launching sites across the country and booby-trapped them with explosive devices long before they attacked. They therefore also knew the exact locations of all their targets well before the attack began. And with the exception of those buried deep underground, they destroyed them all. Along with some of their top military leaders and nuclear scientists. I hate to use a well-worn cliché, but I’ll use it anyway: this was an unprecedented attack of ‘shock and awe.’ (Thank you, General Schwarzkopf.) And they are not done yet!

Iran’s retaliation was anemic. The hundreds of drones they launched against Israel fell flat. Almost all - if not all - were intercepted and destroyed before they could do any harm. No one was injured.

Iran has promised a much more severe response. I’m sure they would like to believe they’re capable of that. But we’ve heard this kind of talk from them before. Their military threat appears to be wildly overrated — at least so far.

The President’s reaction was not what some had expected — namely, anger at Netanyahu for not allowing negotiations with Iran to conclude with a possible nuclear agreement. Not at all. If anything, the President seemed to suggest that he green-lighted the attack. He is, in effect, telling Iran that if they don’t make a deal with the U.S. now, ‘they ain’t seen nothin’ yet.’ A quick AI search gave me the following result:

President Trump posted several times on Truth Social about the Israeli strikes on Iran. He warned Iran to agree to a nuclear deal "before there is nothing left." He suggested that future Israeli attacks could be even more “brutal.” Trump also claimed he gave Iran a “60-day ultimatum” to make a deal, stating that the strikes occurred on the 61st day. “I told them what to do, but they just couldn’t get there,” he said. He further suggested Iran might have a “second chance” to come to terms.

In interviews, Trump also said the U.S. supports Israel and called the strikes a “very successful attack.” He indicated the Israeli government had American backing in carrying out the strikes. When asked whether the deaths of key Iranian hardliners were a result of the attack, he sarcastically replied that they “didn’t die of the flu.”

Lest anyone think this is just the President talking, I am happy to report that Israel is receiving overwhelming support from Congress. On both sides of the political aisle. Predictably, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party and a few of the more extreme isolationist Republicans in the House condemned the strikes, calling them an unnecessary escalation that could drag the U.S. into ‘Netanyahu’s war.’ Thankfully, they are in the minority. Most of the Senate and House expressed sentiments like the following:

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said, minutes after reports of the operation began, “Proud to stand with Israel.” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) soon followed, saying, “Game on. Pray for Israel.”

Cotton later added that “We back Israel to the hilt, all the way,” adding that if “the ayatollahs harm a single American, that will be the end of the ayatollahs.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), said “Israel IS right—and has a right—to defend itself!”

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said, “We stand with Israel tonight and pray for the safety of its people and the success of this unilateral, defensive action.” 

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), the administration’s former nominee to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said, “The U.S. stands strongly with our ally and partner Israel.”

“May God Bless Israel & the brave IAF [Israeli Air Force] soldiers as they protect their national security and the world’s safety,” 

Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) said that he supports the attack and “Our commitment to Israel must be absolute.”

“Keep wiping out Iranian leadership and the nuclear personnel,” Fetterman said. “We must provide whatever is necessary — military, intelligence, weaponry — to fully back Israel in striking Iran.”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) said: “If Israel’s strikes set back Iran’s nuclear program, we’ll all be safer,” adding that the U.S. must protect U.S. citizens and personnel and “must support Israel’s defense.”

Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) said that “Israel is not the aggressor. It is defending itself against an existential threat that long predates the present preemptive strike. The true aggressor is the Islamic Republic and its empire of terror — an empire stained with the blood of innocent Israelis.”

Rep. Greg Landsman (D-OH), also noting that the International Atomic Energy Agency had just declared Iran to be in violation of its nonproliferation obligations, said that “Israel is justifiably defending itself and its people.” 

In an effort to deter Iranian retaliation against U.S. interests, Secretary of State Marco Rubio briefly stated that the U.S. was not directly involved in the attack, while warning Iran against targeting American assets.

But clearly, the operation was not only a success - it was praised by both the executive branch and the majority of the legislative branch.

What particularly pleased me was that, for the first time in many months, Israel received favorable coverage from the mainstream media. The last time that happened was when Israel cleverly devastated Hezbollah by remotely detonating the pagers and walkie-talkies of their commanders, and then killed their longtime leader Hassan Nasrallah. The media recognized Israeli ingenuity then - and they’re recognizing it now.

Every news report I watched this morning seemed to convey a sense of awe - and even gratitude  -  in the voices of the anchors and reporters. There wasn’t a trace of media condemnation that I’ve sadly grown accustomed to over the last year and a half.

Although I’m sure this moment will be short-lived, I’m going to savor it while it lasts.

If anyone still questions the value of Israel to the United States, I suggest they engage in some serious introspection - if not psychotherapy - to better understand what might compel them to interpret positive, almost miraculous events in negative terms.

In the meantime, I will continue to pray for the welfare of all my people - in Israel and around the world. ‘It ain’t over till it’s over.’  We are living in precarious times, and we must not take our freedom and safety for granted.

May God bless and protect the people of Israel and the United States of America.

Is Israel About to Attack Iran?

Iran's Suprme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei (Ynet)

This morning, there were reports in the mainstream media that the U.S. is evacuating personnel from some of its bases in the Middle East. The reason: Israel is reportedly preparing to launch an attack against Iran within days.

When asked about this development, the President was expected - at least by the press - to express outrage at Prime Minister Netanyahu’s apparent disregard of his request to hold off on any military action until U.S. negotiations with Iran over a nuclear deal had run itscourse.

But that was not the response they got. Instead, the President simply stated that Iran cannot have a nuclear program. He acknowledged that while talks are still scheduled, he is pessimistic that a deal can ever be reached. In essence, he dodged the question - implying, perhaps, that he no longer has a problem with Israeli military action at this time.

Iran, in turn, responded with its usual bellicose warnings, threatening that any ‘enemy’ (read Israeli) action would be met with severe consequences from the Islamic Republic.

What is also becoming increasingly clear is that Iran has no intention of dismantling its nuclear program. In fact, they have accelerated their enrichment efforts. Lest anyone on the political left question this, even one of their most honored international institutions, the United Nations, is sounding the alarm. as noted in Ynet:

• The IAEA board has declared Iran in non-compliance for the first time in nearly 20 years due to undeclared nuclear activity. Tehran has responded by announcing new enrichment plans, upgrading centrifuges, and issuing threats of retaliation amid fears of an imminent Israeli strike.

This is not rocket science. As President Trump correctly stated: Iran cannot have a nuclear program. That means if they cannot be stopped peacefully, they must be stopped militarily.

Israel has apparently notified the President of its imminent plans, and he has not objected. He possibly even approved them.

If that’s the case, it doesn’t surprise me. If Israel, the U.S.’s closest and most powerful ally in the Middle East, can carry out such a mission, why should the U.S. risk a single American bomber? That said, the President must know that an Israeli strike will be perceived by Iran as an American-backed attack. If Israel attacks, they have already promised retaliation against U.S. military bases in neighboring countries, such as Iraq.

If that happens, I don’t believe the President will take it lying down. My guess is that the military options against Iran previously laid out for him will be executed. That likely includes the deployment of bunker-busting bombs targeting Iran’s deeply buried nuclear facilities.

One might think I’m happy about this turn of events. But the truth is, I have mixed emotions.

On one hand, destroying Iran’s nuclear capability is a necessity. An extremist Islamist nation, whose ultimate religious goal is to establish a global Islamic order by any means necessary, must never be allowed to acquire the means to destroy entire nations. They must be stopped. By any means necessary.

On the other hand, I have no idea how many lives this will cost Israel - and the US. Iran’s religious fanaticism, combined with its highly trained and fiercely devoted Revolutionary Guard, means they will fight back with everything they’ve got. They believe they are fighting for God, and will joyfully scream “Allahu Akbar” (“God is great”) as they give their lives in pursuit of their ‘noble’ goal. Nor do I know whether US involvement will be protested by Americans - and to what extent.

At this point, I’m not sure what to feel - other than a great deal of anxiety even as I feel we might not have much of a choice.

Isolationists, Hawks, and Israel

U.S. Army Gen. Michael E. Kurilla, commander of U.S. Central Command (JI)

How serious is the threat of a military attack against Iran? Is the president’s bellicose rhetoric just words? Does he abhor the idea of war with a powerful enemy so much that he might sell out Israel in some sort of Obama-like compromise on a nuclear deal? Is Trump just a paper tiger whose ‘roar’ will never amount to much of a bite?

There are two conflicting schools of thought within his administration. On the one hand, there are the strong supporters of Israel who advocate military action if Iran does not capitulate entirely to U.S. demands. Demands that include the complete dismantlement of their nuclear program, even for peaceful purposes. For his part, Trump has said that this is a non-negotiable condition of any agreement. These hawks believe that the only way to stop Iran is through force if talks fail.

Then there are the isolationist factions. They believe we have little to fear from enemies halfway around the world and that we ought not be sabre-rattling when a compromise on a nuclear deal would serve American interests just fine. Thereby avoiding U.S. entanglement in yet another foreign war with little to gain and much to lose.

Some political pundits claim that the isolationist factions are gaining influence within the administration while the hawks are losing ground. That perception is likely based on the belief that Trump has no stomach for war and that his ‘America First’ policies are, at their core, isolationist anyway.

Isolationists, almost by definition, are not particularly pro-Israel and in some case might even be antisemitic. They are known to harbor sentiments blaming the ‘neocons’ for promoting war against Iran for the sake of Israel. It is also common knowledge that many neocons are Jewish. A fact not lost on them.Using the term ‘neocons’ is  a substitute for ‘the Jews’ - giving therm cover for their antisemitism.

They are the kinds of people who make snide comments to pro-Israel legislators such as, ‘You forget which country we represent - and it isn’t Israel.’ That, in my view, is plainly antisemitic. In fact, that exact comment was once made by Chuck Hagel, Obama’s Republican Secretary of Defense. And yes, I consider his comment antisemitic too.

This seems to be the conventional wisdom. Causing many pro-Israel Americans to worry about how Israel will fare in all this. If the isolationist faction is becoming the dominant  voice in the administration, will Israel be left to fend for itself?

Except that this narrative isn’t true.

The isolationist faction is far from taking control over foreign policy in the White House. At least not according to CENTCOM commander Gen. Michael “Erik” Kurilla, the top U.S. military official in the Middle East. As reported in Jewish Insider:

[Kurilla] said on Tuesday that he had provided ‘a wide range of options’ to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and President Donald Trump for carrying out U.S. military strikes on Iran’s nuclear program if negotiations with Tehran fail to achieve the dismantlement of its nuclear program...

Kurilla affirmed, under questioning from the House Armed Services Committee, that the military is fully prepared for a strong show of force against Iran if it refuses to dismantle its nuclear program. He noted that Iran continues to increase its stockpiles of uranium enriched to 60% purity—a level with no legitimate civilian purpose.

Some people try to downplay Israel’s contributions in weakening Iran and its proxies, claiming no one of consequence has ever credited Israel for that. But that too is false. General Kurilla himself stated that Iran is in a weaker strategic position today than it was before October 7^th. He further noted that:

Iran’s vision of a “Shia crescent” through the Middle East has collapsed with the fall of the Syrian government - calling it “probably the single biggest event that has happened in the Middle East” - along with the degrading of Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies.

Kurilla went so far as to describe Israel’s success against Iran’s proxies, especially Hezbollah, as “brilliant,” saying it should be studied by every military in the world.

Israel is clearly an asset worth preserving. And the president has not wavered in his support, despite efforts by some to portray discord between our two nations.

Elbridge Colby, the undersecretary of defense for policy, once opposed military action against Iran. But according to Katherine Thompson, the acting assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, he is now fully aligned with current administration policy. She stated:

“We support the president’s objective to not only, first and foremost, defend the State of Israel but second, of course, deny Iran the ability to obtain a nuclear weapon. That is something that we are 100% committed to,” Thompson said. “I will also note that we support the president’s objectives and stand ready to provide military options should his strategy of pursuing peace with Iran through a negotiated solution [fail].”

I don’t think the president’s pro-Israel policy could be any clearer. Regardless of what some pundits say about the internal debates in his administration, or whether his recent actions suggest a retreat from his stated commitments.

Sometimes what seems like a zebra really is just a horse after all (to turn a common phrase).

Those of us who strongly support the Jewish state should stop being so paranoid about how every move the president makes reflects on his stance toward Israel. We need to recognize that sometimes there is more going on behind the scenes than meets the eye. And I believe that’s the case here.

So, despite indications to the contrary, the isolationists are not winning. To put it the way Thompson did in her testimony before congress: the president’s objective (is) first and foremost, (to) defend the State of Israel. And the president is surely NOT a neocon.

Four Antisemites Who Insist they Aren't

Greta Thunberg being offered a sandwhich by an IDF 'kidnapper' (JTA)

It is getting easier to be an antisemite these days and get away with it. That’s because all one has to do is claim that their opposition to Israel has nothing to do with antisemitism. Some may even delude themselves into believing that. There are four such individuals in the public arena today. They all claim to be fully supportive of the Jewish people, even while saying and doing things that clearly indicate otherwise. Some are more blatant than others, but at the end of the day, they are all antisemites at their core.

The most obvious example is Represntative Rashida Tlaib, who has called for the dismantling of the Jewish state. While she doesn’t state it so explicitly, her open support for the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement is telling. If BDS were successful - if every nation boycotted, divested from, and sanctioned Israel - it would lead to the destruction of the only Jewish state in the world. That alone should be a red flag.

Tlaib also repeatedly uses the slogan ‘Free Palestine from the river to the sea,’ a phrase widely understood to call for the elimination of Israel. And yet she insists she is not antisemitic. What about the majority of the world’s Jewish population that lives in Israel and would be displaced if Palestine replaced it? Does she not consider that antisemitic?

And yet she declares:

“I stand firmly against antisemitism. And I stand firmly in support of a Free Palestine.”

Another example is Marjorie Taylor Greene, who also sees herself as free of antisemitism. Yet both she and Tlaib were the only two members of Congress to vote present (instead of yes) on a bipartisan resolution condemning antisemitism. The bill came in response to attacks on Jewish targets in Boulder, Colorado, and Washington, D.C.

Taylor Greene’s justification? She tweeted:

“Congress never votes on hate crimes committed against white people, Christians, men, the homeless, or countless others... Americans from every background are being murdered - even in the womb - and Congress stays silent. We don’t vote on endless resolutions defending them.”

Well, maybe if Jews didn’t receive an outsized share of hate crimes, they wouldn’t need such resolutions. Greene’s antisemitism may be more subtle than Tlaib’s, but her comments reveal the mindset of an old-fashioned, far-right Christian antisemite -  of the pre-Holocaust variety. She can say all day long that antisemitic crimes are wrong, but that doesn’t make her any less antisemitic.

Next is Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old Democratic Socialist running for mayor of New York City. He isn’t leading in the polls but has nonetheless gained significant traction. His anti-Israel views are well-documented, particularly through his support for BDS, which could bar him from visiting Israel under existing Israeli law.

The Times of Israel recently reported:

“Mamdani has previously called for boycotting Israel but has been evasive on the campaign trail when asked whether he would seek to have the city join the boycott. During a forum on Sunday, he explained his past support for BDS but did not clearly answer a direct question about whether he would continue to support the boycott if elected mayor.”

And yet he, too, denies being antisemitic, echoing the same argument as Tlaib: that opposing Israel is not the same as hating Jews. He claims that …

visiting Israel is not necessary to represent the roughly 1 million Jews among his potential constituents. His positions have drawn strong criticism from parts of the Jewish community.

Rghtfully so.

That Mamdani also has support from some progressive Jews is a sad commentary on how deeply progressive ideology has permeated parts of the Jewish left. These individuals might be called ‘useful idiots’ - unwitting enablers of Israel’s mortal enemies. But I digress.

The worst offender may be none other than Greta Thunberg, the environmental activist idolized by the global left. She gained international fame at 15 for her climate change activism, eventually addressing the UN and earning spots on Forbes' list of the world’s most powerful people and was Time magazine’s Person of the Year in 2019. She became an icon and, unfortunately, was treated as a credible voice on issues well beyond her expertise.

Her anti-Israel stance - especially her over the top support for Gaza over Israel - has granted undue legitimacy to radical views. One might forgive a young woman who suffers from mental illness and is on the autism spectrum, but antisemitism is not a symptom of Asperger’s or clinical depression. It is more likely the product of ignorance and perhaps indoctrination at home.

Her latest stunt was an attempt with a few colleagues to deliver food boxes to Gaza by boat. She pre-recorded a video message implying that if that video was seen, she had likely been kidnapped. Suggesting a moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas in terms of hostage-taking. Of course, she was not kidnapped at all. Her boat was intercepted by Israeli authorities, and she was sent back to Sweden immediately.

Her brand of antisemitism is especially dangerous because of her iconic status as an ‘environmentalist warrior’. She has been put on a pedestal by the global left, by media giants like Time and Forbes, and by (mistakenly) respected institutions like the United Nations. So when she paints Israel as the villain, a lot of people take her seriously. And yet, she would surely insist that she doesn’t have an antisemitic bone in her body.

These four individuals come from vastly different sectors of influence. But they have one thing in common: they are all influential people who, whether knowingly or not, promote antisemitic ideas. That is why we must remain vigilant, support those who truly stand with the Jewish people, and call out antisemitism wherever it hides—especially when it comes disguised as political or social activism. After all, Israel is home to the majority of the world’s Jews today, and attacking Israel often means attacking all of us.

The Unity of All the Jewish People

The brief Post October 7^th unity of the Jewish people (PBS)

Once again, the subject of unity has come up. This time in a Jerusalem Post opinion piece. 

I consider myself second to no one when it comes to pursuing this ideal and have often lamented the elusiveness of this lofty goal. Mostly as it applies to the disunity of Orthodoxy. But there should in fact be unity between the entirety of the Jewish people.

The author of this opinion piece makes what seems to be an excellent point:

"All my life, I’ve heard about how smart we Jews are, especially Israeli Jews. We’re the Start-Up Nation. We’ve won Nobel Prizes far beyond our proportion…

If we’re so smart, why can’t we figure this out? Why do we keep repeating the same patterns with the same disastrous results? Shouldn’t intelligent people be able to learn from the past?

Creating AI, launching satellites, and curing disease – we’ve mastered all of this. We have just never found the answer to the challenge of unity. Why?"

That’s a powerful and thought-provoking question.

One of the reasons we lack broad unity among the entirety of the Jewish people is the attempt (over 200 years ago) at the reformation of Judaism by a group of rabbis who no longer saw observance of all the Torah’s Mitzvos as necessary. In their attempt to make Jews less conspicuous and more integrated into the prevailing culture, they decided that Judaism should be stripped of many of the things that made us different. Hoping that by doing so, we could be seen as equal in every respect. The hope was that this would reduce antisemitism in the then relatively new age of Enlightenment.

Unfortunately, we are seeing the bitter fruits of that effort in two very different ways. First, antisemitism is no longer reserved for conspicuously religious Jews. It affects even completely secular Jews. Second, by stripping Judaism of its uniqueness, many Jews are left with no real Jewish identity. In its place there are universal values like social justice, which, while noble, apply to all of humanity. This is one reason Jewish demographics in this country are shrinking so rapidly. But I digress.

The point I’m really trying to make is that when such a fundamental split exists, unity becomes virtually impossible. You cannot say that observance of Torah law is both mandatory and optional at the same time. That is self-contradictory.

As I read the author’s references to the Torah and some of its classic commentaries like Rashi and the Mechilta quoting a Midrash - and especially his reference to the Final Redemption, I assumed the author, Rabbi David Fine, must be an Orthodox rabbi. To make sure, I googled him and found references to a *Reform rabbi by that name and at first assumed that he was the authot of this article. But I was mistaken. I have been informed that he is indeed an Orthdox rabbi - ordained by RIETS (YU).  should have known better since - to the best of my knowledge, Reform Judaism does not believe in the concept of Final Redemption. 

Bearing this denial of one of the fundamentals of the Jewish belief system in mind, can we have unity with Refrom Jews? As much as I would like to say yes, I’m still not sure it’s possible. I would go a step further and question whether we can have true unity with any heterodox movement that legitimizes heretical beliefs that actually do question the Divine authorship of the Torah.

I would argue that unity is not possible with segments of the far-left Orthodox world that supports the LGBTQ agenda - some of whose rabbinate officiates at same-sex marriage ceremonies. I would even question their Orthodox credentials.

We cannot be unified as a people when our core values clash - when Torah values are redefined or corrupted by well-meaning rabbis in the spirit of inclusivity. As I’ve said many times, we can and should be welcoming without ‘Kashering’ forbidden behavior or promoting pride in desires that involve serious Torah prohibitions.

I agrew with what Rabbi Fine is advocating. I beleive it is possible to have unity with the entirety of our people on a more basic level. We are one people in the sense that we are all Jews. And we have demonstrated that kind of unity in the past - tragically, often only when disaster strikes. That’s what happened on October 7^th. In the face of horror, we stood united. We all shouted ‘Never Again!’ and proudly proclaimed, Am Yisrael Chai - the People of Israel lives!

In those moments of shared tragedy, our Jewishness rises to the forefront of our consciousness. Pride in being Jewish emerges regardless of observance level. The ideological and cultural differences between right and left, secular and religious, were - for a brief time - cast aside. We were all in the same Jewish boat, both in Israel and the diaspora. Sadly, there were some on the extreme right who refused to attend a post-October 7^th unity rally in Washington, objecting to the implied legitimacy granted to secular and heterodox Judaism. But by and large, the Jewish people were united, if only for a fleeting moment.

Rabbi Fine’s question remains: Why can’t we harness that same sense of unity when tragedy doesn’t force it upon us? Why can’t we find a way to unite as we once did at Ma’amad Har Sinai, the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai? If we can achieve so much as a people in medicine, technology, and science - why can’t we be equally ambitious in striving for unity?

I understand the obstacles. One of the most significant I’ve already mentioned. But still, we ought to find a way to harness the unity we feel in times of tragedy and apply it in times of celebration and joy.

*Update An earlier version of thids post erred in identifying Rabbi Fine as a Reform rabbi. I was susbsequently informed by one of his colleagues that he is Orthdox and always has been. The post has been corrected accordingly. And I apologize if I caused him any pain or disconfort.

As Things Stand Now...

2 of the most recent 866 IDF soldiers killed in Gaza since the war began (TOI)

There have been 866 IDF soldiers killed in Gaza since October 7^th, 2023, when Hamas committed one of the most heinous crimes against humanity - specifically targeting the Jewish people - since the Holocaust. Every one of those soldiers died fighting a war against Hamas, the ‘Nazis’ of our time, in defense of our people. These ‘Nazis’ are funded and supplied by an equally virulent antisemitic enemy of the Jewish people: The Islamic Republic of Iran.

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s goal is to eliminate these ‘Nazis’ from the face of the earth - a task he has pursued through the IDF for over 600 days. While Israel has succeeded in severely weakening Hamas’s capacity to commit atrocities like those of October 7^th, he has not succeeded in eliminating them entirely. They continue to survive,  as does their determination to rebuild themselves and return to the level of strength they had before this war began. On that level, one might even say they are winning. As long as their ideology of annihilating the Jewish presence in ‘Palestine’ persists, groups like Hamas will continue to arise with the goal of implementing their own version of a ‘final solution’ to the ‘Jewish problem.’

One may reasonably ask how this is possible, given the extensive destruction in Gaza over these 600 days. Why hasn’t Hamas surrendered? How are they so confident they can reconstitute themselves?

Unfortunately, the answer is right in front of us, though much of the world refuses to see it. The truth is that Hamas is supported by a significant portion (probably the majority) of the Palestinian population. Especially in Gaza. There have been countless instances of such support over the past 600 days, and only willful blindness could lead one to deny that.

It first became evident on October 7th, when Hamas committed its unspeakable brutality, including taking over 200 Jewish hostages. When those hostages were paraded through the streets, video footage revealed crowds showing no sympathy for the innocent Jewish hostages. On the contrary, the mood was one of celebration.

Since then, the IDF has essentially destroyed much of Gaza. It has been bombed into near oblivion and is now largely uninhabitable. In the process, many Palestinian civilians have been killed - used by Hamas as human shields against airstrikes by Israel targeting Hamas command centers and leadership. Hamas deliberately places women and children in harm’s way, disguising fighters in civilian clothing so that any count of civilian casualties will include them.

Food shortages followed. When humanitarian aid was sent to relieve them, Hamas and affiliated gangs commandeered the supplies, hoarded them for their own use, and sold the remainder to starving civilians at exorbitant prices. Meanwhile, UN humanitarian agencies staffed by Hamas sympathizers - or in some cases, actual Hamas operatives - blamed Israel for these shortages. When Israel began blocking aid trucks to prevent Hamas from using the food for its own ends, Palestinian sources in Gaza and their collaborators at the UN presented a picture of near-famine, blaming Israel exclusively. They also blamed Israel for all civilian casualties, as though the inflated numbers were entirely accurate and involved no combatants. Something that is demonstrably false, given Hamas’s widespread embedding in sensitive civilian areas like hospitals.

So why hasn’t Israel been successful in eradicating Hamas? And why does Hamas believe they will surely reconstitute themselves when the war ends?

I believe it’s because most Palestinians in Gaza support Hamas. They have for years. Long before October 7^th. And they will continue to do so long after. Gaza’s Palestinian youth eagerly await the opportunity to join Hamas and help in their ‘holy’ war against the Jews. For every Hamas terrorist killed, there are dozens of young Palestinians ready to take their place.

I don’t accept the claim that the war has created new recruits. That’s an all too easy assumption to make, but I believe it’s false. Their determination to eliminate Jews is deeply embedded in their ideology. It always has been. The only way to defeat Hamas is to defeat the genocidal ideology that drives them. An ideology embraced by far too many Palestinians. The more devout they are in their religious beliefs, the more tightly they cling to this vision of a ‘final solution’. Most Gazans are nothing if not devout.

In all the footage I’ve seen of Palestinian suffering - and I don’t doubt for a moment that they are suffering -  have yet to hear a single voice demand that Hamas release the remaining hostages. Surely they must know it was the Hamas attack that brought this misery upon them. Surely they understand that releasing the hostages would begin to alleviate their suffering. And yet - not a word. Their narrative is entirely about what Israel is doing to them.

It is appalling to me that the mainstream media allows images of war to dictate their moral compass. They see blood. They see bombs. They see Israel dropping them. And they conclude that Israel is solely to blame. They urge Israel to stop defending itself so Palestinians can survive. Not a word is said urging Hamas to release the hostages and surrender as the quickest path to peace. The media knows this. But in their knee-jerk response to the imagery from Gaza, they see only Israeli culpability and demand that only Israel take action to stop the war.

I believe this is the true reality in Gaza and Israel. The question now is: What can be done?

If the only way to fully destroy Hamas is to destroy the genocidal ideology of those who support them, continuing the war seems pointless. You can’t destroy an ideology without destroying the people who hold it. But deliberately killing all Palestinians in Gaza would itself be genocide! Especially considering that there may be significant numbers who do not support Hamas and would be willing to make peace with a Jewish state, though they are likely a minority.

I don’t have an answer. That question is above my pay grade. I leave it to Israel’s political and military leaders to make that determination.

There are those who insist that Netanyahu is prolonging the war solely to stay in power. While I’m sure he wants to retain power - just as all political leaders do - I don’t believe that is his primary motivation. I truly believe he wants to win this war, because he sees it as the only way to prevent future atrocities like October 7^th. There are politicians who disagree, who believe Hamas has already been weakened enough to prevent future attacks. But I side with those who understand that a permanent ceasefire will only allow Hamas to reconstitute itself. It’s just a matter of time. 

That said, I do not want to see any more IDF soldiers die in a war whose legitimate goal seems so unattainable. If this sounds conflicted and confused, that’s because I am.

A brief word about Iran: I believe that President Trump’s insistence on denying Iran any nuclear enrichment capability - and Iran’s insistence on retaining low level enrichment, purportedly for peaceful purposes - makes any future nuclear deal unlikely. This could eventually lead to a joint military operation with Israel against Iran’s underground nuclear facilities, advanced air defenses, and even their Revolutionary Guard installations. Trump may be averse to war, but not at any cost. (The US military has the ‘bunker busting’ bombs that can penetrate their underground nuclear facilities. 

Back to Israel. With the religious parties threatening to bring down the current government, and new elections potentially on the horizon, it’s difficult to predict what the future holds. The only thing I can say with confidence is this: Right now, I’m not sure of anything. 

Big Win for Orthodoxy but Not for DaasTorah

Hard to believe that I’m a bit late to the party, considering that the preliminary results of the WZO elections were just published. But YWN and Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein beat me to the punch. That, however, is not going to stop me from offering my own perspective. Even though there’s a lot of overlap with what Rabbi Adlerstein said.

At the time of voting, I wasn’t aware that there were more than two Orthodox parties vying for votes in that election: the Charedi Eretz HaKodesh party and the Mizrachi (Religious Zionist) party. I had urged everyone to vote Mizrachi for reasons beyond the scope of this post. But it turns out there was another religious party that garnered more votes than either of those two: Am Yisrael Chai, which Rabbi Adlerstein describes as an Orthodox party involved in outreach. Apparently, there were also some other Orthodox party slates I wasn’t aware of, which received votes as well.

According to YWN, the combined total of votes for all the Orthodox parties outnumbered the combined total votes of the secular or heterodox parties. (The numbers are still being checked for accuracy and possible fraud, so we’ll have to wait and see if the final tallies hold up.) Still, I’m feeling pretty good about the fact that observant Judaism seems to have become more important to Jews who care at all about Jewish peoplehood than at any other time in recent memory.

This does not necessarily signal unity, though it should. It does, however, underscore my long-held contention that our ultimate survival as a people depends on our observance of the Mitzvos of the Torah.

That Eretz HaKodesh got more votes than Mizrachi should surprise no one. Charedim vastly outnumber Religious Zionists.

What is perhaps surprising is that this outcome does not seem to hinge on the Charedi concept of Daas Torah. As Rabbi Adlerstein indicated, that ship seems to have sailed.

As mentioned in an earlier post, Rabbi Aharon Feldman - a member of the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah of Agudah - issued a call forbidding participation in the WZO election, even for the Charedi slate, calling it a Chilul HaShem. He argued that the very nature of the WZO is antithetical to Torah values, and participating in their elections—even for the purpose of obtaining badly needed funding - would be hypocritical and thus a desecration of God’s name. This view was endorsed by the Roshei Yeshiva of BMG in Lakewood, which even interrupted its regular afternoon seder Limud so that the students could hear Rabbi Feldman’s message directly. He sharply criticized those in the Charedi community (including the Charedi magazines) who encouraged people to vote.

While this wasn’t a universally held view within the Moetzes, and was never presented as such, the lack of public dissent from other members left the impression that this was Daas Torah.

There was a time when a Moetzes member speaking out so forcefully - and without any public disagreement - would have been sufficient. The Charedi world would have by and large listened to its Gedolim. But this time, that didn’t happen. In fact, the opposite seems to have happened. As Rabbi Adlerstein put it:

(Those) who voted did not simply fail to receive the memo. They were defying one message in the Charedi world for different ones they received from their own guides and mentors. Or, they didn’t see it as an issue that required a Torah luminary to pass judgment on, and voted their own conscience.

Eretz HaKodesh got 50% more votes than they did last time, when it was  publicly endorsed by Rav Chaim Kanievsky!.

Some may argue that those who voted were listening to their own Daas Torah - their own Rabbis and mentors. That may be true. But no one has called these guides ‘Gedolim’.  

I think the better explanation is this: one need not always follow a Gadol on non-halakhic matters. God gave us brains, and a conscience based on our education - equipping us with a moral compass to make independent decisions. So, when it came to voting in the WZO election, people followed their conscience, effectively setting aside the pronouncement of “Daas Torah.”

As a result, the Orthodox world will now reap the majority of WZO’s  financial rewards. It will be distributed equitability based on the numbers who voted per party, which they can use as they see fit.

I do wonder, though: if some of the money awarded to Eretz HaKodesh is allocated to yeshivos whose leaders publicly opposed voting, will they take it? Or will they stay true to their principles and reject funding from a source they ideologically oppose? My guess is: they’ll take it. Just as they accept money from a government they also oppose ideologically.

Be that as it may, it appears that Daas Torah, as the Charedi world defines it, may very well be in its death throes. The idea of religious edicts handed down from on high by Rabbinic leaders whose ideology no longer fully aligns with their constituents may be fading.

I’m not sure what the future holds. But the large Charedi turnout in this election seems to be a form of quiet rebellion. I think that’s a good sign.

I would add that one of the primary differences—though certainly not the only one—between Centrists and Charedim is how we view the concept of Daas Torah. Specifically, whether unlike Centrists  their views on non-Halachic matters still carry the same weight as their Halachic rulings. It seems that gap is starting to narrow.

And I, for one, am happy to see that.

 

Message from a Charedi Reader

Just got this in an email. Thought it would demonstrate how some Charedim feel about me and the MO community. He identified himself by name. But I did not get permission to reveal his indentity. So I am posting it anonymously. It follows:

 hi i'm a proud charedi as you can see probably from my grammar, i will not get into detail on each one of your articles, it will save me a lot of time and embarrassment for you cause whatever your iq is my little brothers is higher. What I do see from you is that you're a really disturbed modern orthodox individual which in my opinion is suffering really badly, my heart goes out for you and I pray for you and your dying community 3 times a day that you all will do teshuva. What's funny to me is that for some reason I don't know any blogs from the charedim that trash the modern orthodox world for a living like you do. i think the answer is simple, when someone like the haredi community knows the truth we don't need to put people down to lift ourselves up. just look at the reform and conservative movement, what's left of it? and now look at the modern orthodox community/ yu commmunity what's left of it?  either they go astray or flip out and become haredi. nothing! look at what is going on with the lgbtq kids (well even if  you embrace them the torah calls it toevah and really doesn't pity them like you do) what i'm trying to bring out harry, whatever is authentic lasts whatever is not doesn't and history has proven itself. have a good shabbos love (first name deleted) your holy brother we will ne in touch

Antisemtism in America - Revisited

I don’t think there can be any doubt about it anymore: Antisemitism in this country is at its peak. I never thought I would see the day when walking down the street in my very Orthodox Jewish neighborhood of West Rogers Park here in Chicago - would cause me even the slightest bit of worry about being attacked.

But now I do worry. Not that I feel in any immediate danger, I don’t. But the fact is that my neighborhood borders another that is highly populated by Arabs, most of whom are devout Muslims. Many may very well be of Palestinian heritage.

Last Sunday, on the eve of Shavuos, one of the most horrific attacks against Jews in America that I could have ever imagined occurred:

Mohamed Sabry Soliman, a 45-year-old Egyptian national who federal authorities say was living in the U.S. illegally, shouted “Free Palestine” and threw two of the 18 Molotov cocktails he was carrying, injuring more than half of the estimated 20 people demonstrating in support of Israel. Officials said he expressed no regrets about the attack.

According to witnesses, one Jewish woman was engulfed in flames. Although there were thankfully no fatalities, there were serious injuries to at least 12 Jews attending the rally.

If such a horrific attack can happen in Boulder, Colorado, there’s every reason to believe it could happen anywhere devout Muslim radicals are found. And as noted, there are certainly devout Muslims here too. So yes - it has felt a bit scary of late. Although, thank God, there have been no incidents here. Yet.

That Mr. Soliman was a devout Muslim is not in doubt. He recorded and shared his virulent, religiously-motivated antisemitism on a social media app - something even the mainstream media has reported.

This savage incident followed the recent murder of two Israeli embassy employees in Washington D.C. by Elias Rodriguez, a radical leftist who declared he had ‘no choice’ but to kill Jews to spread his message of “Free, Free Palestine!” Which he screamed as he was being arrested. Though neither Palestinian nor Muslim, he was clearly influenced by their rhetoric.

There was a time not long ago when the primary threat of antisemitic attacks came from the right - from white supremacists, Neo-Nazis, and other extremist fringe groups. Even though they were few in number, it only took one to perpetrate the massacre in Pittsburgh a few years ago. While hate crimes like that were relatively rare, that threat was always in the air, and still is. We must remain vigilant against that brand of antisemitism too.

But today, the greater and more immediate danger of violent antisemitic attacks comes from devout Muslims and their sympathizers on the far left.

So yes, we Jews live in precarious times. Even here in America. And yet…

The broader American public is not antisemitic. Not even most on the left. They are as appalled by what happened in Boulder and D.C. as we are. Law enforcement is aggressively pursuing both cases, and these vile individuals will likely never see the light of day again. While many Americans may not agree with what Israel is doing in Gaza, that does not mean they question Israel’s right to exist. To the extent that they think about Israel beyond Gaza, they generally see it in a positive light.

This is not 1939 all over again. Not even close. In fact, one could argue that this might even be the opposite of that era. Think about how the government of each era treated antisemitic acts. Compare the German government’s reaction to Kristallnacht to the American government’s reaction to Boulder and D.C.

That said, there are very real differences of opinion about how our government should respond to the rise in antisemitism. As far as I’m concerned, the Trump administration is taking the right approach by targeting the primary source of contemporary antisemitism in America: college campuses.

The left has refused to acknowledge this problem, accusing the government of using the issue as a pretext to stifle free speech and control what they teach. Thus stifling academic independence. There may be some truth to that concern. But there is also a great deal of truth to the claim that antisemitism has festered on these campuses for decades.

Led by Palestinian professors recruited under the banner of diversity - and supported by far-left professors these institutions have created a culture of anti-Israel hatred so intense that it has deeply influenced student governments to support the BDS movement. BDS pretends to advocate for Palestinian rights, but in truth, its goal is the destruction of the Jewish state.

Long before October 7^th, student governments at top universities were demanding that their administrations divest from Israel. Jewish students were being harassed simply for being Jewish assuming all to be Zionist supporters of ‘Apartheid’ Israel. This was widely known, but few spoke out, and fewer still did anything about it.

The prevailing attitude was best illustrated by the now-infamous testimony of three university presidents who, when asked whether calling for genocide against Jews was antisemitic, responded with: ‘It depends on the context’. Their answers revealed a willful blindness to antisemitism on campus.

But the Trump administration and its supporters in congress saw it and called it out in front of the entire country.

That ended those university presidents’ careers. It also exposed the worst-kept secret in academia: that these institutions had an antisemitism problem they were either ignoring or denying.

Guess what happened next? They admitted it. And claimed they’re now doing something about it. Whether they are or not is beside the point. The fact that it had to be dragged out of them shows that they were never serious about combating it. Until now. When they are now finally being seriously sanctioned for it by the government.

Previous administrations turned a blind eye too. But not Trump. He hit these institutions where it hurts: in their funding. Now, university administrators are crying foul - claiming that withholding research grants is unfair because the research has nothing to do with antisemitism.

What about the research that supposedly benefits all of mankind? My response: The government does not owe them a thing. They want to continue vital research? Where there's a will, there's a way. Schools like Harvard have endowments worth billions. Some of which can surely be used to fund their ‘vital’ research.

So, are we living in 1930s Germany all over again? The way to answer that is to compare what the German government did then to what the American government is doing now. Thank God, we have a president who cares enough to bring antisemitism in academia to the national spotlight. Something no previous president was willing to do.

That doesn’t mean I’ve changed my mind about the president’s character. But it does mean I appreciate what he is doing for the Jewish people. Something many of my coreligionists on the left are too blinded by hatred to recognize and, sadly, see in a negative light