BLOOD LIBEL EXPOSED: Did Jewish “Settlers” Kill A “Palestinian-American” On Friday?

A blood libel is now being spread throughout western media concerning the deaths of two Arabs in the vicinity of Ramallah, supposedly by Jewish “settlers”. 23-year-old Saif al-Din Kamil Abdul Karim Musalat, one of the dead Arabs holds “Palesitnian-American” citizenship. The other was Mohammad Shalabi also 23. Arab media immediately reported that they were killed by Jewish “Settlers.” Without checking further, news outlets from NPR to The Telegraph to the New Arab began repeating this claim without any evidence.

So what did happen?

Here are the facts as best presented from those that were there. The video shown above clearly shows that Musalat is no peaceful bystander by rather part of a gang throwing rocks and attacking Jewish youth.

On Friday, a group of Arabs attacked Jewish shepherds near Ramallah in a premeditated attack. Reports confirm that dozens of Arab terrorists and rioters attacked a small group of Jewish shepherds with stones and slingshots in the area of the Ateret settlement in Binyamin. They burned and destroyed equipment and a Bible and injured two shepherds. The Arabs were accompanied by well-known anarchists and extreme left-wing activists.

The attack was planned in advance by the Arabs of the area. This was also reported by the Arab news agency “Wafa”, when the rioters’ goal was, according to them, to storm the place in order to “remove an outpost”.

The Jews called the security forces* who immediately arrived on the scene and repelled the rioters, while also attacking the forces in the open area along the mountain. When the forces arrived, a gas cylinder placed by the Arab rioters inside a bonfire they had lit exploded near them. There were no casualties from the explosion. At the same time, in light of the attack by the terrorists and rioters, Jewish activists were called to the scene and friction arose between them and the rioters who continued to throw stones.

Hours after the end of the event, the Arabs reported that two Arabs had been found dead, who they claimed had been injured during the events.

So was Musalat some peaceful “palestinian” learning about his heritage and traditions as his family has claimed? In a way they may be partly telling the truth. After all, one of the traditions “palestinians” hold in high esteem is throwing rocks and attacking Jews. Looks like Musalat fit right in.

Musalat was no innocent bystander or tourist, but as evidence becomes more clear he was a Hamas member and did not come to Israel to merely visit, but rather to partake in activities relating to attacking and harming Jews. Hamas is now declaring Musalat and Shalabi a martyrs, urging their followers to attack more Jews. Unfortunately, global media – even outlets in Israel are helping to enrage further hate towards Jews by spreading this blood libel – designed to cause increased violence and harm to Jews in Israel and abroad.

Egypt rejects Israel’s Gaza plan, threatens to dump peace agreement

An Egyptian official involved in the negotiations between Israel and Hamas, mediated by Egypt and Qatar, stated that Egypt’s security delegation opposes Israel’s proposed military redeployment plan in Gaza.

In an interview with Al-Araby Al-Jadeed newspaper, the official said that Cairo strongly opposes the continued Israeli military presence in the entire Rafah area, as well as the plan to establish a tent city in Rafah to house hundreds of thousands of Gazan refugees.

He stated, “This would create a human bomb at the Egyptian border, which would pose a clear threat to Egypt’s national security.”

The Egyptian official also noted that his country has warned in the past against Israeli violations of the Camp David Accords. He said that in response to Israeli unilateral actions, Egypt has reinforced its military forces and heavy weaponry in Sinai’s Zone C, contrary to the peace agreement and in direct response to Israel’s actions, which it perceives as violations of the agreement.

He also emphasized that the military buildup in Sinai is meant to send a message, and that Egypt may reconsider the peace agreement if it identifies Israeli violations which it believes pose a definite threat to Egyptian security.

How the Gaza Ministry of Health Fakes Casualty Numbers

The number of civilian casualties in Gaza has been at the center of international attention since the start of the war. The main source for the data has been the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry, which now claims more than 30,000 dead, the majority of which it says are children and women. Recently, the Biden administration lent legitimacy to Hamas’ figure. When asked at a House Armed Services Committee hearing last week how many Palestinian women and children have been killed since Oct. 7, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said the number was “over 25,000.” The Pentagon quickly clarified that the secretary “was citing an estimate from the Hamas-controlled Health Ministry.” President Biden himself had earlier cited this figure, asserting that “too many, too many of the over 27,000 Palestinians killed in this conflict have been innocent civilians and children, including thousands of children.” The White House also explained that the president “was referring to publicly available data about the total number of casualties.”

Here’s the problem with this data: The numbers are not real. That much is obvious to anyone who understands how naturally occurring numbers work. The casualties are not overwhelmingly women and children, and the majority may be Hamas fighters.

If Hamas’ numbers are faked or fraudulent in some way, there may be evidence in the numbers themselves that can demonstrate it. While there is not much data available, there is a little, and it is enough: From Oct. 26 until Nov. 10, 2023, the Gaza Health Ministry released daily casualty figures that include both a total number and a specific number of women and children.

The first place to look is the reported “total” number of deaths. The graph of total deaths by date is increasing with almost metronomical linearity, as the graph in Figure 1 reveals.

This regularity is almost surely not real. One would expect quite a bit of variation day to day. In fact, the daily reported casualty count over this period averages 270 plus or minus about 15%. This is strikingly little variation. There should be days with twice the average or more and others with half or less. Perhaps what is happening is the Gaza ministry is releasing fake daily numbers that vary too little because they do not have a clear understanding of the behavior of naturally occurring numbers. Unfortunately, verified control data is not available to formally test this conclusion, but the details of the daily counts render the numbers suspicious.

The graph reveals an extremely regular increase in casualties over the period. Data aggregated by the author and provided by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), based on Gaza MoH figures.
The graph reveals an extremely regular increase in casualties over the period. Data aggregated by the author and provided by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), based on Gaza MoH figures.

Similarly, we should see variation in the number of child casualties that tracks the variation in the number of women. This is because the daily variation in death counts is caused by the variation in the number of strikes on residential buildings and tunnels which should result in considerable variability in the totals but less variation in the percentage of deaths across groups. This is a basic statistical fact about chance variability. Consequently, on the days with many women casualties there should be large numbers of children casualties, and on the days when just a few women are reported to have been killed, just a few children should be reported. This relationship can be measured and quantified by the R-square (R2 ) statistic that measures how correlated the daily casualty count for women is with the daily casualty count for children. If the numbers were real, we would expect R2 to be substantively larger than 0, tending closer to 1.0. But R2 is .017 which is statistically and substantively not different from 0.

This lack of correlation is the second circumstantial piece of evidence suggesting the numbers are not real. But there is more. The daily number of women casualties should be highly correlated with the number of non-women and non-children (i.e., men) reported. Again, this is expected because of the nature of battle. The ebbs and flows of the bombings and attacks by Israel should cause the daily count to move together. But that is not what the data show. Not only is there not a positive correlation, there is a strong negative correlation, which makes no sense at all and establishes the third piece of evidence that the numbers are not real.

The daily number of children reported to have been killed is totally unrelated to the number of women reported. The R2 is .017 and the relationship is statistically and substantively insignificant.
The daily number of children reported to have been killed is totally unrelated to the number of women reported. The R2 is .017 and the relationship is statistically and substantively insignificant.

Consider some further anomalies in the data: First, the death count reported on Oct. 29 contradicts the numbers reported on the 28th, insofar as they imply that 26 men came back to life. This can happen because of misattribution or just reporting error. There are a few other days where the numbers of men are reported to be near 0. If these were just reporting errors, then on those days where the death count for men appears to be in error, the women’s count should be typical, at least on average. But it turns out that on the three days when the men’s count is near zero, suggesting an error, the women’s count is high. In fact, the three highest daily women casualty count occurs on those three days.

Taken together, what does this all imply? While the evidence is not dispositive, it is highly suggestive that a process unconnected or loosely connected to reality was used to report the numbers. Most likely, the Hamas ministry settled on a daily total arbitrarily. We know this because the daily totals increase too consistently to be real. Then they assigned about 70% of the total to be women and children, splitting that amount randomly from day to day. Then they in-filled the number of men as set by the predetermined total. This explains all the data observed.

The correlation between the daily men and daily women death count is absurdly strong and negative (p-value < .0001).
The correlation between the daily men and daily women death count is absurdly strong and negative (p-value < .0001).

There are other obvious red flags. The Gaza Health Ministry has consistently claimed that about 70% of the casualties are women or children. This total is far higher than the numbers reported in earlier conflicts with Israel. Another red flag, raised by Salo Aizenberg and written about extensively, is that if 70% of the casualties are women and children and 25% of the population is adult male, then either Israel is not successfully eliminating Hamas fighters or adult male casualty counts are extremely low. This by itself strongly suggests that the numbers are at a minimum grossly inaccurate and quite probably outright faked. Finally, on Feb. 15, Hamas admitted to losing 6,000 of its fighters, which represents more than 20% of the total number of casualties reported.

Taken together, Hamas is reporting not only that 70% of casualties are women and children but also that 20% are fighters. This is not possible unless Israel is somehow not killing noncombatant men, or else Hamas is claiming that almost all the men in Gaza are Hamas fighters.

There are three days where the male casualty count is close to 0. These three days correspond to the three highest daily women’s casualty count.
There are three days where the male casualty count is close to 0. These three days correspond to the three highest daily women’s casualty count.

Are there better numbers? Some objective commentators have acknowledged Hamas’ numbers in previous battles with Israel to be roughly accurate. Nevertheless, this war is wholly unlike its predecessors in scale or scope; international observers who were able to monitor previous wars are now completely absent, so the past can’t be assumed to be a reliable guide. The fog of war is especially thick in Gaza, making it impossible to quickly determine civilian death totals with any accuracy. Not only do official Palestinian death counts fail to differentiate soldiers from children, but Hamas also blames all deaths on Israel even if caused by Hamas’ own misfired rockets, accidental explosions, deliberate killings, or internal battles. One group of researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health compared Hamas reports to data on UNRWA workers. They argued that because the death rates were approximately similar, Hamas’ numbers must not be inflated. But their argument relied on a crucial and unverified assumption: that UNRWA workers are not disproportionately more likely to be killed than the general population. That premise exploded when it was uncovered that a sizable fraction of UNRWA workers are affiliated with Hamas. Some were even exposed as having participated in the Oct. 7 massacre itself.

The truth can’t yet be known and probably never will be. The total civilian casualty count is likely to be extremely overstated. Israel estimates that at least 12,000 fighters have been killed. If that number proves to be even reasonably accurate, then the ratio of noncombatant casualties to combatants is remarkably low: at most 1.4 to 1 and perhaps as low as 1 to 1. By historical standards of urban warfare, where combatants are embedded above and below into civilian population centers, this is a remarkable and successful effort to prevent unnecessary loss of life while fighting an implacable enemy that protects itself with civilians.

Abraham Wyner is Professor of Statistics and Data Science at The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and Faculty Co-Director of the Wharton Sports Analytics and Business Initiative.

Debunking the Genocide Allegations: A Reexamination of the Israel-Hamas War (2023-2025)

Hebrew version 
view Executive Summary – pdf

The following study offers a thorough historical exploration and a quantitative-statistical analysis of the allegation that the State of Israel committed genocide against the Gazan population following the October 7, 2023, massacre. Specifically, we address the claims that Israel intentionally starved the Gazan population, that IDF ground forces deliberately massacred civilians, and that the Israeli Air Force (IAF) carried out indiscriminate bombings, failing to distinguish between combatants and civilians and conducting disproportionate strikes.

The goal of this study is to carefully assess both primary and secondary sources in order to draw independent conclusions about the factual aspects of the conflict. This process involved reviewing testimonies, primary sources, and the methodology of data collection utilized by organizations and researchers promoting the genocide allegation, as well as conducting statistical analysis and distinguishing between narratives promoted by various parties and verified facts. The purpose of our investigation is to identify the factual events that occurred, not to engage in legal or ethical discourse. While discussing the war’s legal and ethical implications is important, we firmly believe such discussion must be grounded in a solid foundation of facts to be meaningful as well as relevant.

Our focus on factual analysis in no way diminishes or ignores the severe human suffering in Gaza, nor does it seek to downplay the rhetoric or policy failures of the Israeli government. However, as we demonstrate throughout this report, subordinating factual analysis to the advocacy of a specific policy or ethical position undermines our ability to understand the facts needed to shape informed policy and ethical conduct. Therefore, we have made every effort to avoid taking any stance or offering recommendations that are not rooted in a comprehensive factual analysis.

This research is structured into eight chapters, each addressing different aspects of the Israel-Gaza conflict:

  • Chapter 1 examines accusations of the deliberate starvation of Gaza’s civilian population.
  • Chapter 2 addresses the lack of sufficient context for understanding Israel’s military actions during the war, particularly the challenges of urban warfare. We focus primarily on Hamas’s “human shields” practice and overall strategy, recognizing that war is shaped by reciprocal measures taken by all parties involved. Thus, the actions of one side to the conflict cannot be assessed without considering those of its adversary.
  • Chapter 3 provides an in-depth analysis of claims regarding deliberate killings of civilians.
  • Chapter 4 investigates allegations that Israel systematically violated the principles of distinction and proportionality in its strikes on the Gaza Strip.
  • Chapter 5 critically reviews Gaza Health Ministry (GMOH) data and manipulations. While recognizing the uncertainty of the available figures, we offer a speculative scenario for how these manipulations skewed the actual gender and age distribution of casualties, and draw conclusions as to plausible combatant-civilian casualty ratios.
  • Chapter 6 explores the capability of UN agencies, humanitarian organizations, and major media outlets to assess humanitarian crises in closed societies under oppressive regimes such as Hamas-controlled Gaza. It draws a comparison to Iraq under U.S. sanctions between 1991 and 2003, and explores the inability of said organizations to pierce the heavy-handed humanitarian deceptions of the Iraqi regime.
  • Chapter 7 evaluates the ability of UN agencies and human rights organizations to credibly distinguish between civilians and combatants among war casualties in contexts marked by manipulation and politicization within closed or controlled societies. This chapter includes findings from a comparative analysis of the 2002 Battle of Jenin, the 2006 Lebanon War, and previous conflicts in Gaza.
  • Chapter 8 analyzes the methodologies used by UN agencies, human rights organizations, and affiliated journalists and researchers that have led to recurring analytical failures, as well as the lack of subsequent insights or corrective action, even when these failures were eventually acknowledged by the same organizations.

EXPOSING Qatar’s Double Game: Ally or Enemy of Israel?

Netanyahu’s DC visit appears to have collapsed after a secret second meeting with Trump, leading Steve Witkoff to cancel his Doha trip and Netanyahu’s team to quietly exit Washington. At the same time, ceasefire talks with Hamas fell apart over demands for a permanent truce, increased aid, early prisoner swaps, and a full IDF withdrawal from Gaza. Meanwhile, a long-delayed U.S. shipment of armored bulldozers has arrived in Israel, boosting IDF ground operations. In southern Gaza, a soldier from Yitzhar was killed in a Hamas ambush while operating heavy machinery—terrorists attempted to kidnap him, but he resisted and was fatally shot before Israeli troops intervened.

 

Kicking the can

Most of the problems we face today are as a result of them having in the past been “kicked down the road” for someone else to confront.

The explosion of jihadist terror networks and regimes is just one example of how procrastination, appeasement and a refusal to face up to facts have now resulted in the current tsunami of hate threats. Fear of confronting evil head-on and preferring to pretend a supine surrender will buy peace has proven to be a recipe for disaster.

Jew and Israel hate, now one and the same, has exploded worldwide. It was always present, but with a diminishing exposure to Holocaust education, the general population is now easy prey to being brainwashed with all the latest conspiracies about Jews. The same brainwashing technique that produced a generation of devoted Hitler Youth and provided an army of willing executioners is being replicated today.

Universities and professional associations are rapidly being subverted in the same way.

Most of the media are complicit, as their long track record demonstrates, in distorting, misreporting and accusing. The end result is a steady diet of horror stories and blatant mistruths, which inevitably leave an indelible stain against Jews and Israel.

Political leaders who in the past were experts at “kicking the can down the road” are replicating these days as they once again prefer hot air rhetoric to actually tackling hate head-on.

Back in the 1930s, Jews in Germany thought that they could buy safety by distancing themselves from the “ostjuden” – the Jews from Poland and the east who were more visibly Jewish. This, of course, did not work because to the haters, all Jews were anathema.

Likewise, today, some communal leaders in Diaspora communities think they can placate the haters if they distance themselves from their brethren in the Jewish State.

It states in Kohelet, “there is nothing new under the sun”, as a closer look at some of these current threats will prove only too well.

For years and over many American Administrations, the rise of Islamic terror regimes and their supporters was treated as something that could be safely ignored. Israel’s warnings were noted and then quickly buried. Only after American lives were lost or US interests threatened did the penny drop, but even then, half-hearted responses did not solve the problem.

A standard feature of democracies’ responses is a total lack of understanding as to what constitutes jihadist aims and the role religious fanaticism against infidels plays in Islam. The US State Department’s bias and naïve beliefs that ideological hate can be transformed with dollar bounties failed to recognise the futility of such a transformation. European and UK spinelessness combined with commercial interests and inbuilt appeasement have resulted in the mess we face today.

How many people realise that France and Germany have extensive financial and commercial involvements with Iran?

After years of looking the other way and refusing to take action, we are now faced with a US President who seems intent on addressing the situation.

The question, of course, is whether he is capable of succeeding where others have failed. Can “deals” do the trick? Israel has suffered as a result of rotten deals in the past. Israel has been deceived by so-called deals. The agreement to safeguard maritime navigation for Israeli ships pre-1967 turned out to be a worthless document when Nasser blockaded the Tiran Straits. Likewise, Presidential pledges by previous incumbents to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear capability and the means to deliver them were nothing but window dressing and an excuse not to take practical action.

The burning question of the moment is whether Trump is able to do what no other President has been able to do previously?

His quick “in and out” bombing of nuclear sites is touted as a game changer, but mystery surrounds its results. Israel did the dirty work of degrading Iran’s air defences and other facilities. Mossad’s brilliant activities on the ground contributed to an astounding success. Iran’s retaliatory missile responses caused damage and fatalities, but the fact remains that 99% of drones were shot down, and the majority of missiles were intercepted. Israel took action when it became apparent that the rest of the world preferred rhetoric and duplicitous diplomacy to actual preventative action.

Trump talks of deals with Iran. Iran hints it might be open to talks, but that is a tactic that they have successfully employed before with disastrous results. If they can deceitfully use this strategy as a ruse to rearm, reconstruct and rebuild, then nothing will be achieved. It is already reported that the Chinese are supplying replacement missiles. Without punitive sanctions and ultimate regime change, the Iranian Mullah regime will redouble its efforts to reach nuclear capability. Its aims and ambitions have not changed one iota. The destruction of the “Zionist entity” remains its primary objective.

Any deal that does not ensure that this can never happen is just another worthless piece of paper.

Any deal that does not secure the immediate release of all hostages held by Hamas is likewise worthless. There cannot be any talk of reconstruction until Hamas is totally removed and those who wish to leave Gaza are enabled to do so. Too many innocent Israeli civilians and IDF soldiers have been killed. Leaving the perpetrators in place is unthinkable.

It is time to remember the warning issued by Golda Meir when she declared that “you cannot make peace with someone who has come to kill you.”

If Obama and Arafat could be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, the suggestion that Trump can be nominated is not so outrageous. The fact that Israel has written and nominated him is bound to doom his prospects because Israel is anathema as far as most international groups are concerned.

If one wants to witness political huffing and bluffing in action, look no further than what is transpiring in many countries as mindless mobs rampage and cause mayhem.

In the United Kingdom, every weekend in London is disrupted by screaming and threatening demonstrators. Hurling the vilest epithets against Israel, Zionists, Jews and anyone who supports them, without doubt, generates further hate and incitement. Violence is not far behind. Police passivity in the face of these blatant expressions of pure evil has been a standard feature. In recent times however faced with rising criticism a more robust response has been forthcoming.

After a painful period of trying to avoid upsetting jihadist supporters, the UK Government finally banned “Palestine Action.” Their defiant intention to intensify anti-Israel activities will prove whether the authorities are serious about arresting and prosecuting them. The next question, of course, will be whether the courts pass meaningful sentences or merely issue slaps on the wrist.

Left-wing Labour MP, together with knee-jerk Zionist haters from other parties, have already condemned the attempt to ban hate marches. Corbyn and his friends are working hard to condemn, sanction and boycott Israel. Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, declares his intention to further punish Israel if it does not surrender in Gaza.

Where the UK goes, so it seems, does the Australian Federal Labour Government follow. Well, not quite, because it has yet to implement complete bans against inciting groups or take firm action to squash the rising tide of Jew and Israel hate.

The response has been full of righteous rhetoric and plenty of political hot air, in the face of unprecedented attacks against Israeli/Jewish business premises and arson attempts against synagogues. The promise to create yet more committees to study the problem is a classic way for politicians to kick the can down the road while actually doing nothing.

Who needs more committees when there are already sufficient tools available to tackle the problem?  If existing laws are not strong enough to deal with the epidemic of Jew hate, then introduce legislation that will address the challenge. Empower the police and security services to act. Instead of hand ringing and pathetic blathering about social cohesion and Islamophobia, take off the kid gloves and ban the worst offenders. Deport the worst inciters or make sure that the courts pass meaningful punishments for those making inciting sermons and advocating death. Nip assaults against communal premises in the bud by taking firm action instead of letting the offenders escape and then appealing to the public for help.

The jihadist agitators can discern weakness, which is why in Australia and elsewhere they take pride in redoubling their efforts. Establishing a Holocaust museum in Canberra is all very nice, but it is not going to deter the haters and all those whose minds are irredeemably poisoned by an incessant torrent of lies.

The diabolical situation that now exists in universities and beyond is a direct result of years of refusal to act.

Kicking the can is a fatal dead end.

Get serious before the situation becomes uncontrollable. Instead of futile hand ringing, take off the gloves.

Impressive or miraculous?

26 juli 2015, Ferryvlucht van Fort Worth AB Texas naar Eglin AB Florida...JSF F-35 met Registratie AN-1, tailnummer F001 Werd 24 juli 2015 door Lokheed Martin overgedragen aan Nederland..Om 11:07h Texaaanse tijd word de eerste JSF overgevlogen van Fort Worth AB naar Eglin AB...26 juli 2015, Ferryvlucht van Fort Worth AB Texas naar Eglin AB Florida...JSF F-35 met Registratie AN-1, tailnummer F001 Werd 24 juli 2015 door Lokheed Martin overgedragen aan Nederland..Om 11:07h Texaaanse tijd word de eerste JSF overgevlogen van Fort Worth AB naar Eglin AB....Foto: Eerste Nederlandse vlucht F-35 AN-1

Warplanes of the State of Israel flew close to 400 sorties over Iran with 600 aerial refueling connections during Operation Rising Lion. Not a single jet faltered or fumbled along the way, none had technical difficulties, not a single jet was hit by enemy fire, and not a single pilot was injured or fell into enemy hands.

Is that enormously impressive or outright miraculous?

IAF attack and surveillance drones flew an additional 1,100 sorties into Iran, and only eight drones were lost in the campaign. Together, the jets and drones successfully struck over 900 targets in Iran with 4,300 munitions, including nine nuclear sites, six airports and air bases (including Mashad Airport in eastern Iran which is 2,400 kilometers away from Israel), and 35 missile and air defense production facilities.

All the strikes were executed flawlessly, and not a single Iranian defensive system or guard force managed to interdict these operations.

IDF commandoes and Mossad agents operated inside Iran or from bases just across Iran’s borders, launching UAVs and secret weapon systems to neutralize Iranian abilities and target Iranian military and intelligence leaders. Not a single Iranian defensive system or guard force discovered these Israeli boots-on-the-ground in real time nor managed to interfere with these operations. All undercover Israeli soldiers and agents returned home to Israel safely.

In classic military assessment, such flawless performance and perfect results are statistically impossible. Unheard of. Unprecedented. Hard to believe.

So again, I ask, is this (merely) wildly impressive or wholly miraculous?

Over 14 days, Israel was able to neatly demolish 80 Iranian surface-to-air missile systems, 70 radars, 15 Iranian warplanes, 200 of Iran’s estimated 400 missile launchers, and 800 to 1,000 of Iran’s estimated 2,000 ballistic missiles. In both quantity and speed of execution, this exceeded IDF planning and expectations, and again, not a single Iranian defensive system managed to interdict these operations.

Israel also assassinated 30 senior Iranian military and IRGC officers, hundreds of Basij personnel, and 11 top scientists who were key knowledge-holders in Iran’s nuclear enrichment and weaponization colossus.

All this, of course, demonstrates deep intelligence penetration and matchless Israeli military planning, enormous professionalism, and supreme heroism. But given the improbabilities of it all, given the absoluteness of the accomplishment, given the power of the punch – might it also necessarily point to support from a Supreme Hand in the heavens?

NOW CONSIDER Iran’s attacks on Israel. On June 12, the night before the war, at the cabinet meeting convened to approve Operation Rising Lion, the IDF estimated that between 400 to 800 Israeli civilians could be killed in Iranian missile assaults. According to some reports, Israeli leaders were warned that if the war extended beyond two weeks and Iran was able to fire all its 2,000+ missiles into Israel including the two-ton versions, the death toll could rise to 4,000 Israelis.

In the end, Iran managed to fire about 600 missiles at Israel in 18 barrages, but 87% were intercepted by Israeli and other defensive systems. Another 1,200 Iranian drones were launched into Israel, but 99% were downed by defensive systems.

In cold military terms, such high interception rates of enemy missiles and drones are almost statistically impossible. Certainly unparalleled. Successful beyond belief.

So, is this just fantastically impressive or also spectacularly miraculous?

Unfortunately, 50 missiles and one drone broke through Israeli defensives, killing 29 Israelis, wounding 3,500 more, destroying 2,300 homes in 240 buildings, and leaving 16,000 Israeli civilians homeless. All Israelis suffered through more than 600 enemy attack alerts (more than 12,000 alarms across the county in all), sleep deprivation, economic and social dislocation, and plenty of trauma. Enemy missile fire struck a central military base, a key Israeli oil refinery, and one of the country’s top scientific research institutions.

But given how bad it could have been, how much worse it was expected to be, how devastating an enemy nuclear strike on Israel might have been, God forbid – it is hard to shake the feeling that the Heavens were in on the protection plan for Israel too.

In short, the statistics are totally triumphant, miraculously so. They are not logical unless you calculate something lofty and exalted beyond the mundane math.

THE MASTERFUL Israeli assault on Iran has restored Israel’s deterrent power and blessedly improved its strategic situation, especially after the failures of October 7, 2023. More importantly, Israel’s victories in Operation Rising Lion will perhaps point to something grander than the natural order, driving the way to spiritual conclusions.

By this I mean that maybe the miracles bestowed upon Israel in the recent war will assist people to perceive Providence at work. Perhaps the supernatural victories will lead citizens of the world to ponder the Jewish People and the State of Israel as repositories of eternal truths and as generators of moral purpose.

After all, if you permit that Israel’s victories are not just impressive, but Divine, everything changes. As one ditty going around the internet this week (hazily attributed to Allister Heath of the Daily Telegraph) declares: “Once you admit that Israel’s survival is Divine, your moral compass has to reset. Your (secular) assumptions about history, power, and justice collapse. If the ancient, hated nation of Israel is somehow still chosen, protected, and thriving – then maybe God isn’t a myth after all.”

Again, given the threats arrayed against Israel, and given Israel’s wonderous recent victories, can one deny the stark, palpable intervention of God, alongside Israel’s own prowess?

Can the genocidal gutter-chant “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” hold out against the defiant demonstration of Providential Power on behalf of the State of Israel? I do not think it can.

THE LATE Lord Rabbi Dr. Jonathan Sacks taught that the chronicles of humanity are nothing less than a drama of redemption, in which the fate of nations reflects their loyalty (or otherwise) to covenant with God.

For Jews in particular, he argued, this imposes tremendous responsibility to do things right because they are reputationally associated with the Creator; they are mandated to create “Kiddush Hashem” – a sanctification of God’s name in the world.

Non-Jews also have understood Jewish history this way. Sacks quotes the Russian Marxist thinker Nikolai Berdayev (The Meaning of History, 1936), who late in life came to the conclusion that the script of Jewish history bears the mark of God’s hand.

Berdayev: “The survival (of Jews) is a mysterious and wonderful phenomenon demonstrating that the life of this people is governed by a special predetermination, transcending the processes of adaptation expounded by the materialistic interpretation of history. The survival of the Jews, their resistance to destruction, their endurance under absolutely peculiar conditions and the fateful role played by them in history: all these point to the particular and mysterious foundations of their destiny.”

I think that Rising Lion indeed is a “peculiar and fateful” moment in history, a moment for spiritual introspection not just strategic recalculation.

The victories of Rising Lion, categorically impressive and exceptionally miraculous, ought to point beyond themselves to something grander than the natural order – to the attentive hand of God in our world.

How Dare Israel Win a Defensive War!

Imagine reading the following headline: “Man shoved onto subway tracks survives, but at what cost?”

This is how the media handles the story every time Israel outwits its enemies and lives to fight another day.

The latest version comes from Michael Shear in the New York Times, though it is entirely representative of the general theme of postwar reporting on Israel, to say nothing of the social-media “influencers” forced to find some way to cope with another successful Israeli defense of its sovereignty.

The Times headline is: “The Cost of Victory: Israel Overpowered Its Foes, but Deepened Its Isolation.”

Translation: The losing side is resentful of the victors.

The headline’s claim doesn’t even hold up. Israel had the use of Syrian airspace for its attacks on Iran, and Jerusalem and Damascus are in negotiations over burying the hatchet completely. Flying over the Arab world to take out Iran’s air defenses is a sign not of isolation but of integration.

That quibble aside, there is a larger problem with this conceit. Take this paragraph from Shear’s piece:

“Mr. Netanyahu’s relentless and unapologetic military response to the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack that killed 1,200 people and took 250 people hostage has cemented the view of Israel as a pariah, its leadership accused of genocide and war crimes, and disdained by some world leaders. In opinion polls globally, most people have a negative view of Israel.”

The first thing to note about that paragraph is that this characterization of Israel’s standing was the same as it was before the war, even though the Times portrays it as a result of the war.

A quick search, for example, shows the Times warning of Israel’s “pariah” status—using that exact word—for nearly 20 years.

Israel’s leadership “accused of genocide and war crimes”? Welcome to the party, pal. Was this article written in 1982 or 2025? The answer is: yes. Most of Israel’s bad press is made of 100 percent recycled material.

Israel’s government is “disdained by some world leaders”? As if that’s a new development. The president of France disdaining the Jewish state is what we call “the status quo.”

I will go one step further: All those things were said after Oct. 7, 2023 and before Israel went into Gaza. This point is crucial, because the genocide accusations were leveled after Hamas carried out an explicitly genocidal attack on the Jewish state. Israel is punished for weakness and punished for strength. So it might as well choose the latter, right?

Support for Israel, the Times warns, “has become a fiercely contentious issue in Congress, the subject of angry debates and protests on college campuses and fuel for a surge in antisemitic incidents in the United States and around the world.”

So what I’m reading here is that when an Egyptian man in Colorado burned alive an 82-year-old Jewish woman, it’s on Israel’s head—not the man who murdered her, not the mouth-foaming activists and politicians yelling “globalize the intifada” and other slogans encouraging people to burn Jews alive, and not the city, state or country that didn’t protect her.

Another way of saying this: How dare the Jews survive! Our survival only causes the world to keep trying to kill us!

And again, those masses gathering on college campuses around the country (and the Western world) waving Hamas and Hezbollah flags? They were mobilizing the moment—and I mean the moment, the very second—the Hamas attacks were carried and while the attacks were still ongoing and therefore long before Israel had formulated a response of any kind.

Then we’re told that Israel’s “violence has strained the good will of the country’s allies and neighbors.” Reminder that before Oct. 7, 2023, Israel’s neighbors included Hezbollah and Bashar al-Assad’s Syria. I’d love to see the author’s personal list of acts of goodwill performed by Hezbollah and Assad.

After that, the article goes back to blaming Jews for attacks on them, telling us that “many Israelis now feel threatened while abroad, even as they are more secure at home.”

Well if they just feel threatened I suppose it’s not much to worry about. But perhaps it is, in the words of the band Boston, more than a feeling? Perhaps it is, say, a pogrom in Amsterdam, the city where Anne Frank hid in an attic?

At this point we’re about a quarter of the way through the Times article. The rest is just these nonsense points repeated ad nauseum.

All of this is because Israel fought a defensive war. Well actually, it’s because Israel won a defensive war. And its enemies and critics are struggling to cope.