IDF praises soldier’s ‘composure’ during Samaria stabbing attack
(JNS.org) Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Staff Sgt. Tomer Lan, who was stabbed in the back by a Palestinian terrorist on Wednesday in Samaria, “prevented a larger terrorist attack” when he “acted with composure and as required by a combat soldier,” the IDF said.
Lan was able to shake off his injuries and shoot the terrorist dead. A search of the terrorist’s body revealed a knife and a copy of the Quran. Lan was released after treatment at Shaare Zedek Medical Center in Jerusalem.
“We were tasked with operating in an area near Shiloh,” Lan said, Israel Hayom reported. “I am a medic in the [Tavor] battalion’s medical platoon. Our regular mission was to patrol the road and make our presence felt. In the morning, during our usual mission, I was outside the ambulance, and a Palestinian approached us. He walked by me, did not seem suspicious and then continued on for a hundred meters and disappeared. Seconds later he turned around and came back in my direction. When he was meters away, he began sprinting and screaming and took out a knife, I did not see from where, and stabbed me in the back. I fell into a pile of rocks.”
He continued, “While I was on the ground he entered our vehicle where two of my friends sat, and stabbed them. I got up from the ground, took my weapon, shot, and killed him. After the terrorist was killed, my friend got out of the vehicle and was covered in blood. He spoke to me, said he was okay. I saw how many injuries he had, in the neck, hand. I gave him first aid, stopped his bleeding, and called for emergency medical services and for backup. I myself am okay, only a few cuts in my back.”
Wednesday’s attack marked the second stabbing attack in Samaria in a week. Last Thursday, near Oranit, a soldier from the Paratrooper’s 101st Brigade was stabbed by a Palestinian and lightly wounded. The soldier managed to overpower the attacker and arrest him.
*
Former U.S. secretaries of state slam framework Iran deal
(Israel Hayom/Exclusive to JNS.org) In a joint op-ed published by The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, former U.S. secretaries of state Henry Kissinger and George P. Shultz criticized President Barack Obama for the recently reached framework nuclear deal between world powers and Iran.
“For 20 years, three presidents of both major parties proclaimed that an Iranian nuclear weapon was contrary to American and global interests—and that they were prepared to use force to prevent it,” Kissinger and Shultz wrote. “Yet negotiations that began 12 years ago as an international effort to prevent an Iranian capability to develop a nuclear arsenal are ending with an agreement that concedes this very capability, albeit short of its full capacity in the first 10 years.”
“Mixing shrewd diplomacy with open defiance of U.N. resolutions, Iran has gradually turned the negotiation on its head,” they wrote. “Iran’s centrifuges have multiplied from about 100 at the beginning of the negotiation to almost 20,000 today. The threat of war now constrains the West more than Iran. While Iran treated the mere fact of its willingness to negotiate as a concession, the West has felt compelled to break every deadlock with a new proposal. In the process, the Iranian program has reached a point officially described as being within two to three months of building a nuclear weapon. Under the proposed agreement, for 10 years Iran will never be further than one year from a nuclear weapon and, after a decade, will be significantly closer.”
Kissinger and Shultz pointed out the difficulties of ensuring Iran would abide by the deal. “In a large country with multiple facilities and ample experience in nuclear concealment, violations will be inherently difficult to detect. … The agreement’s primary enforcement mechanism, the threat of renewed sanctions, emphasizes a broad-based asymmetry, which provides Iran permanent relief from sanctions in exchange for temporary restraints on Iranian conduct.”
*
Brooklyn judge rejects Arab Bank bid to overturn terrorism-funding verdict
(JNS.org) A Brooklyn district judge on Wednesday rejected a bid by Jordan-based Arab Bank to overturn a verdict by a jury that found it liable for supporting terrorism against Israelis.
The bank was originally sued by the victims of 24 terror attacks in Israel that have been blamed on the Palestinian terror group Hamas. The plaintiffs accused Arab Bank of providing Hamas with material and financial support. The case marked the first time in U.S. history that a bank stood trial over charges stemming from the Anti-Terrorism Act, which enables American victims of U.S.-designated foreign terror groups to seek compensation.
The jury’s verdict last September “was based on volumes of damning circumstantial evidence that [the] defendant knew its customers were terrorists,” U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan said Wednesday in a ruling relating to post-trial motions, calling Arab Bank “willfully blind” to the Hamas ties of charities it had routed money to. But the judge did dismiss a pair of claims relating to two of the 24 terror attacks included in the lawsuit, citing insufficient evidence that Hamas had orchestrated those attacks.
The court’s opinion “confirms that there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s having knowing provided material support to Hamas,” said Gary Osen, an attorney for several of the victims, Reuters reported. On July 13, Judge Cogan will preside over a hearing to determine the financial damages Arab Bank must pay for the three of the attacks.
*
Chicago re-elects Jewish mayor and former White House official Rahm Emanuel
(JNS.org) Chicago’s Jewish mayor, Rahm Emanuel, was re-elected Tuesday in the city’s first mayoral runoff since changing its election procedures 20 years ago. Emanual defeated his opponent, Cook County Commissioner Jesus “Chuy” Garcia, 56-44 percent.
Emanuel was first elected mayor of Chicago in 2011. He previously served as White House chief of staff under President Barack Obama.
Though Emanuel was born in Chicago, his Israeli father, Benjamin Emanuel, was involved with the Zionist militia organization Irgun, which fought for Israeli independence prior to the Jewish state’s establishment in 1948. Emanuel was a dual American-Israeli citizen until the age of 18 and volunteered for a civilian program run by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) during the Gulf War.
Emanuel’s views on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, however, have come under scrutiny in the pro-Israel community. In a recent interview with The New Republic, he said, “Hamas is as weak as it’s going to be. [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud] Abbas is ready to work with Israel. Israel has a security concern involving geography. But geography does not have the same value it did in 1967. And I want to say that there is nothing I just said that major figures in the national security apparatus of the IDF and Israel haven’t said publicly. Nothing!”
Additionally, Emanuel lamented that American politicians are “not allowed” to express the same criticism of Israel that is being expressed by Israeli politicians.
*
New York Times calls Israel’s Iran nuclear deal demands ‘unrealistic’
(JNS.org) The New York Times editorial board wrote on Tuesday that Israel’s demands for a final agreement in the Iran nuclear deal are “unrealistic.” The newspaper, which pro-Israel advocates and media watchdog groups have long accused of bias against the Jewish state, also praised the recently reached framework nuclear deal as “potentially groundbreaking.”
On Monday, Israeli Minister of Intelligence and Strategic Affairs Yuval Steinitz laid out several specific requirements that Israel sees as necessary in any final agreement. Among the requirements, Steinitz called for an end to all research and development activity on advanced centrifuges; a more significant reduction in the number of centrifuges; the complete closing of the Fordo underground nuclear facility; the revelation of Iran’s past nuclear activities; an Iranian commitment to ship enriched uranium abroad; and “anywhere, anytime” inspections.
The deadline for a final nuclear deal between Iran and world powers is June 30. The New York Times editorial said that Israel’s “new demands are unrealistic and, if pursued, would not mean a better deal but no deal at all.” The newspaper argued that Netanyahu has not offered any “workable options.”
“In any negotiation, there could never be a deal without compromise. … Ultimately, Mr. Obama had to make many judgment calls in getting a deal that would prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon,” stated the editorial.
While calling Iran’s threats against Israel and the Islamic Republic’s involvement in terrorism “heinous and unacceptable,” the New York Times said Netanyahu’s demand that Iran recognize Israel should be dealt with separately—not as part of a nuclear deal, as the Israeli prime minister suggested. Israel’s demands “must not become an excuse to scuttle what seems to be a very serious and potentially groundbreaking deal,” the editorial concluded.
*
Brandeis U. questioned over commencement speaker’s remarks on Israel
(JNS.org) Brandeis University is being questioned for its selection of former U.S. ambassador Thomas Pickering as commencement speaker due to his controversial remarks on Israel.
Pickering served for more than four decades as a U.S. diplomat, with his last position as undersecretary of state for political affairs. He also served as America’s ambassador to the United Nations, the Russian Federation, India, Israel, and Jordan.
In an op-ed he co-wrote last year for Politico, Pickering called Israel’s presence in the disputed territories an “illegal land grab” and urged the Obama administration to take a tougher stand against Israel on that issue. More recently, Pickering joined more than 50 foreign policy experts who applauded the Obama administration for the recently reached framework nuclear deal with Iran and called on Congress to hold off on reviewing the deal. The Israeli government and many American pro-Israel advocates are opposed to the Iran deal and supportive of Congressional oversight of the agreement.
Brandeis’s choice of Pickering follows the Jewish-sponsored university’s controversial decision last year to rescind an honorary degree it had planned to give Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a women’s rights activist and critic of Islamic extremism, due to her statements about Islam.
Lori Lowenthal Marcus, the U.S. correspondent for The Jewish Press, wrote that Pickering has a “reputation of being extremely anti-Israel even amongst his peers” and that the university’s commencement speaker selection fails to uphold the values of the its namesake, former Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis.
“If Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis, the ardent Zionist and advocate for the disenfranchised…could see what his namesake university was doing, he would demand his name be removed,” wrote Marcus.
Despite some of Pickering’s controversial positions on Israel, he was an outspoken opponent of the U.N.’s “Zionism is Racism” resolution and played a role in getting that resolution repealed while he served as U.S. ambassador to the U.N. under President George H.W. Bush.
*
Articles from JNS.org appear on San Diego Jewish World through the generosity of Dr. Bob and Mao Shillman
__________________________________________________________________
Care to comment? We require the following information on any letter for publication: 1) Your full name 2) Your city and state (or country) of residence. Letters lacking such information will be automatically deleted. San Diego Jewish World is intended as a forum for the entire Jewish community, whatever your political leanings. Letters may be posted below provided they are responsive to the article that prompted them, and civil in their tone. Ad hominem attacks against any religion, country, gender, race, sexual orientation, or physical disability will not be considered for publication. There is a limit of one letter per writer on any given day.
__________________________________________________________________