Zionism’s Lost Shine

[seemslikeadream]

ELI LAKE’S SERIAL DEFENSE OF BIBI NETANYAHU’S CLANDESTINE TAMPERING MAKES HIM THE POSTER CHILD PROVING ILHAN OMAR RIGHT

March 6, 2019/80 Comments/in Intelligence /by empty wheel

I haven’t really engaged in the serial debate over what Ilhan Omar or Rashida Tlaib should be permitted to say without being accused of anti-Semitism. Yes, as Muslim women, they are being selectively targeted, even as the President and Steve King make blatant racist comments with less pushback. But at least from afar, my sense was that the serial efforts to silence them have backfired, delineating (even as Bibi Netanyahu desperately shifts further right in a bid to retain power while being prosecuted for being a criminal sleaze) both the degree to which Congress has lagged the country in recognizing areas where Israel can and should be criticized and the degree to which a goodly number of American Jews agree with that. Omar and Tlaib will weather these attacks, I figure, and in the process, a lot of apology for Israeli human rights abuses will be exposed.

That was before I saw this astonishing column from Eli Lake. His specific attack — the purported complaint justifying the column — is that Omar has said, in several ways, that Israel has too much influence in Congress.

In response to a tweet from Representative Nita Lowey of New York, Omar explained that she “should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress.” The implication was that supporters of Israel in Congress were more loyal to the Jewish state than to America. The tweet followed an appearance at a Washington bookstore where she said she just wanted to talk about the influence of Israel on Congress without being called anti-Semitic.

Before he gets there, though, he rehearses past statements Omar has made that rightly were deemed tin-eared, but were also complaints about the influence of Israel in Congress.

That followed a tweet she sent last month suggesting that congressional support for Israel is “all about the Benjamins.”

Sensing a pattern? Omar has already had to apologize twice for her comments about Israel and its lobby. She didn’t know, she said, that saying Israel had hypnotized the world into accepting its war crimes might be offensive to Jews. She didn’t understand, she explained, how vile it is to say that members of Congress vote in favor of Israel because they are paid off. She says she opposes anti-Semitism but will not be silenced when it comes to the Jewish state’s pernicious efforts to shape U.S. foreign policy.

And before Eli Lake gets there, he first accuses elected Congresswoman Ilhan Omar — who, after all, is asking for a more balanced debate on Middle Eastern issues — of (!!!) “self-appointed policing of the national interest.” [my emphasis]

Now, before I go back and look at the truly disgusting accusation Lake makes of Omar because she opines that Israel has too much influence in Congress (Lake, down in paragraph nine, ultimately admits “criticism of the pro-Israel lobby is not in and of itself anti-Semitic”), let me talk about why it is so absurd that Lake, of all people, is making this attack.

Let’s pretend for the moment (I don’t agree, at all, but just for sake of debate) that Omar’s critics are right: that the language that she uses to criticize Israel’s influence on Congress continues to be anti-Semitic, which devalues her argument that Israel exercises detrimental influence in this country.

Now let’s consider how that argument comes from Eli Lake.

Lake has, twice, been the stenographer for complaints launched by Catholic congressman Devin Nunes about how the Executive Branch of the United States treats SIGINT capturing Israel’s efforts to undermine the official policy of the United States.

The second time was when Trump’s pick to be National Security Advisor, at a time when he was under active counterintelligence investigation for his ties to Russia, and at a time when he had not registered for serving as an agent of the state of Turkey, called up Russia’s ambassador to ask him to undercut the stated foreign policy position of then President Obama.

On or about December 21, 2016, Egypt submitted a resolution to the United Nations Security Council on the issue of Israeli settlements (“resolution”). The United Nations Security Council was scheduled to vote on the resolution the following day.

On or about December 22, 2016, a very senior member of the Presidential Transition Team directed FLYNN to contact officials from foreign governments, including Russia, to learn where each government stood on the resolution and to influence those governments to delay the vote or defeat the resolution.

On or about December 22, 2016, FLYNN contacted the Russian Ambassador about the pending vote. FLYNN informed the Russian Ambassador about the incoming administration’s opposition to the resolution, and requested that Russia vote against or delay the resolution.

As Lake himself reported, this Jared Kushner-led effort was coordinated with Bibi Netanyahu, whose lackeys were sharing their own intelligence to try to defeat the stated policy of the Administration at the time.

This was the context of Kushner’s instruction to Flynn last December. One transition official at the time said Kushner called Flynn to tell him he needed to get every foreign minister or ambassador from a country on the U.N. Security Council to delay or vote against the resolution. Much of this appeared to be coordinated also with Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose envoys shared their own intelligence about the Obama administration’s lobbying efforts to get member states to support the resolution with the Trump transition team.

Now, not only did Mike Flynn (who was raised Catholic) call up the Russian Ambassador to try to thwart the policy of the United States, but he did so after someone in Trump’s transition told Obama that they would not undercut Obama’s policies before inauguration. When Flynn was asked about doing so by the FBI, he lied.

Those two attempts to hide this effort makes it a clandestine effort, backed by the intelligence of a foreign nation, to undercut the stated policy of the United States.

I mean, Devin Nunes was also upset that the Obama Administration caught Flynn and others trying to monetize policy considerations with the Emirates. But the 2017 panic over unmasking — sown largely by Eli Lake — has to do with Flynn and others being exposed for clandestinely working with foreign governments to undermine the stated policy of the US, and — at times in conjunction with that effort — to cash in on doing so.

Devin Nunes and Eli Lake think unmasking those communications was improper. (Here’s a tweet linking Lake’s series trying to claim this was some big civil liberties problem.)

According to Nunes as relayed by his scribe Eli Lake, the second unmasking panic built on an earlier one. The earlier one pertained (in part) to Israel sharing the intelligence it had collected by spying on Americans with Americans in an effort to undercut the policy of the President of the United States pursuing a peace deal with Iran.

Stepped-up NSA eavesdropping revealed to the White House how Mr. Netanyahu and his advisers had leaked details of the U.S.-Iran negotiations—learned through Israeli spying operations—to undermine the talks; coordinated talking points with Jewish-American groups against the deal; and asked undecided lawmakers what it would take to win their votes, according to current and former officials familiar with the intercepts

.

As the WSJ (which Lake endorsed during our Twitter spat on this) laid out, unlike the Mike Flynn intercepts, the Obama Administration did not specifically ask for NSA to unmask any members of Congress; it let NSA decide what needed to be shared to make sense of the intercepts. But what NSA did share revealed how Israel was lobbying Congress to get votes to undercut the Administration. The intercepts also revealed which Israelis who had been privy to US classified briefings were leaking that information.

[T]he White House let the NSA decide what to share and what to withhold, officials said. “We didn’t say, ‘Do it,’ ” a senior U.S. official said. “We didn’t say, ‘Don’t do it.’ ”

[snip]

Netanyahu to deliver a speech to a joint session of Congress. A day later, Mr. Boehner called Ron Dermer, the Israeli ambassador, to get Mr. Netanyahu’s agreement.

Despite NSA surveillance, Obama administration officials said they were caught off guard when Mr. Boehner announced the invitation on Jan. 21.

Soon after, Israel’s lobbying campaign against the deal went into full swing on Capitol Hill, and it didn’t take long for administration and intelligence officials to realize the NSA was sweeping up the content of conversations with lawmakers.

The message to the NSA from the White House amounted to: “You decide” what to deliver, a former intelligence official said.

[snip]

The NSA reports allowed administration officials to peer inside Israeli efforts to turn Congress against the deal. Mr. Dermer was described as coaching unnamed U.S. organizations—which officials could tell from the context were Jewish-American groups—on lines of argument to use with lawmakers, and Israeli officials were reported pressing lawmakers to oppose the deal.

[snip]

A U.S. intelligence official familiar with the intercepts said Israel’s pitch to undecided lawmakers often included such questions as: “How can we get your vote? What’s it going to take?”

NSA intelligence reports helped the White House figure out which Israeli government officials had leaked information from confidential U.S. briefings. [my emphasis]

In other words, this earlier panic was handled the way surveillance is; it only became a problem because so many members of Congress, from both parties, were being caught up in calls with Bibi or his minions. That is, it only became a panic because Israel so aggressively and confidently believes it can bend the will of Congress.

Which seems to be Omar’s point.

So the second panic is based off a first one that deems normal surveillance improper because Israel generally and Bibi specifically so prolifically lobbies Congress that normal surveillance amounts to a breach of the separation of powers.

Which is why this thread started with me mocking that the chief scribe for Nunes’ complaints that Bibi’s efforts — in both 2014 and 2016 — to undermine the stated policy of the United States got picked up by the NSA.



After that, he spent the day complaining (seven times!) that I was writing a post on a breaking surveillance issue and doing an hour long conference call on surveillance, rather than explaining why spying on Bibi (and suspected foreign agent Mike Flynn) undermining stated US foreign policy wasn’t a civil liberties issue.

I hope you can see how Eli Lake, of all people, is not very persuasive in suggesting that Ilhan Omar’s views — that Israel has too much influence over Congress — must be silenced.

And Eli Lake, the chief scribe attempting to portray pretty exceptional efforts by Bibi Netanyahu to get Christians like Devin Nunes and Mike Flynn and Tom Cotton to undercut the stated policy of the US, doesn’t just scold elected Representative Ilhan Omar for being her, quote, “self-appointed policing of the national interest.” He also likens her — by spinning what his own actions prove to be Israel’s exceptional influence over Congress generally, including Christians — to David Duke.

Here is a Somali-American refugee success story, a woman who embodies the American ideal of citizenship not based on race, creed or religion. And yet, in barely two months in office, the Minnesota Democrat has repeatedly questioned the loyalty of Zionists.

Historically this kind of thing has been associated with the ugly nativist strain of American politics. David Duke famously called the federal government the ZOG, for Zionist-Occupied Government. A similar note was sounded by Pat Buchanan, who once called Congress Israel’s “amen corner.” More recently one finds this sentiment on the left: A few years back, the Center for American Progress parted ways with a few bloggers after they used the term “Israel Firster” to describe pro-Israel members of Congress

.

I wouldn’t consider Devin Nunes or Mike Flynn or Tom Cotton to be Zionists at all (though Cotton is definitely a Neocon). But somehow Lake spins what his very career proves to be the case — that Israel exercises a great deal of influence in DC — to suggest Somali-American Omar is a nativist.

From anyone else, this would just be a stupid racist attack. But coming from Lake it is parody that nevertheless proves Omar’s point better than almost anything else could.

Update: Changed how I described Flynn’s FARA crime to match the timeline DOJ currently uses.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2019/03/06/e ... mar-right/

[seemslikeadream]

Netanyahu Says Will Begin Annexing West Bank if He Wins Israel Election
Netanyahu tells Channel 12 three days before election that he will not 'evacuate any community' nor divide Jerusalem: 'A Palestinian state will endanger our existence'

Haaretz Apr 07, 2019 1:24 PM
FILE PHOTO: The Jewish settlement of Neve Yaakov in the northern area of east Jerusalem, April 1, 2019.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Israel's Channel 12 News on Saturday evening that he will start extending Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank if re-elected prime minister in the election on April 9.

>> Israel election 2019: Full coverage

It remains unclear at this point whether Netanyahu was referring to all of the West Bank, or only parts of it.

Haaretz Weekly Ep. 21Haaretz

"A Palestinian state will endanger our existence and I withstood huge pressure over the past eight years, no prime minister has withstood such pressure. We must control our destiny," the premier said.


Israels Netanyahu to annex West Bank settlements if reelected


>> Annexing the West Bank: Why We Must Take Netanyahu's Pre-election Stunt Seriously ■ Explained: Two states, one and other solutions ■ Donald Trump legitimized Israel's illegal conquest of occupied territory

After boasting that he was responsible for U.S. President Donald Trump's declaration recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, Netanyahu told the program "Meet the Press": "Will we move ahead to the next stage? Yes. I will extend sovereignty but I don't distinguish between the settlement blocs and the isolated ones, because each settlement is Israeli and I will not hand it over to Palestinian sovereignty."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu planting a tree in a West Bank settlement, January 28, 2019.

"I will not divide Jerusalem, I will not evacuate any community and I will make sure we control the territory west of Jordan," Netanyahu told the show's host, Rina Matzliah.

Asked what will happen to the Bedouin community of Khan al-Ahmar, which Netanyahu has vowed to evacuate but has still not been and which has been at the center of international condemnations against the decision, Netanyahu promised that "it will happen, I promised and it will happen at the soonest opportunity."

The prime minister refused to say whether he would support term limits, saying there is still a lof of work he needs to do.

'No force in the world will stop us'

Other party heads were also interviewed on the same show. Benny Gantz said his Kahol Lavan "will be the biggest party" after Election Day. "There's no force in the world, even that of smaller parties who know the Netanyahu era is over" to prevent Kahol Lavan from heading Israel's next government, he said.

Gantz added chances of him joining a Netanyahu-led government are "non-existent," adding he was hoping to "discuss some fundamental issues" with Netanyahu, who "didn't take up the gauntlet." He also said "Israelis know very well where 13 years of Netanyahu brought them … The public will have its word."

Asked whether Kahol Lavan supports a two-state solution for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Gantz only said it "is for striving toward peace … We'll push for a diplomatic process." He added his party "wishes to keep Israel a Jewish and democratic state, and not a bi-national state."

Gantz also said the Labor Party "is a future partner in any constellation … it's an important partner." Responding to calls to eliminate his rotation agreement with Yair Lapid for prime minister, Gantz said he "is a senior, excellent partner, who will be an excellent prime minister."

Labor Party Chairman Avi Gabbay vowed to support Gantz for prime minister, saying he "is an excellent man, and we want him to succeed … [But] if it won't be the Labor's way, there'll be a right-wing coalition, no matter who leads it … Any voter who wants change, who doesn't want to see Netanyahu as prime minister, must vote Labor."

Hadash-Ta'al Chairman Ayman Odeh said "the prime minister lies just like he breathes and just like he incites" against Israel's Arab citizens.

Asked whether he would join Gantz if he is elected, Odeh answered: "I didn't say I'll be part of Gantz's coalition, we're not in his pocket. He'll have to come to us, talk to us and respect us. He said he respects the Arab public but not the Arab leadership; that is wild incitement."

Meretz chairwoman Tamar Zandberg said her party would back Gantz as prime minister, despite reports about his intentions to potentially form a national unity government with Netanyahu. “That is the reason supporters of the left must vote Meretz, so that Gantz will have to form a government with the left. If he turns to Likud, or Likud turn to him, supporters of the left are going to bang their head against to wall the next day.”

'I will not crown the left'

Hayamin Hehadash leader Naftali Bennett said he wouldn't enter a Gantz-led government "not even in a thousand years. Gantz is a leftist. He's a nice person but unfit to run the country."

Asked about removing Netanyahu's immunity should he be indicted in his corruption cases, Bennett said his position "would depend on the charges," adding that the press doesn't "really care about the rule of law, but wants to take down an incumbent prime minister. I will not crown the left … in the name of this immunity, because I'm a right-wing man."

Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon said his Kulanu party is "making it into the next Knesset big time," despite its poor performance in recent public opinion polls. Appealing to Likud voters, he added: "You have no reason to vote for Netanyahu, he's going to form the next government. If you want a compassionate right … I said I'll only be finance minister, I won't take any other position."

Avigdor Lieberman, former defense minister under Netanyahu and Yisrael Beiteinu leader, said he would support Netanyahu as prime minister after the election, but "there's a long way" before his party enters a Netanyahu-led coalition. "We won't accept surrendering to terror … and won't accept surrendering to what the ultra-Orthodox [parties] dictate," he said.

Former Yisrael Beiteinu MK Orli Levi-Abekasis, now leader of Gesher, said both Netanyahu and Gantz "don't take interest in public issues. They're fighting cockfights, there's not much difference between them."

Far-right Zehut's Moshe Feiglin said he "struggles to tell the difference between Netanyahu and Gantz," refusing to declare which candidate for prime minister would receive his backing.

Speaking about his conditions for entering the governing coalition, he added: "Without the finance portfolio I can't see us fulfilling" the party's libertarian platform," and if [we get] enough seats – we'll also ask for the education portfolio."

Asked about his past homophobic statements, Feiglin said: "I love members of the LGBT community just like any other person … The only dispute I have with them is whether the first priority when the state puts a child up for adoption should be by a man and a man or a man and a woman. I still think a child needs a mother and a father. Same goes for surrogacy, I'm backward like that."
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/ele ... -1.7089387

Israel Election: Twitter Suspended Dozens Of Hebrew-Language Accounts Run By A Strange Chinese Religious Sect

The company has suspended at least 600 accounts in total during the election, but won't release details about them.

Craig Silverman
Posted on April 7, 2019, at 6:37 a.m. ET


Ben Kothe / BuzzFeed News
Twitter has suspended dozens of suspicious Hebrew-language accounts run by a controversial Chinese religious group ahead of Israel’s national elections, BuzzFeed News has learned. It’s at least the second such suspension in the run-up to the elections, but the company is saying little about what actions it took or why. Nor is it clear what the religious group’s goals were before Twitter’s enforcement actions.

The accounts are affiliated with the Church of Almighty God (CAG), a Christian sect that’s banned in China and which believes that Jesus Christ has been reincarnated as a Chinese woman currently living in Queens, New York.

In the months leading up to the April 9 election, Twitter suspended dozens of CAG-affiliated accounts, some of which were amplifying political messages for right-wing politicians, according to a source with knowledge of the removals. None of the profiles promoted any messages favoring Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The vast majority of the content from the accounts, which posted in Hebrew and appeared to use fake names, was focused on religion.

The CAG-affiliated Twitter accounts were among hundreds flagged as suspicious, based on initial work done by Noam Rotem and Yuval Adam, two Israeli researchers who study social media manipulation. Other volunteer hacktivists did a more in-depth analysis of the profiles to determine the organization responsible for coordinating the accounts’ activities.

The accounts were flagged due to what appeared to be coordinated amplification of content, according to the source, who is familiar with how the CAG accounts were brought to Twitter’s attention, and asked for anonymity to protect ongoing research.

The source said in a message that the accounts caught the attention of researchers after they turned up in searches “programmed to look for tweets in Hebrew (to influence Hebrew speakers) generated by account clusters outside Israel.”

“Essentially, a queen bee generates the narrative and worker bees generate interactions with those narratives to spread it further or to give it greater credibility,” the source said.

A Twitter spokesperson declined to speak on the record, and would not comment on how the accounts were flagged to the company or say how many accounts were removed. The spokesperson would only say the accounts were suspended due to spam violations.

This is the second time Twitter has refused to disclose details about accounts it suspended in Israel ahead of the election, which raises questions about the company’s commitment to transparency around removing accounts during global political events.

On March 31, the New York Times and Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth reported that Rotem and Adam, the independent social media researchers, had identified a network of hundreds of accounts working together to spread disinformation about Benny Gantz, the leader of the opposition Blue and White Party, and to promote Netanyahu’s Likud Party. Gantz is Netanyahu's main challenger.

Netanyahu said he and his party were not controlling the accounts, and that they were not "fake" or bots. Rotem and Adam's report didn't claim the network was using bots.

“There are real accounts in that system, and there are real people. We did not say anywhere that there were bots, but that there are a group of accounts working together to promote an agenda,” Adam told the Washington Post.

Netanyahu soon appeared at a press conference with Giora Ezra, an Israeli real estate agent who runs a pro-Netanyahu Twitter account, "Captain George," cited in the report about the pro-Likud network. “As you can see, I’m not a bot,” Ezra said.

Giora Ezra, aka "Captain George," and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Gali Tibbon / AFP / Getty Images
Giora Ezra, aka "Captain George," and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
His account is still online, but Twitter suspended others in the network identified by Rotem and Adam. The company would not confirm the suspensions to journalists, and it has not publicly disclosed the total number of accounts it has suspended ahead of Israel’s election.

In contrast, Facebook has begun to disclose details about the pages, accounts, and groups it removes when they are found to be involved in “coordinated inauthentic activity,” or when they are linked to efforts during elections.

Ronen Bergman, a prominent Israeli investigative journalist who wrote the article for the New York Times and coauthored the story for Yedioth Ahronoth, told BuzzFeed News that Twitter removed accounts in the pro-Likud network after his stories appeared.

“After the story was published, one of the NGOs fighting against misuse of social media gave the list of accounts to Twitter. As far as I understand, Twitter has taken down the accounts connected to this network,” he said.

Roughly 600 accounts have been removed by Twitter as a result of Rotem and Adam’s research, according to the source with knowledge of account removals in Israel.

Twitter continues to suspend Hebrew-language CAG accounts long after it was initially notified about their activity on its platform. BuzzFeed News also found at least one active CAG account that was created after the initial suspensions, and which has amplified messages from Benny Gantz of Blue and White. That account follows "Captain George" as well as Danny Yatom, a former head of Mossad, Israel’s external intelligence service.

It’s unclear why CAG accounts have mixed political messaging into their activity, but this is likely why an obscure Chinese religious sect was reported to Twitter during the Israeli election.

BuzzFeed News did not identify any Hebrew-language CAG accounts spreading false or misleading information. Given the group’s acrimonious relationship with the Chinese government, its online activity is clearly not state-linked.

The Israeli Elections Committee, National Cyber Directorate, and Foreign Ministry did not respond to questions from BuzzFeed News.

The Church of Almighty God


It’s not surprising that the CAG would operate Twitter and other social media accounts in Hebrew, according to Holly Folk, an associate professor at Western Washington University who has been studying the CAG since 2016.

“The CAG, a lot of their international ministry functions as an internet religion,” she told BuzzFeed News.

CAG is also known as Eastern Lightning and has roughly 1 million members around the world, according to Folk.

It practices an offshoot of Christianity that holds at its core that Yang Xiangbin, the wife of its founder, is the female incarnation of Christ. She lives in Queens after being granted asylum in the US in 2001 as a result of persecution in China. CAG followers believe her word is the word of God.

“They have their own narrative for how the apocalypse is going to happen, and they have their own scripture. They don’t see the Bible as the literal word of God but as a human document that has flaws in its teaching,” Folk said. “The literal word of God is the recorded recitations of Almighty God, their leader who lives in Flushing, Queens.”

The Chinese government has labeled the group an “evil cult” and banned it. CAG members have been put on trial in China multiple times, and in one case were accused of committing a murder in a McDonald’s in China as part of their missionary activity. (Some scholars believe that those who committed the murder were actually part of a different group.)

As a result of being outlawed and persecuted in China, CAG members have sought asylum in countries around the world. This diaspora has established an online presence in many languages and locations. Some of the active and suspended CAG accounts in Hebrew reviewed by BuzzFeed News were found sharing religious images and messages that are also available in other languages, suggesting a central operation that churns out images and messages for translation and distribution.

The use of political messaging, however, is outside the pattern of CAG’s typical behavior, Folk said.

The CAG has in fact been the victim of propaganda and impersonation at the hands of the Chinese government, according to Folk.

“Part of the Chinese government’s efforts to undermine this group has sometimes been to create alternative and fake websites,” she said.

“In the UK, there was a separate CAG that was doing demonstrations and having photos [taken] and posting the photos online. Those photos were then being used in website articles as part of a disinformation campaign.”

CAG did not respond to an emailed request for comment.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/cr ... uspensions

Twitter Network Uses Fake Accounts to Promote Netanyahu, Israel Watchdog Finds
March 31, 2019
A campaign billboard for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem.Thomas Coex/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images


A campaign billboard for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem.Thomas Coex/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
TEL AVIV — An Israeli watchdog group has found a network of hundreds of social media accounts, many of them fake, used to smear opponents of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in next week’s election and to amplify the messages of his Likud party, according to a report to be released Monday.

The messages posted on the network’s Twitter and Facebook accounts are frequently reposted by prominent Likud campaign officials and by the prime minister’s son, Yair Netanyahu, the report says.

The watchdog group, the Big Bots Project, an independent organization that aims to expose the malicious use of social media, found no direct links between the network and Mr. Netanyahu, his party or his son, but said it appeared to operate in coordination with the party and Mr. Netanyahu’s re-election campaign.

“The network operates through manipulations, slander, lies and spreading rumors,” the report said. “On its busiest days, the network sends out thousands of tweets a day.”

The network’s activity has intensified almost fivefold since the election was called in December, the report said, and “is mobilized at climactic moments for Netanyahu, such as the announcement of the indictment against him.”

The report says the network may violate Israeli laws pertaining to elections, campaign finance, privacy and taxation.

A spokesman for the Likud party said that it did not run a network of fake accounts. “All of the Likud’s digital activity is entirely authentic and is based on the great support of the citizens of Israel for Prime Minister Netanyahu and the great achievements of the Likud,” the spokesman, Jonathan Urich, said on Sunday.

Mr. Netanyahu, who is facing an indictment on corruption charges, is in a tight race for what he hopes will be his fourth consecutive term. He is facing a strong challenge from Benny Gantz, a retired army chief, in the April 9 election.

According to the report, 154 of the accounts in the network use fake names and another 400 accounts are suspected of being fake. The accounts appear to be operated by people, not bots, making them much harder to detect, the report says. Their posts, all in Hebrew, have had over 2.5 million hits, the report’s authors estimate, in a country with 8.7 million citizens.

Benny Gantz at a campaign rally in Tel Aviv.Abir Sultan/EPA, via Shutterstock


Benny Gantz at a campaign rally in Tel Aviv.Abir Sultan/EPA, via Shutterstock
The report was written by Noam Rotem and Yuval Adam, founders of the Big Bots Project. They were assisted by the Israeli Alliance, a liberal-leaning organization, and their investigation was financed through an Israeli online crowdfunding site, Drove.

The New York Times and the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot received advance copies of the report.

One of the accounts is under the name “Moshe,” whose handsome profile picture actually belongs to the Greek model Theo Theodoridis. Moshe, whose posts praise Mr. Netanyahu and excoriate his rivals, tweeted only 16 times during the first three months of 2018. By contrast, during the first three months of this year, with the election campaign underway, he tweeted 2,856 times.

The members of the network work in sync with each other, the report says. When one posted the false rumor that Mr. Gantz was a rapist, many of the others reposted it. On Thursday, many of the members almost simultaneously began tweeting that Mr. Gantz was mentally ill, echoing a video clip distributed by the Likud campaign.

As Mr. Gantz became Mr. Netanyahu’s chief rival, the network focused more on him. The network’s activity has often spiked at times of key political events.

The evening before the attorney general announced his decision to indict Mr. Netanyahu, the network circulated a Facebook post by an American woman saying that Mr. Gantz had sexually harassed her when they were in high school.

Mr. Gantz denied the accusation, and no support for it has been forthcoming, but the fabricated accounts pushed the story with tweets like: “Gantz the rapist to jail” and “Lousy scum rapist.”

Items posted by the network have also described Mr. Gantz, somewhat incongruously, as being gay and having a mistress.

The network has also attacked the attorney general, Avichai Mandelblit, echoing Mr. Netanyahu’s assertion that by seeking to indict the prime minister the attorney general had “surrendered to the media and the left.”

All accounts in the network are linked to that of a real person, Yitzhak Haddad, a resident of Ashdod.

The report cites a YouTube channel to which Mr. Haddad is an active subscriber, which has a message offering workers cash in exchange for “responding on Facebook and on the internet with political messages.”

The fake social media network’s messages have been redistributed by prominent figures like Yair Netanyahu, shown here with his father.Thomas Coex/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

The fake social media network’s messages have been redistributed by prominent figures like Yair Netanyahu, shown here with his father.Thomas Coex/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
“You just get political messages and you post them,” the message said.

It was not clear if the message was linked to the fake social network or whether Mr. Haddad ran the network.

When asked about the network on Sunday, Mr. Haddad said it was “all lies.”

He declined to confirm or deny that he was the person behind the Twitter account bearing his picture and email address, his connections with Likud, or his relationship to the YouTube channel recruiting workers for the election campaign.

In a later text message, Mr. Haddad wrote: “There is absolutely nothing in this. Anyone publishing this nonsense can expect a very large lawsuit.”

“You have no right to gag people on the right or on the left, period,” he added, “and the organization that is busy identifying accounts, who are they at all to decide for the open and free world?”

Mr. Urich, the Likud party spokesman, said that he did not know Mr. Haddad, and that Mr. Haddad was not employed by the Likud party and had no connection with Likud.

The network’s messages have been redistributed by prominent figures in the Likud campaign team. Yair Netanyahu, an unofficial adviser to his father’s campaign, has retweeted the network’s members 154 times, the report said. Similarly, the network “liked” and replied to his messages 1,481 times, and shared his messages 429 times.

Yair Netanyahu did not reply to a request for comment. Mr. Urich, speaking on his behalf, said, “Yair Netanyahu has no role in the Likud campaign, does not know the people of the network and is not involved in its activities, if any.”

Some of the tweets that include curse words and anti-Arab slurs are written using numbers that look like letters in the Hebrew alphabet, apparently so that a Twitter audit would not identify them as inappropriate and shut down the account.

There have been efforts to update Israeli election law to cover relatively recent developments in social media. After the work of a special panel headed by a former Supreme Court chief justice, Dorit Beinisch, an amendment to the law was proposed to cover social media.

The Likud party opposed the amendment and it did not pass.

Karine Nahon, president of the Israel Internet Association, who was a member of the Beinish panel, said: “We made a great effort to submit the recommendations as soon as possible so that legislation could already be enacted in the coming elections. But when a first reading bill was about to be voted on, the Likud decided in the middle of the night to remove it from the agenda.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/31/worl ... itter.html

[seemslikeadream]

Bibi Goes Full GOP, Sends Activists to Polling Stations to Monitor Arab Precincts
KAFIR QASIM, ISRAEL - APRIL 09: An arab woman casts her ballot in Israel's general elections on April 9, 2019 in the village of Kafir Qasim, Israel. (Photo by Amir Levy/Getty Images) Amir Levy/Getty Images Europe
By Josh Marshall
April 9, 2019 11:42 am

In recent years we’ve witnessed the increasing ideological marriage of the Israeli Likud and the American GOP. Nor is it just ideological and cultural. There is increasingly transnational cooperation, with longtime Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu frequently intervening in US politics on Republicans’ behalf. But Likud took a big step today adopting more or less wholesale GOP ‘voter fraud’ tactics to suppress minority voters.

Today is election day in Israel, an election the right again seems likely to win by a narrow but decisive margin. But the big story of the day in the Israeli press is Likud sending party activists to Arab majority precincts with hidden cameras to monitor “voter fraud.” The party reportedly distributed 1200 hidden cameras to activists.

The action appears to be clearly against the law and an official at the election authority has ordered Likud to remove the equipment. Police appear to have confiscated at least some of the cameras that were installed by right-wing activists by right-wing activists in polling stations in Arab communities. What’s less clear is whether any of the activists will be charged with a crime. Other reports suggest there has been no determination that the activists committed a criminal act.

Likud is arguing that there’s no a problem because of the cameras aren’t hidden, though it’s not clear to me whether this actually matters or not under Israeli election law. According to the Times of Israel, Likud lawyer Kobi Matza said “The cameras were not hidden, they were out in the open, and were in places where there is a high suspicion of fraud. I get reports from all over the country that our representatives are being kicked out of polling stations in Arab areas … The problem is with those people in the Arab sector. The cameras were intended to preserve the purity of the vote.”

Outside his own polling station, Netanyahu himself declared: “There should be cameras everywhere, not hidden ones.”

According to Ynet, Likud gave its activists pamphlets alleging voter fraud in the Arab community in the previous election in 2015.

The specifics of what happened are still murky. I don’t know Israeli election law as well as I do US election law. But what is most striking is how the actions and rationales are pulled almost wholesale from right-wing US politics; same arguments about combating voter fraud; same solution of sending activists to intimidate members of a minority community at the polls.

The Likud-GOP alliance is truly complete.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/bi ... blem-arabs

[seemslikeadream]

trump urged Israel to deny entry to two U.S. congresswomen, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, in an unusual effort to punish domestic rivals

Israel blocks Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib from entering country – live
Joan E Greve
3m ago
Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, pictured here with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley, were due to arrive in Israel on Sunday.
Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, pictured here with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley, were due to arrive in Israel on Sunday. Photograph: Carol Guzy/ZUMA Wire/REX/Shutterstock
2m ago 16:05

Two Palestinian-Arab parliamentarians in Israel slammed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government over the decision to block Tlaib and Omar from entering the country:

Ayman Odeh (@AyOdeh)
A country with nothing to hide wouldn't have banned the entrance of two members of Congress.

Another desperate attempt to hide reality from the world and mainly from ourselves.
August 15, 2019
Ahmad Tibi (@Ahmad_tibi)
Now its easear to explain for Americans about Netanyahu policy especially for Democratic’s https://t.co/OY8FMGb5qB
August 15, 2019
9m ago 10:58

Israel decides to block Tlaib and Omar's trip

A senior Israeli official said the government has officially decided to block Tlaib and Omar’s planned visit.

“The decision has been made, the decision is not to allow them to enter,” Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely told Israel’s Reshet Radio.

12m ago 10:55

The president of the nonprofit J Street – which describes itself as “the political home of pro-Israel, pro-peace Americans” – issued a statement slamming the move to block Tlaib and Omar’s trip.

J Street president Jeremy Ben-Ami said such a decision would be “dangerous, unacceptable and wrong.” “As sitting Members of Congress representing hundreds of thousands of Americans in their districts, Reps. Omar and Tlaib have the same right as every one of their colleagues to visit Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory,” Ben-Ami said.

“We may disagree with the views that the Members hold on such questions as BDS or with Rep. Tlaib on the two-state solution, but the right approach for a state that values democracy is to welcome criticism and debate, not to shut it down.

“The fact that President Trump has already tweeted out his own call for these representatives to be denied entry illustrates that this decision is motivated purely by politics and ideology – not by the interests of the State of Israel. It is an affront to Congress and the American people and does severe damage to the US-Israel relationship – and it must be reversed immediately.”

22m ago 10:45

Warren urges Israel to allow Tlaib and Omar's trip to proceed

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren said Israel would harm its reputation as a “tolerant democracy” if it blocked Tlaib and Omar’s planned visit. The Massachusetts senator added that such a move would be “shameful” and “unprecedented.”

Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren)
Israel doesn't advance its case as a tolerant democracy or unwavering US ally by barring elected members of Congress from visiting because of their political views. This would be a shameful, unprecedented move. I urge Israel’s government to allow @IlhanMN and @RashidaTlaib entry.
August 15, 2019
22m ago 10:45

Unlike many news organisations, we chose an approach that means all our reporting is free and available for everyone. We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism, to maintain our openness and to protect our precious independence. Every reader contribution, big or small, is so valuable.

For as little as $1 you can support us – and it only takes a minute. Thank you. Make a contribution - The Guardian

27m ago 10:39

One of the key points of contention about Tlaib and Omar’s trip to Israel appears to be their planned visit to the Al Aqsa Mosque in East Jerusalem.

The New York Times has more:

A sacred site revered by Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary and by Jews as Temple Mount, the location of their ancient temples, it is a frequent flash point in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Danny Ayalon, a former Israeli ambassador to the United States and a former deputy foreign minister, told Israel’s Kan Radio on Thursday that the congresswomen should be allowed to enter Israel ‘but with restrictions.’

‘If they want to stage a provocation by entering the Temple Mount with Palestinian hosts, then that can be prevented,’ he said.

33m ago 10:33

Former Israeli diplomats encouraged the prime minister to allow Tlaib and Omar to visit, arguing that giving in to Trump’s requests would display weakness:

ארתור לֶנק آرثر لينك (@ArthurLenk)
Of course, the opposite is true. It would show great strength and confidence for Israel to allow a visit, even by those who disagree with us. Especially members of the United States Congress. https://t.co/9qWDzwDDgu
August 15, 2019
Alon Pinkas (@AlonPinkas)
3. ...when your self-righteous indignation dictates your state of mind and actions, when you think youudoing a favor to your Bro President Trump. Embrace? Yes. Embrace and engage Omar and Tlaib, show them where they are wrong or have a partial and skewed perception of reality.
August 15, 2019
41m ago 10:26

A report emerged last week that Trump had told advisers he wanted Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to block the visit by Tlaib and Omar.

Axios reported:

Trump has told U.S. advisers, including senior Trump administration officials, that Israel should bar Omar and Tlaib’s entry because the two congresswomen favor a boycott of Israel, according to sources familiar with Trump’s private comments. In 2017, Israel’s parliament passed a law requiring the interior minister to block foreign nationals from entering Israel if they have supported boycotting the Jewish state. ...

Trump said that if Omar and Tlaib wanted to boycott Israel, ‘then Israel should boycott them,’ according to a source with direct knowledge.

47m ago 10:20

Trump’s tweet about Tlaib and Omar contradicts a statement put out by his press secretary just an hour ago, which said that the White House would allow Israel to reach its own decision about whether to block the progressive lawmakers’ visit.

Manu Raju (@mkraju)
About an hour ago, the WH press secretary Stephanie Grisham put out a statement, saying: “The Israeli government can do what it wants," adding that reports that Trump urged Netanyahu to barr Omar and Tlaib are “inaccurate” https://t.co/ybJEQbmfYB
August 15, 2019
52m ago 10:15

Trump predicts "happy and enlightened" resolution to Hong Kong protests

Trump is just full of advise for his fellow world leaders today. He has also advised the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, to meet with the pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong.

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
If President Xi would meet directly and personally with the protesters, there would be a happy and enlightened ending to the Hong Kong problem. I have no doubt! https://t.co/eFxMjgsG1K
August 15, 2019
Trump implied yesterday that US-China trade negotiations could be affected if Beijing did not treat the protesters “humanely.” That warning came as footage emerged of Chinese troop movements near the Hong Kong border and state media outlets warning that “anti-China forces” would be stopped.

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
..deferral to December. It actually helps China more than us, but will be reciprocated. Millions of jobs are being lost in China to other non-Tariffed countries. Thousands of companies are leaving. Of course China wants to make a deal. Let them work humanely with Hong Kong first!
August 14, 2019
1h ago 10:04

Trump urges Israel to block entry of Tlaib and Omar

Trump has weighed in on Representatives Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar’s planned trip to Israel, encouraging Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to block the progressive congresswomen from entering the country.

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
It would show great weakness if Israel allowed Rep. Omar and Rep.Tlaib to visit. They hate Israel & all Jewish people, & there is nothing that can be said or done to change their minds. Minnesota and Michigan will have a hard time putting them back in office. They are a disgrace!
August 15, 2019
1h ago 10:01

Booker releases plan to combat white supremacist violence

In the wake of the El Paso shooting, Democratic presidential candidate Cory Booker has released a plan to combat white supremacist violence and the rise of hate crimes.

Cory Booker (@CoryBooker)
Yes, we need to change our gun laws—and I have the most far-reaching plan of any other candidate to do that—but we also need to confront the ugly reality of rising hate crimes and white supremacist violence in our country.

Here’s my plan: https://t.co/6gYdzn7sKm pic.twitter.com/51Yu4w06eI
August 15, 2019
Booker said in a statement announcing the plan that his proposals to reduce gun violence “would make it much harder for those intent on committing hate crimes to access guns. But we also need to focus on violence motivated by hate and white supremacy.

“That’s why, as president, Cory would confront rising hate crimes and white supremacist violence by improving the federal and local response, addressing online hate, and supporting communities and victims of hate crimes.”

Booker proposes creating a White House Office on Hate Crimes and White Supremacist Violence to coordinate efforts to reduce such tragedies and requiring federal law enforcement agencies to provide an annual report on the threat of white supremacy.

The New Jersey senator would also call on the Justice Department and the FBI to prioritize domestic terrorism in the same way that they do international terrorism.

1h ago 09:44

Epstein autopsy heightens mystery around his death

An autopsy of financier and alleged sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein uncovered some broken bones in his neck, raising more questions about his apparent suicide.

Jeffrey Epstein's co-conspirators 'should not rest easy', says William Barr – video
The Washington Post reports:

Among the bones broken in Epstein’s neck was the hyoid bone, which in men is near the Adam’s apple. Such breaks can occur in those who hang themselves, particularly if they are older, according to forensics experts and studies on the subject. But they are more common in victims of homicide by strangulation, the experts said. ...

People familiar with the autopsy, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitive stage of the investigation, said Sampson’s office is seeking additional information on Epstein’s condition in the hours before his death. That could include video evidence of the jail hallways, which may establish whether anyone entered Epstein’s cell during the night he died; results of a toxicology screening to determine if there was any unusual substance in his body; and interviews with guards and inmates who were near his cell.

2h ago 09:30

Israel considers blocking visit by two members of 'the Squad'

Israel is considering blocking Democratic Representatives Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar from entering the country.

Representatives Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib listen to President Trump’s State of the Union speech.
Representatives Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib listen to President Trump’s State of the Union speech. Photograph: J Scott Applewhite/AP
The progressive lawmakers, two members of the congressional group known as “the Squad,” are slated to arrive on Sunday. They have previously been critical of Israel’s stance toward Palestine and are supportive of the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement to protest those policies.

Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer said last month that his country would not deny entry to any lawmaker “out of respect for the U.S. Congress and the great alliance between Israel and America.” But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu now appears to be reconsidering that, consulting with several advisers about the planned trip. An Israeli official said, “There is a possibility that Israel will not allow the visit in its current proposed format.”

Democratic lawmakers and some pro-Israel groups in the US have already started pushing back against Netanyahu, so it’s unclear if he will follow through on the plan.

Updated at 10.06am EDT

2h ago 09:09

Overwhelming majorities of Americans back gun restrictions

A new poll found that overwhelming majorities of Americans back universal background checks and red flag laws, while support for an assault weapons ban is on the rise.

According to the Fox News poll, 90 percent of Americans believe criminal background checks should be required for all gun purchases, and 81 percent support passing red flag laws that would allow judges to take away guns from those deemed dangerous.

The percentage of Americans who back a ban on assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons has risen since last year, from 60 percent to 67 percent. But that support is largely driven by Democrats, as Republicans remain split on the issue.

Trump’s approval rating has also dipped, from 46 percent last month to 43 percent now.

2h ago 08:39

Hickenlooper expected to drop out of presidential race

Good morning, live blog readers!

It would appear that the 2020 presidential race is going to have to make do with one less Democrat, which should be fine because there will still be more than 20 of them running.

John Hickenlooper is expected to drop out of the race today. The former governor of Colorado has failed to catch fire with his more moderate message, and his most memorable moment from the last debates was when got Bernie Sanders to throw his hands up. It’s unclear whether Hickenlooper will then enter the Colorado Senate race, but he has reportedly discussed the idea with his advisers.

These departures will likely ramp up now that we are less than two weeks away from the Aug. 28 deadline to qualify for the next debate. Only nine candidates have qualified so far, and Julián Castro and Tom Steyer both remain one poll away from making the cut.

All of the other dozen or so candidates seem likely to miss the debate stage, giving them few paths forward to reaching Democratic voters. And candidates like Beto O’Rourke and Steve Bullock are similarly being pressured to drop out and run for the Senate instead (although O’Rourke has qualified for the next debate). With little chance of winning the nomination, these remaining candidates will likely soon face the same question: what’s the point?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/liv ... st-updates

[seemslikeadream]

Coercive Disclosure: Israel’s Weaponization of Intelligence
Conventional wisdom holds that intelligence data is collected and safeguarded to gain an advantage on the battlefield if and when war breaks out. In recent years, however, Israel has come to increasingly rely on deliberate public disclosure of intelligence data as an instrument of influence and coercion.

Such was the case, for instance, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presented, during his annual speech at the United Nations General Assembly last September, photographs of what he claimed was a “secret atomic warehouse” in a Tehran suburb. Five months earlier, Netanyahu publicly revealed with great fanfare Iran’s nuclear archive ― thousands of documents, photos, and videos related to Iran’s secret nuclear program, stolen by Israeli Mossad agents from the Iranian capital in January 2018.

These instances, which have received major international attention and may have provided extra motivation to the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect the suspected nuclear site (and reportedly to uncover incriminating evidence), represent a notable shift in Israel’s basic approach to intelligence use.

Evidence of this shift appeared in 2010, when the Israel Defense Forces Northern Command established a precedent by making public a detailed intelligence map specifying the military deployment of Hizballah in a village in southern Lebanon. The following year, Israeli military officials provided the Washington Post with a far more detailed map of Hizballah’s military deployment. Had a war broken out that day, many of the 950 Hizballah installations on that map would have been targeted by the Israeli Air Force. But Israel preferred to use the intelligence it gathered to avoid war, whether by deterring Hizballah or by creating other pressure on it. At the time, this unprecedented move was met with apprehension in the defense establishment: as then-Northern Command Chief Gadi Eizenkot, who later became chief of staff, noted, “some people leveled accusations such as ‘how can you publish such hard-earned targets’.” We argue that what had started out as a hesitant experiment has evolved into a coherent modus operandi.

While intelligence disclosure is not new either in Israel or globally, most Israeli senior security and government officials, journalists, and analysts we interviewed in recent months agreed that the sheer volume and prevalence of this phenomenon is unprecedented. Among them was the former head of the military’s intelligence research division, retired Brig. Gen. Eli Ben-Meir, who noted that “over the past five years” the volume of intelligence disclosure has been “much higher than ever before.”

The notion of simply revealing one’s most secret intelligence data is counterintuitive. That Israel has increasingly come to rely on this practice is especially intriguing. As veterans of Israel’s military intelligence, we know that it runs against its very DNA, too. Nonetheless, as the examples cited above suggest, Israel has been employing this method as a tool of strategic influence; not only to deter, delegitimize, and otherwise bring pressure on adversaries, but also as a way to gain international legitimacy and shape domestic public opinion.

In this article, however, we choose to focus on the systematic public disclosure of intelligence for coercive purposes — or as we call it, “coercive disclosure.” Similar to the way in which states wield military hardware and economic power to reshape others’ perception and strategic calculations, we argue that intelligence, too, can be used to threaten other actors that, absent a change in behavior, they are likely to suffer painful costs, including by military force.

Israel’s revelation of Iran’s nuclear archive represents perhaps its most high-profile use of coercive disclosure. Nonetheless, Israel has been publicly leveraging its intelligence dominance surprisingly frequently, sometimes daily, mostly against non-state adversaries such as Hizballah.

Perspectives on Intelligence Disclosure

The practice of publicly disclosing secret intelligence is not new to foreign policy. In 1917, at the height of World War I, President Woodrow Wilson disclosed the contents of “the Zimmermann Telegram,” a cipher sent by the German Foreign Office and decrypted by British intelligence, to the American media. The very act of publicizing the cipher, which suggested that Germany may be seeking to join forces with Mexico against the United States, prompted American intervention in the war. In October 1962, President John F. Kennedy revealed detailed evidence of the deployment of Soviet missiles in Cuba. Kennedy’s dramatic revelation, in a live television address, was designed to reinforce his ultimatum to the Soviets to remove the missiles from the island. In August 1995, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Madeleine Albright revealed before the Security Council aerial photos suggesting the slaughter of thousands of Muslims at the hands of Bosnian Serbs in Srebrenica.

These prominent but infrequent instances of public intelligence disclosure point to the intricate dilemma underlying this practice, often referred to as the “Coventry Dilemma.” After World War II, a former Royal Air Force officer argued that British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had refrained from deploying air defenses to the city of Coventry despite concrete intelligence indications — obtained through the cracking of Germany’s formidable Enigma cipher — of an upcoming massive German air force bombardment of the city. Although rejected by later historians, the dilemma reflects a common real-world predicament: policymakers are sometimes forced to choose between acting upon their most sensitive intelligence data in order to influence other actors and shape outcomes, and safeguarding the sources that produced the intelligence.

In a recent article, Allison Carnegie and Austin Carson tackled this tough tradeoff in the context of the Trump administration’s recent exceptional revelations of incriminating intelligence data — some of which had been provided by Israel — on Iranian military activities in the Persian Gulf. While revealing intelligence can be necessary to win domestic and foreign support, it almost inherently compromises intelligence collection methods. An adversary whose secrets are publicly exposed will quickly look for the security breach and alter its behavior to reduce its vulnerability. If the information was gathered through human intelligence, its revelation could put people’s lives on the line. But most importantly, the anticipated short-term benefits of an intelligence disclosure will almost always come at the expense of the revealing state’s ability to use it in the ultimate moment of truth.

The Israeli Perspective

It is hardly surprising that throughout Israel’s eventful diplomatic history the pendulum most commonly swung towards safeguarding its intelligence data, sources, and methods. Since Israel regards intelligence as a matter of survival, per Walter Laqueur, secrecy, as its cornerstone, is considered a sacred value, binding both the public and the elites.

Hence, Israel publicly revealed highly sensitive intelligence data for strategic purposes on merely two celebrated occasions. On June 7, 1967, the third day of the Six Day War, Israel’s Army Radio broadcast a full telephone conversation between Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser and Jordan’s King Hussein, in which the two leaders conspired to fabricate reports that the West took part in the military assault on the Arab states. Similarly, in October 1985 Ehud Barak, then the head of the Intelligence Directorate, played a recording on television of a telephone conversation between the terrorist hijackers of the Achille Lauro cruise ship and their commander, thus proving the links between the hijackers and the Palestinian Liberation Organization, which Israel sought to delegitimize at the time. Both disclosures encountered fierce resistance from within the intelligence establishment.

In sharp contrast, recent years have been witnessing a recurring, systematic public use of intelligence by the Israeli government and its intelligence agencies themselves. As Ronen Manelis, the spokesman for the Israeli Defense Forces, told us, “I definitely use much more intelligence, compared to both my predecessors and myself with each passing day.”

Releasing to the world its hard-earned intelligence has been anything but an easy process for Israel’s intelligence community. But as Netanyahu explained last year, Israel was ultimately “a country that has intelligence services,” not “intelligence services that have a country.” Similar to coercion in general, coercive disclosure is ultimately designed to maintain deterrence and avoid conflict. While privately communicating with an ally or a third party, let alone the adversary itself, allows the coerced party to easily defy the coercer, public disclosure of intelligence simultaneously engages multiple audiences, including domestic audiences. It draws attention that cannot be easily ignored or dismissed.

A coercive disclosure of intelligence data does not necessarily have to include an explicit threat of action. The disclosure itself amounts to an implied “informational threat,” and signals that the actor is aware of its adversary’s private plans. The released intelligence maps of Hizballah’s deployment in southern Lebanon are a good example of this. If the state has a track record of preemption, the revelation of such plans could signal an upcoming attack. A state can also selectively disclose intelligence, gradually imposing a price on the coerced party until it changes its behavior.

Coercive Disclosure in Action

Most cases of Israeli intelligence disclosure pertain to the country’s various non-state adversaries. For clandestine groups, secrecy has to do with more than their identity. It is a vital prerequisite for their ability to function and survive. Exposing their closest-held secrets carries similar effects to those achieved through military force. If carried out consistently, intelligence disclosure can potentially make such groups perceive themselves to be particularly vulnerable, and even fracture the trust that binds them together.

Over the past decade, Israel has engaged in several campaigns against such armed groups, usually affiliated with Iran. Among other things, it was especially interested in curtailing Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps procurement of advanced weaponry for Hizballah in Lebanon, and later the manufacturing of long-range precision-guided missiles in Lebanon itself. Concurrently, it sought to prevent Iran and Hizballah from establishing a strategic foothold in southern Syria, across from the Israeli border.

These campaigns were conducted under different circumstances, using varying measures, while intelligence disclosures were accordingly playing different roles. In Lebanon, Hizballah was able to establish mutual deterrence with Israel, while delineating military attacks in Lebanon as a “red line” not to be crossed without severe punishment. Conversely, in war-torn Syria, Israel has regularly employed military force since early 2013. However, it targeted mostly military hardware, and steered clear of targeting personnel as much as possible. Therefore, the campaign against Hizballah’s military build-up in Lebanon was restricted to diplomacy, with a strong emphasis on coercive intelligence disclosures. In Syria, Israeli military force and public intelligence disclosures were combined to prevent Iranian-backed militias from entrenching themselves in the country.

Precision-Guided Missiles in Lebanon

The overt struggle against the manufacturing of missiles in Lebanon began with an “informational threat” issued by the Israelis. In a public lecture at a security conference near Tel Aviv, the commander of the Military Intelligence Directorate, Maj. Gen. Herzi Halevi, stated that, “Over the last year Iran has been working to set up independent production facilities for precise weaponry in Lebanon and Yemen. We cannot remain indifferent to this and we don’t.” This statement, followed by additional reports on Israeli and international media regarding the alleged manufacturing facilities and a contingent Israeli strike against them, as well as a report on cabinet deliberations surrounding the dilemma whether to attack in Lebanon or not, created somewhat of a “war scare.” The fright peaked during a Northern Command drill in early September 2017. Later that month, Eizenkot stated in an interview that, “today there is no precision capability in Lebanon threatening Israel’s strategic assets.” His remark suggested that work on the project was stalled, or at the least posed no threat for the time being.

Either way, Israeli concerns over the manufacturing of precision-guided missiles in Lebanon were once again making headlines in early 2018. Although Israel and Hizballah exchanged unveiled threats, the former did little more, kinetically or diplomatically, to eliminate the threat until September 2018. In his dramatic speech at the United Nations, Prime Minister Netanyahu presented a map of Lebanon’s capital, indicating three “secret sites to convert inaccurate projectiles into precision guided missiles.” This limited, exemplary disclosure of secret intelligence illustrated the quality and intimacy of Israel’s penetration of Hizballah’s weapons procurement effort and reinforced the gravity with which Israel perceived the matter.

The direct achievement fostered by this intelligence disclosure, as noted by a senior official in the Military Intelligence Directorate, was the hasty evacuation of the sites within days, and the fact that Hizballah was forced to find new sites. In and of itself, this disrupted their plans in the short term. Conversely, Israel achieved limited success on its broader objective to draw attention to the threat and to prod the international community into exerting pressure on Iran and Hizballah to give way. Hizballah proceeded with its plans, while Israel has since harnessed U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to leverage the Lebanese government to hold Hizballah accountable; and continued to publicly disclose updated intelligence about the project.

Terrorists in Southern Syria

Amid the raging civil war, leading to waning military posture of the Syrian Army on the Israeli front, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and Hizballah sought to establish local armed groups of Syrian Druze and Palestinian refugees, designed to carry out attacks against Israel and deterring it from operating freely inside Syria. In January and December of 2015, the Israelis assassinated prominent Iranian and Hizballah commanders, allegedly in charge of orchestrating these endeavors. Hizballah retaliated against Israel and took revenge for their deaths, but the work on the project was stalled for a while. Since late 2016 and throughout 2017, Israel reinitiated the occasional targeting of low-rank local militiamen and materiel (e.g. military posts and surveillance equipment).

With the return of the Syrian Army to southern Syria and its redeployment along the border with Israel, following Russian-brokered ceasefire agreements, Iran and Hizballah resumed their efforts to form a local operational infrastructure. Still arguably hesitant to return to targeted killings of Hizballah commanders, Israel adhered to a policy of large-scale intelligence disclosures. During 2018 and 2019, Israel publicly disclosed the identity of a Hizballah regional commander in southern Syria, and the identities of the different men supervising the local armed groups. Last March, under the snappy title “The Golan File,” the Israeli Defense Forces revealed comprehensive details surrounding the project. These included exclusive facial photos of its leaders, raw footage from intelligence observation posts depicting their operations along the border, maps indicating different sites of operation, and information pertaining to their plans.

The coercive objectives of these extensive disclosures were twofold. First, the immediate intent was to make the senior echelons of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and Hizballah realize that their covert operations were exposed and prone to a military assault, and thus needed to be forestalled. Moreover, it perhaps aspired to make them reevaluate the benefits of pursuing their overall strategy. Secondly, the public disclosure was meant to raise the awareness of Russia, and perhaps the Syrian government as well, who had vouched to push Iran and Hizballah back to a distance of 50 to 60 miles from the Israeli border, by invoking their pride and motivating them to make good on their promise.

The increasing prevalence of the public use of intelligence as a tool of coercion in international politics requires the attention of both scholars and practitioners. Coercive disclosure is gradually appearing to be a convenient tool for pursuing foreign policy objectives, despite the relatively constant costs of disclosure and the fact that the conditions for successful use are not fully clear. While the existing evidence indicates that intelligence disclosure is often insufficient by itself, it has the potential to inflict pain and set in motion processes that could achieve the desired policy goal, especially when the intelligence disclosure is coupled with credible threats and military force. With states becoming ever more risk-averse, shying away from military use of force, coercive intelligence disclosures are demonstrating an ability to walk a tight rope between coercion and conflict.

Ofek Riemer is a PhD candidate at the Department of International Relations of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Previously he served as a career officer in various positions in the Israel Defense Forces Intelligence Directorate.

Daniel Sobelman is Assistant Professor of International Relations at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
https://warontherocks.com/2019/08/coerc ... elligence/

Israel, Hezbollah exchange fire at Lebanon border
Lebanon's prime minister asks US, France to intervene to prevent the situation from escalating into a full-fledged war.

8 hours ago
Israel and Hezbollah have exchanged fire along the Lebanese border after a week of rising tensions.

Israel's military said it fired into southern Lebanon on Sunday after a number of anti-tank missiles fired by Hezbollah targeted its army base and vehicles near the border. Hezbollah was responding to an earlier drone attack by Israel.

The missiles hit several targets in Israel's border town of Avivim on Sunday, the Israeli army said, adding it responded by shelling 100 targets inside Lebanon.

According to Hezbollah, the missiles launched from Lebanon destroyed a tank, killing and wounding those inside it.

Israel, however, said the attack did not lead to any casualties on its side.

In its statement, the Israeli army said "a number of anti-tank missiles were fired from Lebanon towards an Israel Defense Forces base and military vehicles".

"A number of hits have been confirmed," the Israeli army added.

The Israeli shelling following the missile strike has since died down with the Israeli military saying the latest round of fighting with Hezbollah appears to be over.

Jonathan Conricus, a military spokesperson, told reporters later on Sunday that Hezbollah missiles caused damage on the base and struck a military ambulance.

Conricus said the "tactical events" appear to have ended, adding that deeper "strategic threats" posed by Hezbollah remain.

The Lebanese army said Israel fired at least 40 shells towards the border towns of Yaroun and Maroun al-Ras after the missile attack.

Israeli media also reported at least one air raid took place.


Israel Defense Forces
✔
@IDF
· Sep 1, 2019
Moments ago, an anti-tank missile was fired from Lebanon towards a community in northern Israel. Details to follow.
Embedded video

Israel Defense Forces
✔
@IDF
Anti-tank missiles fired from Lebanon hit IDF military positions in northern Israel. We returned fire toward the source of the attack in southern Lebanon.

We will continue to update as the situation develops.

1,712
8:47 AM - Sep 1, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

756 people are talking about this

Following Sunday's cross-border fire, Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri said he called US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and France's top diplomat to discuss the events, to prevent the situation from escalating in to a full-fledged war.

Hariri's office said he made the calls "asking the United States and France to intervene in the face of developments at the southern border", Reuters news agency reported.

In a statement sent to Al Jazeera, the United Nations' UNIFIL mission, which is present in the border region between the two countries, called for restraint from both sides.

"The head of mission is in close contact with the parties, urging maximum restraint and asking to seize any activities that are endangering the cessation of hostilities," UNIFIL told Al Jazeera.


UNIFIL
@UNIFIL_
As #UNIFIL is following up on the firing across the Blue Line, UNIFIL Force Commander and Head of Mission Major General Stefano Del Col is in contact with the parties urging the maximum restraint and asked to cease all activities endangering the cessation of hostilities

79
10:24 AM - Sep 1, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

87 people are talking about this

Hezbollah retaliation was expected

Al Jazeera's Zeina Khodr, reporting from the Lebanese capital of Beirut, said people were bracing for a response like this from Hezbollah.

"It [Hezbollah] is blaming Israel for killing two of its members inside Syria, and it is blaming Israel for what it says were two armed drones inside the southern suburbs of Beirut," she said.

"This is the first time Hezbollah is claiming an attack inside Israel since the 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel."

Map Israel Lebanon
The missiles launched from Lebanon targeted the Israeli border town of Avivim [Al Jazeera]
Al Jazeera's Harry Fawcett, reporting from northern Israel, said Israel had been preparing for retaliation by Hezbollah since last Sunday, when Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said in a televised speech that Israel "must pay a price" and that "the need for a response is decided".

"I think Israel has been ready when Nasrallah made his speech last Sunday when he said that Israel had breached the terms of the rules of engagement that had been in effect since the end of the last conflict in 2006," Fawcett said.

The latest incidents also come after the Lebanese army claimed an Israeli drone violated its airspace and dropped incendiary material, sparking a fire in a pine forest near the border.

Lebanese state news agency NNA said Israeli forces fired flare bombs on Saturday.

A statement by the Israeli army only said the fires near the border "originate with operations by our forces in the area".

Israel Lebanon border
Following the attack, Israel responded with shelling, claiming to have struck at least 100 targets inside Lebanon [AP Photo]
Tensions flared last week after Hezbollah said a drone attack on one of its compounds was carried out by Israel.

At the time, the Iran-backed movement said a drone had landed on the roof of a building housing Hezbollah's media office in south Beirut, while another drone exploded midair.

Shortly before Nasrallah's televised speech on Saturday, Israel's army announced that it had ordered the deployment of additional forces to the "northern command" along the border with Lebanon.

Israeli media have since reported that the drones were targeting hardware for mixing the propellant used in precision-guided missiles.

Hezbollah and Lebanese officials have not responded to those reports.

On Wednesday, the Lebanese army claimed it had fired upon Israeli drones violating its airspace, forcing the aircraft to return across the border.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/ ... 06880.html

[seemslikeadream]

Netanyahu: Internal polls show Likud losing on Sept. 17
Netanyahu revealed that his own internal polls indicate that he will not win the September 17 election.

September 12, 2019 14:42

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reveals the Iranian nuclear bases uncovered by Israel, September 9 2019. (photo credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu revealed on Thursday morning that his own internal polls indicate that he will not win the September 17 election.

In an interview with KAN Radio, Netanyahu lamented that too many voters who want him to be prime minister either will not vote or will vote for one of the Likud's satellite parties.

He blamed Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit for preventing him from annexing the Jordan Valley, which he said he wanted to do before the election.
Netanyahu said that if he did win the election, his first call to form a coalition would be to Yamina leader Ayelet Shaked.

Regarding his party's social media, he distanced himself from a Facebook post that said “Arabs want to destroy us all" and said he did not know that his instagram account compared Channel 12 legal correspondent to Dumbo the elephant.

"I didn't write it," he said. "I'm a serious person."

Blue and White leader Benny Gantz mocked Netanyahu for denying knowledge of so many things.
https://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Net ... aza-601465

Israel accused of planting mysterious spy devices near the White House
The likely Israeli spying efforts were uncovered during the Trump presidency, several former top U.S. officials said.

DANIEL LIPPMAN09/12/2019 05:14 AM EDT
Illustration of spying devices in D.C.
Politico Illustration: istock/Wikimedia Commons
The U.S. government concluded within the past two years that Israel was most likely behind the placement of cellphone surveillance devices that were found near the White House and other sensitive locations around Washington, according to three former senior U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter.

But unlike most other occasions when flagrant incidents of foreign spying have been discovered on American soil, the Trump administration did not rebuke the Israeli government, and there were no consequences for Israel’s behavior, one of the former officials said.

The miniature surveillance devices, colloquially known as “StingRays,” mimic regular cell towers to fool cellphones into giving them their locations and identity information. Formally called international mobile subscriber identity-catchers or IMSI-catchers, they also can capture the contents of calls and data use.

The devices were likely intended to spy on President Donald Trump, one of the former officials said, as well as his top aides and closest associates — though it’s not clear whether the Israeli efforts were successful.

Trump is reputed to be lax in observing White House security protocols. POLITICO reported in May 2018 that the president often used an insufficiently secured cellphone to communicate with friends and confidants. The New York Times subsequently reported in October 2018 that “Chinese spies are often listening” to Trump’s cellphone calls, prompting the president to slam the story as “so incorrect I do not have time here to correct it.” (A former official said Trump has had his cellphone hardened against intrusion.)

By then, as part of tests by the federal government, officials at the Department of Homeland Security had already discovered evidence of the surveillance devices around the nation’s capital, but weren’t able to attribute the devices to specific entities. The officials shared their findings with relevant federal agencies, according to a letter a top Department of Homeland Security official, Christopher Krebs, wrote in May 2018 to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

Based on a detailed forensic analysis, the FBI and other agencies working on the case felt confident that Israeli agents had placed the devices, according to the former officials, several of whom served in top intelligence and national security posts.

That analysis, one of the former officials said, is typically led by the FBI’s counterintelligence division and involves examining the devices so that they “tell you a little about their history, where the parts and pieces come from, how old are they, who had access to them, and that will help get you to what the origins are.” For these types of investigations, the bureau often leans on the National Security Agency and sometimes the CIA (DHS and the Secret Service played a supporting role in this specific investigation).

“It was pretty clear that the Israelis were responsible,” said a former senior intelligence official.

An Israeli Embassy spokesperson, Elad Strohmayer, denied that Israel placed the devices and said: “These allegations are absolute nonsense. Israel doesn’t conduct espionage operations in the United States, period.”

A senior Trump administration official said the administration doesn’t “comment on matters related to security or intelligence.” The FBI declined to comment, while DHS and the Secret Service didn’t respond to requests for comment.

After this story was published, Trump told reporters that he would find it "hard to believe" that the Israelis had placed the devices.

"I don't think the Israelis were spying on us," Trump said. "My relationship with Israel has been great...Anything is possible but I don't believe it."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also denied after publication that Israel was behind the devices. "We have a directive, I have a directive: No intelligence work in the United States, no spies," he said in a gaggle with reporters. "And it's vigorously implemented, without any exception. It [the report] is a complete fabrication, a complete fabrication."

But former officials with deep experience dealing with intelligence matters scoff at the Israeli claim — a pro forma denial Israeli officials are also known to make in private to skeptical U.S. counterparts.

One former senior intelligence official noted that after the FBI and other agencies concluded that the Israelis were most likely responsible for the devices, the Trump administration took no action to punish or even privately scold the Israeli government.

“The reaction ... was very different than it would have been in the last administration,” this person said. “With the current administration, there are a different set of calculations in regard to addressing this.”

The former senior intelligence official criticized how the administration handled the matter, remarking on the striking difference from past administrations, which likely would have at a very minimum issued a démarche, or formal diplomatic reprimand, to the foreign government condemning its actions.

“I’m not aware of any accountability at all,” the former official said.

Beyond trying to intercept the private conversations of top officials — prized information for any intelligence service — foreign countries often will try to surveil their close associates as well. With the president, the former senior Trump administration official noted, that could include trying to listen in on the devices of the people he regularly communicates with, such as Steve Wynn, Sean Hannity and Rudy Giuliani.

“The people in that circle are heavily targeted,” the former Trump official said.

Another circle of surveillance targets includes people who regularly talk to Trump’s friends and informal advisers. Information obtained from any of these people “would be so valuable in a town that is like three degrees of separation like Kevin Bacon,” the former official added.

That’s true even for a close U.S. ally like Israel, which often seeks an edge in its diplomatic maneuvering with the United States.

“The Israelis are pretty aggressive” in their intelligence gathering operations, said a former senior intelligence official. “They’re all about protecting the security of the Israeli state and they do whatever they feel they have to to achieve that objective.”

Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with President Donald Trump. | Michael Reynolds/Getty Images

So even though Trump has formed a warm relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and made numerous policy moves favorable to the Israeli government — such as moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, ripping up the Iran nuclear deal and heavily targeting Iran with sanctions — Israel became a prime suspect in planting the devices.

While the Chinese, who have been regularly caught doing intelligence operations in the U.S., were also seen as potential suspects, they were determined as unlikely to have placed the devices based on a close analysis of the devices.

“You can often, depending upon the tradecraft of the people who put them in place, figure out who’s been accessing them to pull the data off the devices,” another former senior U.S. intelligence official explained.

Washington is awash in surveillance, and efforts of foreign entities to try to spy on administration officials and other top political figures are fairly common. But not many countries have the capability — or the budget — to plant the devices found in this most recent incident, which is another reason suspicion fell on Israel.

IMSI-catchers, which are often used by local police agencies to surveil criminals, can also be made by sophisticated hobbyists or by the Harris Corp., the manufacturer of StingRays, which cost more than $150,000 each, according to Vice News.

“The costs involved are really significant,” according to a former senior Trump administration official. “This is not an easy or ubiquitous practice.”

Among professionals, the Israeli intelligence services have an especially fearsome reputation. But they do sometimes make mistakes and are “not 10 feet tall like you see in the movies,” a former senior intelligence official noted.

In 2010, the secret covers of a Mossad hit team, some of whom had been posing as tennis players, were blown after almost 30 minutes of surveillance video was posted online of them going through a luxury Dubai hotel where they killed a top Hamas terrorist in his room.

Still, U.S. officials sometimes have been taken aback by Israel’s brazen spying. One former U.S. government official recalled his frequent concern that Israel knew about internal U.S. policy deliberations that were meant to be kept private.

“There were suspicions that they were listening in,” the former official said, based on his Israeli counterparts flaunting a level of detailed knowledge “that was hard to explain otherwise.”

“Sometimes it was sort of knowledge of our thinking. Occasionally there were some turns of phrase like language that as far as we knew had only appeared in drafts of speeches and never been actually used publicly, and then some Israeli official would repeat it back to us and say, ‘This would be really problematic if you were to say X,’” said the former official.

Back when the Obama administration was trying to jump-start negotiations with the Palestinians, for example, the Israelis were eager to get advance knowledge of the language being debated that would describe the terms of reference of the talks.

“They would have had interest in what language [President Barack] Obama or [Secretary of State John] Kerry or someone else was going to use and might indeed try to find a way to lobby for language they liked or against language that they didn’t like and so having knowledge of that could be advantageous for them,” the former official said.

“The Israelis are aggressive intelligence collectors, but they have sworn off spying on the U.S. at various points and it’s not surprising that such efforts continue,” said Daniel Benjamin, a former coordinator of counterterrorism at the Obama State Department and now director of the John Sloan Dickey Center for International Understanding at Dartmouth.

Benjamin, who emphasized that he was not aware of the FBI's investigation into the cell-phone spoofing, recalled once meeting with a former head of Mossad, the premier Israeli intelligence agency, when he was out of office. The first thing the former Mossad official told Benjamin was that Israel didn’t spy on the U.S.

“I just told him our conversation was over if he had such a low estimate of my intelligence,” Benjamin said.

Israeli officials often note in conversations with their American counterparts — correctly — that the U.S. regularly gathers intelligence on Israeli leaders.

As for Israel’s recent surveillance of the White House, one of the former senior U.S. intelligence officials acknowledged it raised security concerns but joked, “On the other hand, guess what we do in Tel Aviv?"

This article has been updated to clarify that Daniel Benjamin had no knowledge of the alleged Israeli spying, and that the Israeli official he was speaking with was a former official at the time of their conversation.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/ ... es-1491351

Unprecedented Alliances Are Moving Against Netanyahu Ahead of the Israeli Election
Bernard Avishai
The do-over campaign for Israel’s do-over election is reaching its end; voters go back to the polls on September 17th. Last time around, in the April 9th election, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu assumed that he had won—or at least that a bloc of loyal-enough rightist parties had won. But, in the last hours of May 29th, just before the Presidential mandate to form a coalition government expired, he failed to muster, by a single vote, the required majority of the hundred and twenty seats in the Knesset. Rather than see the mandate pass to someone else, Netanyahu engineered a new election. It was a desperate gambit that, if the polls hold, will prove a futile one.

Over the summer, unprecedented alliances across the political spectrum have made Netanyahu seem more vulnerable than he has since the first time he lost office, in 1999. Should he lose, Israelis concerned about the fate of their democracy will sense an immediate relief. They are tired, most immediately, of his attacks on the judiciary and the police, his attempts to suborn the media, his willingness to tolerate soldiers violating Israel Defense Forces norms in occupation raids, his racist incitement against minorities, and his populist incitement against élites. In May, Benny Gantz, the leader of the new centrist Blue and White Party, which won as many seats as the Likud in April, claimed in his inaugural speech to the Knesset that his battle was “against the new threat to the democratic system’s functioning.” Indeed, it’s hard to find anyone in the opposition who does not see the election as a referendum on democracy.

Yet Netanyahu’s real nemesis has turned out to be not a coalition of progressive democrats but a former ally and a political tough, Avigdor Lieberman, whose secular-right Yisrael Beiteinu (“Israel, Our Home”) Party won five seats in April. Lieberman refused to join a new Netanyahu government without assurances that ultra-Orthodox youth would be conscripted into the I.D.F., as the Supreme Court had ruled that they should—assurances that Netanyahu could not give without losing the support of the ultra-Orthodox parties, which had won sixteen seats. Lieberman’s recalcitrance can be explained on purely tactical grounds. His base is largely made up of immigrants from the former Soviet Union, many of whom are drawn to his (and Netanyahu’s) hard-nationalist and anti-Arab rhetoric. But the majority of Israelis who speak Russian at home say that “they never go to synagogue,” and they don’t want the rabbis meddling in their affairs.

In fact, seventy per cent of Jewish Israelis say that religious practice is not, or is only “somewhat,” important in their lives. Many abhor the separation of genders in public schools and universities and are dismayed that Jewish Israelis still can’t have civil marriages—and that the Chief Rabbinate has begun asking for genetic tests before allowing couples to marry. (According to the Law of Return, passed in 1950 and amended in 1970, in order to be granted citizenship rights a person must demonstrably have at least one Jewish grandparent.) Two-thirds of Jewish Israelis say that they want a “broad, civil coalition” government that excludes the ultra-Orthodox parties. Moreover, a slim but persistent majority identify as “right-wing.” Lieberman apparently grasped that the spectre of creeping theocracy could prove a wedge issue even among those voters, and so reverse his sinking popularity. (His party once got more than twice as many seats as it won in April.)

Yet Lieberman’s motives are personal, too. He previously served as the director-general of the Likud Party, and later as a minister in Likud-dominated coalitions, and made common cause with theocrats when it suited him. But Netanyahu thwarted and even humiliated Lieberman when it suited him. In 2014, he had Likud renege on an electoral alliance with Lieberman’s party. A new election portends revenge at its sweetest, particularly now.

That’s because Netanyahu is facing three possible indictments—one for bribery, two for breach of trust—and hearings are scheduled for early October. According to precedent and to Supreme Court rulings, if he is charged he will be expected, if not forced, to resign. And the timing of the campaign has made the case against him seem only stronger. Israel’s most widely watched news program, on Channel 12, aired a leaked transcript of testimony by the former director of the Communications Ministry (a Netanyahu appointee), confirming that Netanyahu had ordered him to issue regulations benefitting a media mogul from whom Netanyahu was aiming to extract political favors. (Netanyahu has urged Likud supporters to boycott Channel 12, calling its news “fake,” and accusing it of being “anti-Semitic” for co-producing a series with HBO—airing here as “Our Boys”—which shows Israeli extremists committing a hate crime against a Palestinian boy.)

Netanyahu hoped that, with a new election, he could secure a Likud coalition without Lieberman and with the ultra-Orthodox and national-Orthodox, pro-settler parties. The former will almost certainly hold their number of Knesset seats. The latter have no affection for Netanyahu, but they want to keep control of the ministries—Justice and Education—that give them the upper hand in Israel’s culture wars. They’ve indicated that they would pass whatever laws might be necessary to diminish the power of the Supreme Court and keep Netanyahu in office—and to win those wars.

Indeed, over the summer, a consolidated national-Orthodox party, Yemina (“To the Right”), led by the former Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, formed, in order to end the factionalism that had cost Netanyahu’s coalition crucial seats in April. Shaked, who is known for a kind of glamorous ruthlessness—her campaign put out a mock commercial for a perfume called “Fascism,” purportedly exposing the left’s hyperbole—folded her party into Yemina. She had tried to join Likud, after the April defeat, but Netanyahu, always nervous about rivals, blocked her. She has signalled, however, that, should Likud and the religious parties get a majority, Yemina would join them to try to protect Netanyahu from prosecution. Another party, Otzma Yehudit (“Jewish Strength”), led by extremist followers of the late rabbi Meir Kahane, now looks as if it might win four seats, and it would also protect Netanyahu in order to advance itself. Those seats could bring Netanyahu’s potential coalition to just two short of a majority.

Still, Lieberman will likely prove the wiliest figure in the campaign. Blue and White is currently polling at around thirty-two seats, essentially tied with the Likud once more. Though the total number of center-left seats—including Arab members, whom Blue and White has not exactly embraced—falls at least five short of a majority, Lieberman can still plausibly believe that Netanyahu and the ultra-right parties will also fall short, and that his own party will hold the balance of power. In that case, he can drag out the process of forming a new government through October, forcing Netanyahu to face indictments before any legislation to save him can be passed.

In addition, Netanyahu’s forced resignation would facilitate Lieberman’s larger plan to keep the secular right in power: he has been hinting that he will recommend to the President that Benny Gantz be given the mandate. He has also made it clear that he will not support a Blue and White coalition that includes the progressive and Arab parties. Instead, he intends to prompt Gantz to organize a national-unity government, whose core would be Blue and White, Lieberman’s party, and a Likud without Netanyahu. This last element presumes that, if Netanyahu is charged, Likud leaders who are not simply Netanyahu sycophants— the former Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar, for example—will abandon him. Last month, Netanyahu, showing signs of panic, extracted a public pledge from the top forty Likud candidates that they won’t try to replace him. But Lieberman has openly encouraged Party leaders to dump the Prime Minister.

This plan relies on a number of uncertainties, but it’s not fanciful. Lieberman’s party signed a vote-sharing agreement with Gantz’s. Knesset seats are apportioned according to the total number of votes a party wins—often with some votes, short of the amount required for another seat, remaining. Vote-sharing awards all the remainder votes to the party that has the most of them, and perhaps entitles that party—presumably Blue and White—to another seat.

Not surprisingly, Gantz and Yair Lapid, Blue and White’s No. 2, appear content to go along with Lieberman’s machinations. The Party is top-heavy with former commanders of the defense establishment who, like many of the Likud rank and file, instinctively favor a national-unity government and tend toward a secular-nationalist rhetoric. Like Lieberman, they also tend to see the Palestinian issue as a military challenge—controlling the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and deterring Hamas in Gaza—rather than as a sacred right to the Land of Israel.

Gantz himself has given few interviews in recent months; he’s apparently been content to rely on Lieberman’s scheming, the charisma and the authority of his team of generals, and on Netanyahu fatigue, which is rising across the country. The governor of the Bank of Israel is warning of a disruptive budget deficit—as high as four per cent of the G.D.P.—so Netanyahu’s lavish public grants to religious institutions increasingly seem of a piece with fiscal mismanagement. The Gaza border remains violent, and there have been exchanges with Hezbollah and Iranian forces in the north. In the past, Netanyahu benefitted from such tension, posturing as the nation’s indispensable leader; now he’s increasingly suspected of manipulating it. Gantz, in a rare interview, for the Yediot Ahronot Web site, bluntly accused Netanyahu of exploiting the military situation to advance his campaign. On Tuesday, Netanyahu announced that he will, if elected, annex the strategic Jordan Valley, in the West Bank. Blue and White spokespeople accused him of trying to use Jordan Valley residents “as extras in a campaign video.”

Gantz and Lapid have seemed at odds over a strategy to carry the secularist vote. Lapid projects himself as its authentic champion and plays the bad cop to Gantz’s good cop in challenging the ultra-Orthodox parties’ venality. He made a satirical video accusing ultra-Orthodox leaders of selling their support of Netanyahu for more state subsidies. Gantz repudiated it. Yet he also told Yediot Ahronot that he would work to set up a secular government first so that any religious parties that joined would have to accept its principles.

On the whole, then, the Gantz-Lapid partnership seems to be holding—and Netanyahu’s panic seems to be deepening. His closeness to Donald Trump is not doing Netanyahu the kind of good that it did in April, after Trump suddenly recognized Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights. The American President has appeared increasingly erratic about confronting Iran—the Israeli press is buzzing with stories of Trump side-stepping Netanyahu and secretly angling to meet with the Iranian President, Hassan Rouhani—and increasingly reckless in demanding American Jewish “loyalty.”

Moreover, the opposition to the left of Blue and White is consolidating, much as rightist parties are doing in Yemina. A new party, calling itself the Israel Democratic Party, formed in July, as a coalition that includes the left-wing Meretz Party, some defecting Labor leaders, and the former Prime Minister Ehud Barak. The Arab Knesset leader Ayman Odeh, who is the head of the Hadash Party, has, for his part, reconstituted the Joint List, a coalition of Arab parties, in an attempt to bring out the Arab vote, which dropped to under fifty per cent in April. The Joint List is currently polling at ten seats, but it could pick up more. (In April, Likud, in a naked effort to suppress the Arab vote, sent operatives with cameras to Arab polling places, which the Attorney General deemed illegal. This week, Netanyahu’s government tried, and failed, to ram through a law to permit the cameras.)

Last month, Odeh took the extraordinary step of announcing that his party would offer parliamentary support to, and even join, a government that worked to end the occupation; repeal the controversial nation-state law, passed last year, which privileges Jews over other citizens; and redouble efforts to bring police, educational, and social-welfare services to Arab communities. Some Blue and White leaders responded with skepticism. Yoaz Hendel dismissed the offer out of hand, insisting that the Joint List includes “Arab parties which fundamentally reject Israel’s existence as a Jewish state”—nor did he feel it was incumbent upon him to explain just what he meant by “Jewish state.” (Some in the Party were strong proponents of the nation-state law.)

Nevertheless, Odeh told me that the priority is to constitute a “democratic front” with all parties with shared values, including progressive members of Blue and White. Stav Shaffir, a former leader of Labor, and now a leader of the Democratic Party, told me that her goal was to advance just such an alliance. As a gesture toward the Arab community, Barak issued a public apology for his government’s role in opening fire on Israeli-Arab protesters in the early days of the al-Aqsa Intifada, in 2000. Odeh, knowing how deeply Barak is still resented in Arab towns, rejected it. (He said the Joint List would refuse to sign a vote-sharing agreement with the Democratic Party as long as Barak is on its list, but the point seems negotiable.)

The Democratic Party has been polling uncertainly at between four to seven seats, about the same as Labor, which is now led by Amir Peretz. Labor has merged with the economic populist Gesher (Bridge) Party, led by Orly Levy-Abekasis; both politicians are from North-African-immigrant communities and are particularly eager to topple Netanyahu in order to fund social services, “a hundred and twenty billion shekels from which Netanyahu has cut,” Peretz claims. Given the precarious state of the economy, he may attract Jewish voters of North-African descent.

But any democratic front, whatever its eventual appeal, is too late for this election. If Netanyahu loses, Blue and White will almost certainly get the mandate. Gantz and Lapid will push to recommit the country to norms of electoral democracy (though they will fall short of what Odeh is requesting). They will cut back on support for religious-party institutions, and increase funding for education, housing, and health care, including for the Arab sector. They will implicitly project “Israeliness” over Netanyahu’s pretension to represent diaspora Jews as a whole, and they say that they will seek to repair relations with the Democratic Party in this country. Though Gantz has acknowledged the strategic value of the Jordan Valley, and Lapid has criticized boycotts of the settlements, they would likely scotch talk of annexing outright any parts of the West Bank. When Gantz speaks of saving the “democratic system’s functioning,” this is what he means.

Needless to say, with Palestinians under occupation, and a state apparatus increasingly structured to discriminate against non-Jewish citizens, the democratic system’s functioning will require more than that. But, if Netanyahu loses, the potential effect should not be underestimated. Land of Israel zealots will no longer be in control of the education ministry; the prerogatives of the Supreme Court will be preserved. Neighboring Arab states are exerting pressure for a regional plan, and would prefer to work with moderates like Gantz. Next year, Trump may be voted out of office, and pressure from Washington to deal creatively on Palestine would increase. To move forward, a car does not need a foot on the accelerator. It inches forward when you take your foot off the brake. For now, it will be enough to get Netanyahu out of the driver’s seat.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-co ... -netanyahu

Netanyahu’s Plan to Escape Trial, in His Own Words: 'Time for Them to Be Frightened'
The PM changed versions during the course of his interrogations, talked about the 'Judgement Day' to come after Adelson, and sounded determined not to stand trial

Gidi Weitz Sep 13, 2019 11:39 AM
Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi, Russia, Sept. 12, 2019.
Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi, Russia, Sept. 12, 2019. Shamil Zhumatov/Pool Photo via AP
Immediately after the last election, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu outlined to members of his inner circle a plan to extract him from facing trial. The plan was based on obtaining immunity from the Knesset and passing legislation to prevent the High Court of Justice from removing that immunity. (For the latest election polls - click here)


If his bloc wins 61 Knesset seats next week, Netanyahu will presumably resort to this rescue plan. For him it will be the Day of Judgment.

“Stop being frightened. It’s time for them to be frightened,” Netanyahu told his confidants, referring to justice officials, headed by Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit and State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan, who have decided to indict him in three cases, subject to a hearing.

>> 'Internet, TV, radio – it's all left': Latest leaks reveal depth of Netanyahu's media obsession ■ Netanyahu was warned over media intervention, but leaked audios show he's possessed | Analysis ■ Conflict of interests? The real story behind Netanyahu’s rant at his communications minister

Haaretz Weekly Ep. 39Haaretz

Netanyahu told his confidants why he insisted on his destructive plan, telling them he had lost all confidence in the legal system on all levels – the attorney general’s office, the state prosecutor and the court system.

“They want me in prison,” he told one of his cronies, noting that if he were indicted that would indeed be the result – not because he had crossed a red line, but merely due to the jurists’ collective hostility toward him and his ideology.

Netanyahu appears to wholeheartedly believe himself to be a victim, framed by prosecutors and that Mendelblit, who is weak, doesn’t believe in them at all, but couldn’t withstand the pressure.

In his interviews with the police Netanyahu acted like a hunted man. “It’s a wacky conception,” he told the head of the fraud squad, national fraud squad chief Koresh Bar-Nur in January 2017. Bar-Nur came to Netanyahu’s residence with a team of investigators to question him under caution on Case 2000, involving a bribery deal Netanyahu allegedly negotiated with Yedioth Ahronoth publisher Arnon "Noni" Mozes.

Under the deal, Netanyahu would push for legislation that would undermine Yedioth Ahronoth’s main rival, the freebie Israel Hayom, in return for favorable coverage in Mozes’ paper, which would ensure Netanyahu remains in power.

During the interrogation Netanyahu slammed the table repeatedly with his hand, lowered his voice to emphasize certain things and resorted frequently to English phrases.

“You’re in an insane offside,” he told the investigators. “Is this what you’re going to say to the public?!”

He told Bar-Nur and his colleagues they were wasting his and their own time with futile questions. “Be serious, guys,” he said. “Nobody, but nobody in the world (in English) would think that I think this law (the Israel Hayom law) is good. And even if I said it, nobody believes I meant to actually do what I said.”

Bar-Nur: “So why did you say it to Mozes?”

Netanyahu: “I told you, it’s like (reverting to English) Game of Thrones.”

Bar-Nur: “But you didn’t only play the game inside the room. You went to Elkin (Netanyahu had asked ministers Zeev Elkin and Yariv Levin to find out if the law could be enacted during the election campaign). You invested time in the matter.”

Netanyahu: “Because he (Mozes) gets everywhere. He knows. He hears!”

Bar-Nur: “You’re drawing a picture of some monster wandering around the Knesset who knows everything and manipulates everyone.”

Netanyahu: “I’m not drawing, I’m describing…He built a situation room. He’s got a secluded room there. I know. All kinds of strange things, Okay?”

Bar-Nur: “A command post with diagrams of Bibi and Sara, is that what you think, sir?”

Netanyahu: “No, I’m hallucinating…he’s working, come on, he’s working.” Later he explained in English: “This guy is a rare guy…”

When he was caught saying something inaccurate or not telling the truth, Netanyahu skipped blithely over the mine, demonstrating confidence that in the war on public opinion he would have the upper hand.

For example, after the detectives found the recordings Netanyahu had made of his conversations with Mozes on the prime minister’s bureau chief’s iPhone, they gave Netanyahu a chance to tell them on his own accord that he had initiated the recordings.

Meshulam (one of the detectives): “Were the meetings with Noni documented?”

Netanyahu: “I didn’t document them.”

Bar-Nur: “No protocol? Video? Audio?”

Netanyhau: “No.”

After several minutes of talking on other matters, Meshulam said: “You stated here firmly that you didn’t record anything of your meetings with Mozes…but you did record the meeting. What do you have to say about it?”

Netanyahu: “I didn’t record it.”

Meshulam: “You didn’t…”

Netanyahu: “Er, it’s possible there was an attempt to record, yes.”

Meshulam: “What do you mean, an attempt to record?”

Netanyahu: “It’s possible that Ari Harrow tried to record…it could be. Don’t know. He wanted to record.”

Meshulam: “Of his own initiative?”

Netanyahu: “Don’t remember, we said Noni must be recording it…”

Meshulam: “I’m telling you that you initiated the recording. What do you, sir, have to say about that?”

Netanyahu: “I didn’t remember until you told me a moment ago…we saw him take out an instrument, put in an instrument. I don’t remember. It’s possible…and then I said, he must be recording and I’m exposed.”

In the midst of the interrogation Netanyahu asked to consult with his lawyer, the late Jacob Weinroth, who was nearby. When he came out he asked the detectives if he could offer them anything to drink or eat in the meantime, “but mind you don’t get accused of receiving gifts.”

When he returned from the consultation his version about recording the negotiations with Mozes changed completely. “I’m under constant extortion with this man. He stabs, stabs, stabs,” he told the detectives.

“And in this recording, I also remembered just now, I’ve caught him. By recording him I can actually show who this man is, if the Day of Judgement comes.”

Meshulam: “Is that why you recorded?”

“Obviously. Now I’m remembering it.”

Meshulam: “What is the Day of Judgement?”

Netanyahu: “The Day of Judgement? There are several situations in which he could take control again…”

Meshulam: “You’re holding him by the balls?”

Netanyahu: “Excuse me, no. What are you saying?...I cannot know what he would do someday. He wants to destroy Israel Hayom…Mr. Adelson is not a young man, OK? And let’s say he passes away and suddenly you return to a state secretly controlled by that thing?...I’m trying to understand what led to this thing. Why I recorded…”

Meshulam: “That’s what we’re asking.”

Netanyahu: “Sheldon Adelson passes away.”

Mesnulam: “And.”

Netanyahu: “There’s no Israel Hayom.”

Meshulam: “And.”

Netanyahu: “I want the state to know who it's dealing with…you go back to a situation in which this man is again ruling the state.”

But if Netanyahu didn’t believe Mozes and had no intention of keeping his own promise to the publisher, what would the recordings be worth on the Day of Judgement? According to Netanyahu, both men were brazenly lying to each other. The detectives discussed this point for some time, but Netanyahu insisted that the public would believe him.

Meshulam: “How do you think you’re portrayed in this conversation?”

Netanyahu: “I didn’t believe him for a moment and had no intention of doing it.”

Meshulam: “But what did you expose? You say (in the recordings) that you’re in favor of the Israel Hayom law. You say you’re playing a game and he’s playing a game. In what way are you different from him?”

Netanyahu: “In what way am I different from him? There are 8 million people in Israel. You can sell them anything you like, but nobody will believe that I went and meant to do it. Nobody!”

Bar-Nur: “And on Judgement Day the public will believe those things (that Noni said).”

Netanyahu: “I think so.”

Bar-Nur, who specialized in dealing with crime organizations, told the prime minister that keeping recordings for the Day of Judgement was a practice he knew of only “among criminals.”

“You record things too,” Netanyahu said angrily.

Later the detectives tried to settle the contradiction between the suspect’s two versions. “You said you recorded because you suspected he was recording,” Bar-Nur said. “Now you’re saying you wanted an insurance policy for the Day of Judgement.”

Netanyahu: “Also. The trigger for recording was wait, he’s recording us. This man is capable afterward of doctoring it. (in English)…I’m not ruling out anything as far as he’s concerned, he’s capable of anything, and if everything falls and the state is in his hands again then first record him, record him.”

Bar-Nur: “And you meet with a person who is capable of doing such things?”

Netanyahu: “I meet with plenty of people like that. In the diplomatic world.”

In the case dubbed Case 1000, in which Netanyahu allegedly received lavish gifts from wealthy friends, the prime minister also played the victim’s role. When first questioned in the case he was asked if a public official who receives gifts from a tycoon worth NIS 700,000 shekels is crossing the normative threshold.

“I have to think about that,” he replied.

A few days later Bar-Nur asked him if he had an answer yet. “I’m not crossing the normative threshold,” Netanyahu answered immediately.

Bar-Nur: “So why did it take you time and why didn’t you say that straight away?”

Netanyahu: “Nu so I’m telling you. I thought about it, OK?...Now I’ll tell you, there’s nothing in the world like what you’re doing here. There’s no such thing that they come to Francois Holland or Barack Obama and say to them ‘did you get cigars from your friends’…No way! What the hell?! You didn’t even investigate the 1.3 million shekels for Olmert’s pens…There’s one law for Olmert and another for Netanyahu?”

Bar-Nur: “Will you continue taking cigars and bottles?”

Netanyahu: “No, I won’t.”

Bar-Nur: “Why, if it’s normative?”

Meshulam: “He stopped smoking.”

Bar-Nur: “And champagne bottles and jewellery?”

Netanyahu: “I wasn’t the consumer…”

Bar-Nur: “You say passionately that it’s normative.”

Netanyahu: “Normative is what Noni Mozes and the media decided is normative. But I want to ask you a normative question…how come you’re investigating such a thing?”

Immediately after the previous election Netanyahu said he was lucky when Mendelblit decided to release the details of susicions against him weeks before the polls opened. The public was exposed to the materials gathered by the prosecution, yet gave him renewed confidence that justified keeping him in power and brushing the charges aside. If Netanyahu and his allies gain 61 Knesset seats in the election next week, he will likely carry out his rescue plan.

Aides to the prime minister commented: “Another false media spin. Prime Minister Netanyahu did not advance any immunity law. At first you said he was pushing the immunity law, then you said it will be part of the coalition agreements. None of that happened nor will it happen. Netanyahu said many times it’s not right to issue a decision about a hearing before the election, if it cannot be held by the time of the election. Such a decision could have misled the public, distort the voters' will and damage the democratic process. The last election’s results proved clearly that the public believes the prime minister’s cases are persecution, based not on facts but on false gossip and state witnesses who were extorted by violent and wrongful means to hand over Netanyahu’s head.”
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/ele ... -1.7837402

[seemslikeadream]

Zionism’s Lost Shine
Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:28 pm

6 years

This Is Israel's Last Ever Zionist Election

Neither Netanyahu nor his crude, illiberal, annexationist, political arsonist ‘friends’ comprehend the magnitude of the storm they’re about to bring down on Israel’s security – and its most foundational ideas

Chuck Freilich Sep 12, 2019 3:49 PM

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a ceremony at the Tomb of the Patriarchs, a shrine holy to Jews and Muslims, in Hebron in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. September 4, 2019.\ RONEN ZVULUN/ REUTERS
For decades commentators have warned that the politico-military and societal processes underway in Israel pose severe dangers to our national future, and therefore that each of the previous round of elections were nothing less than critical.


The warnings were prescient, but the future does not happen all at once: it creeps up slowly over time, almost without our noticing - and it has now arrived, big time.

>> The Racist Party That May Save Netanyahu's Political Career >> The 15-second Video That Could Kill Netanyahu’s Campaign

Indeed, it is questionable whether the enlightened Zionist enterprise can survive four more years of the current trends - and the upcoming elections may prove to be the last chance to save it.

There are six primary dangers.

The first danger is the possibility of an imminent formal annexation of the West Bank, or parts thereof, an eventuality that appeared entirely fanciful just a year ago, but which has since gained the support of the prime minister and right-wing parties.

Earlier this week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared he would annex the Jordan valley if re-elected, and that the endlessly deferred Trump Mideast peace plan offers a "historic opportunity" for annexing more of the West Bank and other areas.

Breaking news and analyses in your inbox

Various bills have been introduced in the Knesset, some calling for broad and even complete annexation of the entire West Bank, others more moderate, sufficing with limited and "consensual" annexations, such as Gush Etzion or Maale Adumim.

Neither Netanyahu nor the proponents of these bills seem to comprehend the magnitude of the storm they may be bringing down upon us.

Even a limited annexation is likely to lead to severe Palestinian violence and to the cessation of security cooperation with the Palestinian Authority. Should this happen, the IDF will be forced to take control over areas currently ruled by the PA, likely leading to its collapse and to renewed Israeli responsibility for 2.6 million Palestinians. Violence is probable in Gaza, too, and Israel may end up once again in control over the two million Palestinians living there.

The donor states, who currently fund the PA, will presumably cease their support and Israel will also have to bear the financial burden of social and other services for millions of Palestinians. Moreover, in the territory between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, in the "Jewish state," there will be a non-Jewish majority.

Those who doubt the severity of this brief analysis, and believe that limited annexation is feasible, should read the details in the in-depth study conducted by Commanders for Israeli Security, a group of 300 former Israeli generals and other senior defense officials.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu points out the Jordan Valley, an area he has declared Israel will annex, as he gives a statement in Ramat Gan. September 10, 2019
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu points out the Jordan Valley, an area he has declared Israel will annex, as he gives a statement in Ramat Gan. September 10, 2019.AFP
The second danger is that we are rapidly approaching the point of no return in the West Bank, beyond which no government, even a left-wing one, will be able to separate and disentangle Jewish settlements from Palestinian towns and villages, and Israel will become a binational state.

The primary problem is not the ostensibly large number of settlers to be relocated: after all, during the 1990s, Israel successfully absorbed almost ten times as many immigrants from the former Soviet Union, who did not speak the language, have homes, or jobs.

The real issue is one of political wherewithal - the settlers’ and their supporters’ political clout - which may make a future withdrawal impossible in practice.

In the meantime, the status quo is an illusion. The number of settlers who would have to be relocated grows continually; the territory available for land swaps, which is limited to begin with, is being used for other purposes, and positions continue to harden on both sides.

Already today, not in some distant future, 40 percent of the combined population of Israel and the West Bank is not Jewish and does not share the Zionist dream - and that is without taking into account the disengagement from Gaza, in whose absence there would already be a non-Jewish majority.

An overwhelming majority of the Israeli public is adamantly opposed to a binational state, even though many continue, ostrich-like, to vote for parties whose policies lead precisely to this. Some simply do not believe that annexation will happen.

A massive Likud election campaign billboard reading ‘Netanyahu: Another league,’ shows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump. Tel Aviv, Israel, Sept 8, 2019
A massive Likud election campaign billboard reading ‘Netanyahu: Another league,’ shows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump. Tel Aviv, Israel, Sept 8, 2019.Oded Balilty,AP
The third danger, after years in which basic norms of public decency and the rule of law have been systematically undermined, is to Israel’s democracy.

The prime minister, who faces a series of imminent indictments, continues to violate the law by intervening in policy regarding the mass media, and recently appointed sycophants as both the comptroller general and minister of justice. The prime minister’s wife has been convicted of criminal charges. One minister (Haim Katz) has already had his special pre-indictment hearing and faces criminal charges, two others (Deri and Litzmann) are soon to have theirs.

Instead of forcefully defending Israel’s highly-regarded judicial system, the premier and his merry band - including both the recent and current ministers of justice - have done their utmost to undermine the legitimacy of the Supreme Court, attorney general and law enforcement agencies. They have no shame.

The fourth danger is to Israel’s national unity, which will not be able to bear the incitement fomented by the premier and his co-arsonists much longer. Public discourse is replete today with despicable messaging designed to amplify tensions between Ashkenazi and Sephardi Israelis, a scourge that should have been put to rest decades ago, and public life has come to be full of hatred and violence.

The delicate relationship between Israel’s Jewish majority and Arab minority remains an easy target for their poisoned missives. Previously, the prime minister warned of Arab voters "converging" in droves on polling stations; he is now delegitimizing the Arab population with entirely baseless allegations of irregularities in Arab polling stations, during last spring’s elections, that supposedly prevented the establishment of a right-wing coalition.

The message on Netanyahu's Facebook page: a secular left-wing government 'would depend on the Arabs who want to annihilate us all'
The message on Netanyahu's Facebook page: a secular left-wing government 'would depend on the Arabs who want to annihilate us all'Screengrab
Netanyahu’s latest social media outburst – a message he later blamed, somewhat implausbly, on low-level staffers – was a message on his official Facebook account stating that "Arabs want to annihilate us all – women, children and men," a fate which, he alleged, left-wing parties would facilitate – signals he considers even the crudest forms of anti-Arab incitement as legitimate.

The fifth danger is of growing religiosity. The Ministry of Education hired 477 new Jewish studies teachers this year, but just seven teachers of physics, eight of chemistry and 37 of civics. Gender separation is becoming increasingly common in publicly funded events and community colleges. Soldiers in an IDF base were recently ordered to turn off their phones on Saturdays.

The ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) population, which views rabbinical leaders as the supreme source of authority, not the laws and institutions of the State of Israel, constitutes a clear and present danger to Israeli democracy. It also constitutes an untenable burden on the national economy, whose inexorable outcome will be a severe economic crisis.


Eylon Levy
✔
@EylonALevy
· Sep 12, 2019
Seriously bonkers and disturbing messages at Shas's massive (all-male) rally last night. It's a totalitarian religious worldview that simply cannot be reconciled with liberal democracy.

#Israelex19v2
Embedded video

Eylon Levy
✔
@EylonALevy
1. "This election is a choice: Either God, or against God."
View image on Twitter

7
4:42 AM - Sep 12, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

See Eylon Levy's other Tweets


If current trends continue, 35 percent of Israel’s Jewish population will be Haredi in 2060. Deeply worrisome trends exist among the national-religious public, as well.

The sixth danger is to Israel’s international standing and relations with the U.S. In the era of Trump, things blur, but Israel has become a pariah in much of international public opinion and delegitimization trends are making inroads into the U.S., too.

Support for Israel among Democrats, its historic base, is in freefall and many in the Jewish community, which votes some 80 percent Democratic, are distancing themselves, as well. Initial calls have even been made recently for cuts to the holy of holies, U.S. military aid to Israel. If things do not change soon, Israel’s ties with its closest ally will be marred by growing difficulty.

Israel won’t suddenly shutter up its polling stations for ever on September 18th. There will be more elections, but they may well not be elections for representatives of the nation-state as we know it, and as it was founded. The question is whether it's still possible to ensure Israel’s future as a vibrantly democratic and predominantly Jewish state.

Hypnotized by the imminent arrival (and gratification) in Israel of the Messiah, i.e. Amazon, the easy availability of low-cost flights abroad and a surfeitof binging on Netflix, the Israeli electorate is both too tired and stupefied to notice.

Nevertheless, it’s not too late. To paraphrase Netanyahu, every Israeli who cares about what "Israeli" really means, who cares about preventing a dark, illiberal future, who cares about the rule of law, who doesn’t want to pave the way for unavoidable, endless conflict – it’s time to descend on the polling stations in droves. Storm them with your ballots.

Chuck Freilich, a former deputy Israeli national security adviser, is a senior fellow at Harvard University’s Kennedy School and a professor at Tel Aviv University. He is the author of "Israeli National Security: A New Strategy for an Era of Change" (Oxford University Press, 2018). Twitter: @FreilichChuck
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.pr ... -1.7836161

[seemslikeadream]

watching the vote in Israel today

1500 votes separated the winner last April

will be back with the results


SO FAR

Barak Ravid
‏
Verified account

@BarakRavid
Follow Follow @BarakRavid
More
BREAKING: Exit polls in the three main TV channels in Israel predict Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has lost the elections with his right wing block not reaching 61 seats majority
https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/1 ... 8483778561

Netanyahu is not yet here at Likud, but Trump is



Washington Post
For Netanyahu, winning reelection could be the only way to avoid corruption charges....sounds just like trump
.

Barak Ravid
‏

BREAKING: In first post elections speech Netanyahu refuses to concede. blames the media for biased coverage

BREAKING: Neyanyahu says he is still waiting for the final results of the elections

BREAKING: Netanyahu says Israel needs a Zionist government that is committed for Israel as a Jewish state. No government can be based on support from Arab parties
5:26 PM - 17 Sep 2019

BREAKING: Netanyahu says he will try to form a government in order to prevent "an anti Zionist government"
https://twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/1 ... 9124491264

[seemslikeadream]

Arab Parties Back Benny Gantz as Israeli Leader, to End Netanyahu’s Grip

By David M. Halbfinger and Isabel Kershner
Sept. 22, 2019
Updated 5:10 p.m. ET

By David M. Halbfinger
Sept. 22, 2019Updated 12:11 p.m. ET

JERUSALEM — After 27 years of sitting out decisions on who should lead Israel, Arab lawmakers on Sunday recommended that Benny Gantz, the centrist former army chief, be given the first chance to form a government over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a watershed assertion of political power.
Ayman Odeh, the leader of the Arab Joint List, wrote in a New York Times Op-Ed published on Sunday that the alliance’s 13 incoming lawmakers — the third-largest faction in the newly elected Parliament — had decided to recommend Mr. Gantz because it would “create the majority needed to prevent another term for Mr. Netanyahu.”
“It should be the end of his political career,” Mr. Odeh wrote.
The Arab lawmakers’ recommendation, which Mr. Odeh and other members of the Joint List delivered to President Reuven Rivlin in a face-to-face meeting Sunday evening, reflected Arab citizens’ impatience to integrate more fully into Israeli society and to have their concerns be given greater weight by Israeli lawmakers.
“There is no doubt a historic aspect to what we are doing now,” Mr. Odeh said in the meeting with the president, which was broadcast live.
It was also a striking act of comeuppance for Mr. Netanyahu, who for years had rallied his right-wing supporters by inflaming anti-Arab sentiments. Before the Sept. 17 election, he accused Arab politicians of trying to steal the election and at one point accused them of wanting to “destroy us all.”
Israeli Arabs “have chosen to reject Benjamin Netanyahu, his politics of fear and hate, and the inequality and division he advanced for the past decade,” Mr. Odeh wrote in the Op-Ed for The Times.
Still, Mr. Odeh wrote that the Joint List would not enter a government led by Mr. Gantz because he had not agreed to embrace its entire “equality agenda” — fighting violent crime in Arab cities, changing housing and planning laws to treat Arab and Jewish neighborhoods the same, improving Arabs’ access to hospitals, increasing pensions, preventing violence against women, incorporating Arab villages that lack water and electricity, resuming peace talks with the Palestinians and repealing the law passed last year that declared Israel the nation-state only of the Jewish people.
The last time Arab lawmakers recommended a prime minister was in 1992, when two Arab parties with a total of five seats in Parliament recommended Yitzhak Rabin, though they did not join his government.
“We have decided to demonstrate that Arab Palestinian citizens can no longer be rejected or ignored,” Mr. Odeh wrote.
In the 1992 election, Mr. Rabin initially held a narrow majority in the 120-seat Knesset even without the Arab parties’ support, though he came to rely on it a year later after Shas, an ultra-Orthodox party, quit the government when Mr. Rabin signed the Oslo peace accords.
Mr. Odeh wrote that the decision to support Mr. Gantz was meant as “a clear message that the only future for this country is a shared future, and there is no shared future without the full and equal participation of Palestinian citizens.”
Mr. Gantz narrowly edged the prime minister in the national election last Tuesday. Afterward, both candidates called for unity, but differed on how to achieve it.
The former army chief appears to lack a 61-seat majority even with the Joint List’s support. He emerged from the election with 57 seats, including those of allies on the left and the Joint List, compared with 55 seats for Mr. Netanyahu and his right-wing allies.
Avigdor Liberman, leader of the secular, right-wing Yisrael Beiteinu party, which won eight seats, is in the position to be a kingmaker, but said on Sunday that he would not recommend any candidate. He said that Mr. Odeh and the Joint List were not merely political opponents, but “the enemies” and belonged in the “Parliament in Ramallah,” not in the Knesset.
Mr. Rivlin began hearing the recommendations of each major party Sunday evening and was to finish on Monday, before entrusting the task of forming a government to whichever candidate he believes has the best chance of being successful.
In remarks at the start of that process, Mr. Rivlin said the Israeli public wanted a unity government including both Mr. Gantz’s Blue and White party and Mr. Netanyahu’s Likud.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/22/worl ... nyahu.html

[seemslikeadream]

Netanyahu Prepares for Expected Corruption Indictment
ASSOCIATED PRESSOctober 2, 2019

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressees his supporters at party headquarters after elections in Tel Aviv, Israel, on Sept. 18, 2019. (AP Photo/Ariel Schalit)
JERUSALEM (AP) — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attorneys met Wednesday with Israel’s attorney general and other top law enforcement officials in Netanyahu’s long-awaited pre-indictment hearing on a series of corruption scandals.

The hearing is the last step before formal charges are pressed and has been delayed many times already. It looms large over Netanyahu’s efforts to extend his political career. The sessions are expected to last four days and come just two weeks after Israel’s second inconclusive election of the year.

Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit has recommended indicting Netanyahu on bribery, fraud and breach of trust charges in three cases. The hearing offers Netanyahu’s legal team a chance to present its defense in hopes of persuading authorities to drop the charges. A decision on whether to indict is expected by the end of the year.

The scandals have engulfed Netanyahu’s family and his inner circle, with at least three former close confidants turning state’s witnesses and testifying against him.

Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, have long been known for their penchant for an expensive lifestyle and questionable use of public funds. Mrs. Netanyahu was convicted of misusing state funds after she reached a plea bargain settling allegations that she overspent some $100,000 of state money on lavish meals. She’d previously been indicted for graft, fraud and breach of trust.

Here is a look at the three cases.

TELECOM TRADE-OFF
The most damaging case against Netanyahu involves an influence-peddling scandal in which two of his formerly closest aides are testifying against him on suspicion of promoting regulation worth hundreds of millions of dollars to Israel’s Bezeq telecom company. In return, Bezeq’s popular news site, Walla, allegedly provided favorable coverage of Netanyahu and his family.

Nir Hefetz, a former Netanyahu family spokesman, and Shlomo Filber, the former director of the Communications Ministry under Netanyahu, cut deals with prosecutors after they were arrested along with Bezeq’s controlling shareholder Shaul Elovitch, his wife, son and other top Bezeq executives. Former journalists at the Walla news site have attested to being pressured to refrain from negative reporting of Netanyahu. The charges include bribery, fraud and breach of trust.

LAVISH GIFTS
Police recommended indicting Netanyahu for accepting nearly $300,000 in gifts from Hollywood mogul Arnon Milchan and Australian billionaire James Packer.

Police say that in return for jewelry, expensive cigars and champagne, Netanyahu operated on Milchan’s behalf on U.S. visa matters, tried to legislate a generous tax break for him and sought to promote his interests in the Israeli media market.

Police have not commented on what Packer, who reportedly sought Israeli residency status for tax purposes, may have received, and Netanyahu has said all he received were gifts from friends. Longtime aide Ari Harow is a state witness in this case. The charges include fraud and breach of trust.

MEDIA MEDDLING
Police have also recommended indicting Netanyahu for offering a newspaper publisher legislation that would weaken his paper’s main rival in return for favorable coverage.

Netanyahu reportedly was recorded asking Arnon Mozes, the publisher of the Yediot Ahronot daily, for positive coverage in exchange for helping to weaken Israel Hayom, a free pro-Netanyahu newspaper that had cut into Yediot’s business.

Israel Hayom is financed by Netanyahu’s American billionaire friend Sheldon Adelson and largely serves as the prime minister’s mouthpiece. Netanyahu has noted that a proposed law to weaken Israel Hayom never passed and that he had dissolved his coalition and called a new election in 2015 because of his opposition to the proposal. Harow is a state witness in this case, too.

According to TV reports based on recently leaked police investigations, Adelson’s wife also testified that Sara Netanyahu exerted pressure on her to provide gifts and favorable media coverage. The charges include fraud and breach of trust.
https://www.courthousenews.com/netanyah ... ndictment/

[seemslikeadream]

The Precarious Position of Benjamin Netanyahu

| The New Yorker
The office of the Justice Ministry in Jerusalem is an inelegant and nondescript building north of the Old City. It seems an unlikely location for the future of Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister, to be decided. But that is what happened this week, as Netanyahu’s attorneys concluded four days of a pre-trial hearing before the Attorney General, Avichai Mandelblit, and around twenty state prosecutors—a team that had been involved, for three years, in three open criminal cases against the Prime Minister. In February, Mandelblit recommended that Netanyahu be charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust in three major corruption cases—accusations that Netanyahu has denied. Now the decision of whether to indict Netanyahu and, if so, on what charge, is in Mandelblit’s hands—a decision that could take only a few weeks or drag on for months, perhaps until mid-December, when a senior prosecutor is set to leave office. (It is expected that the prosecutor will see the investigations through.)
One figure has been conspicuously absent from these sessions: the Prime Minister himself. Netanyahu spent the week before the hearing fulminating against leaks from the investigations into his conduct and demanding that the pre-trial hearing be made public and aired live. Netanyahu presented this demand in the name of so-called transparency. But in a pre-trial hearing, only the defense is given the chance to argue its case. This would have made for a lopsided public broadcast favoring Netanyahu—as he knows well. (Mandelblit rejected the request out of hand: “This procedure will not serve its purpose if it is regarded as a media spectacle,” a top aide wrote in a letter.) In a sinister move, Netanyahu then tweeted out his thanks to hundreds of protesters who picketed Mandelblit’s home over the weekend, chanting, “fifth column.”

“It’s unclear to me if what we’re seeing is a real legal battle or a battle over public opinion,” Mordechai Kremnitzer, a former dean of law at the Hebrew University and senior research fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute, told me last Wednesday, as the first day of the hearing concluded. “There are bad signs, such as his insistence on making the hearing public. It shows that he’s aiming at the people at home, not those in the room.” Kremnitzer continued, “It all seems geared toward public opinion—either that or a play for time. The longer he can keep to the Prime Minister seat, the better it is for him.” There is no law in Israel against indicting a sitting Prime Minister, but nor is there a precedent for it.

Netanyahu’s populist image as Israel’s “King Bibi” now dangles precariously. On the one hand, his defenders have reasons to feel newly emboldened. He entered the hearing not only as Israel’s longest-serving Prime Minister but as one recently given a mandate to form yet another government. On the other hand, he had just come off of a string of humiliating defeats. Twice in five months he had failed to win enough votes to form an outright coalition, and many analysts believe that he is unlikely to assemble one in the twenty-eight days now afforded him by law. By all accounts, Netanyahu’s nightmare scenario is to be indicted in the coming weeks, while he’s trying to cobble together a coalition. Although he is not required to resign if he is charged, an indictment weakens his standing drastically: other parties may refuse to sit with him and lawmakers from his own Likud Party may decide to unseat him.
In a sign of just how battered Netanyahu is politically, his main opponent, Benny Gantz, of the centrist Blue and White Party, blew off a meeting with him last week. (Gantz reportedly wanted Netanyahu to be the first to attempt to form a coalition; he is counting on Netanyahu to fail, and thinks that other parties will join Blue and White if they know that Netanyahu is out of the running.) A rival from within Likud then all but declared that he would challenge Netanyahu if Likud were to hold a primary. A day later, however, Likud came out with a statement saying that the party would only “take part in a government headed by Benjamin Netanyahu,” in effect quashing any chance of an internal shakeup at the moment.

In the court cases, Netanyahu is in the unenviable position of having already been found more guilty than innocent (although legally, of course, his innocence is presumed). The most serious of the charges against him center on what is known in Israel as “Case 4000,” which alleges that Netanyahu gave regulatory benefits worth about five hundred million dollars to a telecommunications tycoon in exchange for favorable coverage on a popular news site owned by the tycoon. In that case, all three senior state prosecutors, including Mandelblit, believed that there was enough evidence to indict the Prime Minister for bribery.

Netanyahu’s defense has been not to deny that he had been given favorable coverage, exactly, but to say that it is impossible to attach a monetary value to such coverage and that therefore trading in favorable articles does not rise to the level of a quid pro quo. Although Mandelblit found hundreds of instances in which the news site’s owner appeared to intervene in coverage on behalf of the Prime Minister and his wife, Netanyahu has dismissed the allegations as overblown—nothing, as he put it, but “two and a half articles.” Netanyahu, whose Twitter banner is a picture of him with Trump, has also tried to present senior state prosecutors as engaged in a “witch hunt” against him. This required some rhetorical gymnastics, given that it was he who had appointed Mandelblit Attorney General. Netanyahu also demanded to “confront” state witnesses in his case—at least three of whom had been his confidants before they decided to coöperate with the prosecution. When, ahead of the pre-trial hearing, Netanyahu was asked to submit a document describing the main arguments in his defense, his lawyers instead sent a one-page letter listing the charges and stating, simply, that he denies them all, according to Haaretz.

There are indications that Netanyahu may now be trying to change course and preserve a modicum of civility. Shortly before the hearing, he installed a new defense attorney, Ram Caspi, a veteran establishment figure who had worked with two former Israeli Prime Ministers. “I have complete faith not only in the legal establishment in Israel but also in those who stand at its head,” Caspi said as the hearing began, last week. To many observers, however, those words rang hollow. Why, if Netanyahu had “complete faith” in the system, did he mobilize Israelis to protest in front of the Attorney General’s home? Why make a mockery of the procedure by sending an empty document of defense?

Legal experts in Israel are divided on whether Netanyahu will be indicted. Given Mandelblit’s past recommendation to charge Netanyahu, is it already a foregone conclusion, or might Mandelbit decide to reopen and relitigate the cases? One camp points to the fact that Mandelblit had taken almost three years to recommend charges, and that he zeroed in on relatively few of them, as an indication that he has set an extremely high burden of proof, bringing forward only charges that he views as airtight and therefore not likely to be overturned in a pre-trial hearing. “The whole point of a hearing is to insure that a decision isn’t taken lightly, but, of course, this case has already gone through so many eyeballs and so much scrutiny,” Kremnitzer told me. Others point to Mandelblit’s foot-dragging as proof of the opposite: that, despite a stellar reputation, he may in the end be too hesitant to indict a sitting Prime Minister. They also bring up the case of Avigdor Lieberman, the hard-line politician who has emerged as Netanyahu’s toughest political adversary. In 2013, Mandelblit’s predecessor as Attorney General cleared Lieberman of accusations of fraud surrounding his appointment of an ambassador, which had dogged him for more than a decade.
If Mandelblit were to reverse his recommendation to indict, he would need to be presented with new evidence. Or, as legal analysts like to call it, a “new narrative.” So far, leaks from inside the hearing last week suggest that Netanyahu’s defense team has been unable to come up with one. Instead, Kremnitzer said, it’s relying on “arguments we know well”: that Netanyahu, in accepting gifts, was following the advice of his former attorney (who had since died); that the favors he received were “a trifle”; that it was his aides and family members, not him personally, who had sought the positive coverage in Case 4000. “They’re waiting to see what sticks,” Kremnitzer said. “When that happens usually it’s a sign that you don’t have a winning argument.”

Netanyahu’s scattershot strategy extends to the media, too. This past week alone, he suggested that Yair Lapid, Blue and White’s No. 2, is actually the person who should be investigated for ties to a tycoon (“If it’s not Bibi, they don’t investigate,” he tweeted), said that protesters who had taken to the streets against him were “funded by” leftist organizations, reposted the words of a legal scholar who had argued that Netanyahu “doesn’t stand a chance of getting a fair trial,” and posted a link to an article that compared his ordeal to Trump’s impeachment proceedings and argued that, at least in the United States, “This is done out in the open.” Tehilla Shwartz Altshuler, who heads the Media Reform Program at the Israel Democracy Institute, described Netanyahu’s offer to meet with Gantz on the first day of the hearing—and his subsequent lashing out at its cancellation—as an attempt at distraction, amplified by his near-constant attacks against perceived enemies, such as the press and the Attorney General. “They’re shooting in every direction and they don’t know what’s going to work yet,” Shwartz Altshuler told me. “The election itself made Bibi realize that the spins that used to work for him—all those sweaty videos on Facebook—didn’t bring about the desired results.”

She saw in this dual line of attack and victimization an effort to appeal to two audiences. The first is the average Israeli, who may identify with Netanyahu’s grievances and feel sympathy toward him. “There’s an attempt to shape public opinion as ‘What do they want from Bibi? Poor Bibi. They’re all out to get him while he’s busy fighting for us,’ ” Shwartz Altshuler said. The second group is what she called a right-wing “anarchist élite”—one that already harbors suspicion toward Israel’s Supreme Court and believes in the existence of “deep state” elements, and is therefore receptive to Netanyahu’s diatribes against leftist forces that are conspiring to bring him down. “This is all part of his spinologia”—spin-ology— Shwartz Altshuler told me.

After the election, rumors swirled that Netanyahu might negotiate a plea bargain ahead of an indictment, which would see him plead guilty to some lesser charges and resign from office in exchange for walking free. Last month, his lawyers shot down that suggestion. Other Israeli analysts suggested that if Netanyahu were to be indicted, he might arrange to step down from office in exchange for a Presidential pardon. Backing up this theory is his enlistment of Caspi, whose most famous case, in the nineteen-eighties, was of Shin Bet members who had been involved in the killing of suspected terrorists and a subsequent coverup, and ended in a Presidential pardon. This option of a pardon in return for Netanyahu bowing out of public life—which Caspi has denied even discussing with his client—has been floated so often in recent days that a poll released last week surveyed Israelis on it. Fifty-six per cent said they would oppose such a move, either because they believe that Netanyahu is innocent or because they want to see him convicted.

This week’s pre-trial hearing therefore provides a Rorschach test of sorts for Israelis: most everyone seems to find that it makes them apprehensive, but each for his or her own reasons. Netanyahu’s admirers are worried that he will be indicted; his critics are worried that he won’t be. And both admirers and critics alike are worried that a plea deal or a Presidential pardon may never see their position vindicated. Netanyahu’s defense team presented its final arguments on Monday, just in time for Yom Kippur. One person, who, for now at least, occupies the Prime Minister’s seat, may have some atoning to do.
http://archive.is/z7rV0

[seemslikeadream]

Netanyahu Tells President He Can't Form Government; Rivlin to Tap Gantz
Netanyahu rival and Kahol Lavan leader Benny Gantz will have 28 days to try to establish a coalition once Rivlin hands him the mandate, which the PM just returned

Jonathan Lis Oct 21, 2019 9:14 PM
Benjamin Netanyahu prepares to speak at an official ceremony in Jerusalem, May 5, 2019.
Benjamin Netanyahu prepares to speak at an official ceremony in Jerusalem, May 5, 2019.Mark Israel Salem/Pool photo
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Monday that he cannot establishment a new Israeli government and that he is returning the mandate to form a coalition to President Reuven Rivlin, paving the way for a different candidate to try to create a government for the first time in over a decade.

The premier made the announcement two days before his final deadline to present a coalition. Rivlin stated in response that he intends to tap the prime minister's rival and Kahol Lavan leader Benny Gantz. He is expected to formally announce his decision within 72 hours, by Thursday evening.

Gantz, a former Israeli army chief of staff, will have 28 days to try to form a coalition. If the Gantz-led coalition talks also fail, any lawmaker backed by a majority of at least 61 Knesset members would be the next one to have a go at forming a coalition.

If no other lawmaker will be tapped by Knesset members within 21 days, or if they are unable to form a government, Israel will find itself heading for a third election within a year.

Netanyahu broke the news on social media. In a video published on his official Facebook page, the prime minister said: "Ever since receiving the mandate [to form a government] I have worked relentlessly … to establish a broad national unity government. This is what the people want."

He argued that his efforts to "bring Gantz to the negotiation table … and prevent another election" have failed, adding that the Kahol Lavan leader "refused time after time."

Responding to Netanyahu's announcement, Gantz wrote on Twitter: "It's time for Kahol Lavan."

The party's co-leader Yair Lapid said that "Bibi failed once more. It's a serial thing." In an official statement, his party said: "The time for spins is over, now is the time for actions. Kahol Lavan is determined to form a liberal national unity government headed by Benny Gantz, for which the people voted last month."

Gantz's party received 33 out of 120 Knesset seats in Israel's September 17 election, followed closely by Netanyahu's Likud with 32, both far from securing a majority in parliament.

Netanyahu has the backing of ultra-Orthodox parties Shas (eight seats) and United Torah Judaism (seven seats), as well as the far-right alliance Yamina (also seven seats).

In consultations with Rivlin ahead of nominating Netanyahu, the Arab alliance Joint List, which won 13 Knesset seats, backed Gantz in a rare move for Israeli Arab parties. Labor-Gesher, with six Knesset seats, and the Democratic Union, with five seats, also recommended Gantz to Rivlin.

Yisrael Beiteinu, led by Avigdor Lieberman, who received eight Knesset seats, backed none of the candidates for prime minister.

'Fix the damage'

Gantz and his potential coalition partners "are only talking about unity," Netanyahu said in his video message. "In effect, they're doing the exact opposite, encouraging sectarianism" by refusing to accept a government with ultra-Orthodox parties, he added.

The prime minister then argued that Gantz has worked in full coordination with Joint List lawmakers, "who glorify terrorism [and] deny Israel's existence," to form "a minority left-wing government."

If such a government comes into being, Netanyahu said, "I will head to the opposition and work with my friends to take it down."

Joint List Chairman Ayman Odeh said on Twitter: "The magician has long run out of tricks and he's pulling the incitement card once more. I hope this would be the last time Netanyahu incitesw against the Arab citizens as a prime minister."

Kahol Lavan lawmaker Ofer Shelah said Monday that Netanyahu "wants an election, it's clear," calling on other parties to "join us in a government that will fix the damage he's done."

He added that Netanyahu has wasted four weeks in order to continue serving as prime minister, while "fabricating stories about security and economics."

Labor Chairman Amir Peretz said "Tonight Netanyahu ended his role as a prime minister, but it is his failure that has become Israeli citizens' new hope."

The Democratic Union's Nitzan Horowitz said his party "aspired to be part of the government [Gantz] forms... It's about time."

Rotation still an option

Gantz now intends to hold consultations with all party leaders, including Netanyahu, in an attempt to form a broad unity government.

Rotation for the prime minister's position is not off the table, but Kahol Lavan insists that Gantz would go first, before any Likud candidate, and that no lawmaker with charges against him be considered.

Netanyahu is facing potential charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust in three corruption cases. Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit is soon expected to announce whether the prime minister will be charged following his early October pre-indictment hearing.

Kahol Lavan is expected to present several preconditions for joining its government, including backing public transport on Shabbat and revoking legislation forcing businesses to close on Saturdays, to which ultra-Orthodox parties object.

On Thursday, Netanyahu published an outline for a broad national unity government, in his final attempt to form a coalition, which was quickly rejected by Gantz.

The outline, which Netanyahu presented to Gantz by phone, is based on the guidelines set forward by President Rivlin, but ignores Kahol Lavan's demand to break up the right-wing bloc as a precondition to coalition talks. The plan also makes no mention of a rotation of the premiership or an arrangement for such a rotation.
https://thehill.com/policy/internationa ... government

Netanyahu announces he can't establish government
Zack Budryk10/21/19 01:40 PM EDT
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday informed President Reuven Rivlin he has been unable to form a government, according to Haaretz.

“Ever since receiving the mandate [to form a government] I have worked relentlessly ... to establish a broad national unity government. This is what the people want,” Netanyahu said in a video posted to Facebook on Monday.

Since receiving the mandate, however, Netanyahu said he has been unsuccessful in bringing Benny Gantz, leader of Kahol Lavan, the largest party in the Israeli Knesset, saying Gantz has “refused time after time.”

Rivlin’s office said in a statement that he will turn the mandate to form a government over to Gantz, who would have 28 days to form it, according to Haaretz. Rivlin is likely to make the decision official by Thursday evening.

"The time for spins is over, now is the time for actions. Kahol Lavan is determined to form a liberal national unity government headed by Benny Gantz, for which the people voted last month,” the party said in a statement.

If Rivlin decides against allowing Gantz to form a government, the task will instead fall to the Knesset, which will also be responsible for forming a government if Gantz does not make the 28-day deadline.
https://thehill.com/policy/internationa ... government

[seemslikeadream]

Netanyahu Recordings Reveal Threats to Publisher: 'I'll Retaliate With Everything I've Got'
Negotiations between the premier and Yedioth Ahronoth publisher Arnon Mozes, a central figure in one Netanyahu's corruption cases, revealed by Channel 13

Haaretz Oct 26, 2019 10:28 PM

Benjamin Netanyahu and Yedioth Ahronoth publisher Noni MozesNir Keidar / Olivier Fitoussi
“If you take me down, I’ll retaliate with everything I’ve got… It will become my life’s mission.” These are the words of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to newspaper publisher Arnon Mozes in a recording that has become central evidence in a corruption case against Netanyahu, as revealed Saturday by Channel 13 journalist Raviv Drucker.

In the case, known as Case 2000, Netanyahu is suspected of fraud and breach of trust for striking an alleged deal with the Yedioth Ahronoth publisher. According to the indictment, Mozes was to provide favorable coverage of the prime minister in exchange for legislation to damage its competitor, the free daily newspaper Israel Hayom.

On the tape, Netanyahu is heard telling Mozes: “There shall be no situation in which I’m under attack.” He is also heard saying, “The reports you write, they’re all biased,” to which Mozes replied, “I’m telling you, bring me a writer.”

In another recording, Mozes is asking Netanyahu, “Where is the opinions writer?” “It’s not the opinions,” Netanyahu answered, “It’s your news headlines. They’re biased. Everything is biased.”

Mozes then tells Netanyahu, “Bring me someone tomorrow morning to write for the opinions page.” “It’s negligible,”Netanyahu says. “If it’s negligible, then it’s not a newspaper. ... I want to say this... If your aim is to bring me down, to bring Likud down... What do you think I’ll do? Are you leaving me a choice?”

Later in the conversation, the two discuss a Yedioth Ahronoth headline from 1996 which claimed Netanyahu won the televised election debate against Shimon Peres. “You became prime minister because of that headline... You know I was actually the editor during those three months, right?” Mozes says.

Later in the conversation, Netanyahu expresses that he is interested in pre-election coverage and Nentanyahu says: “My mission in this election is to push [Naftali Bennett] below 15 seats.” Mozes asks Netanyahu if he would be comfortable with Bennett as defense minister. “If there was a candidate from the left, it would be easier,” Netanyahu answers.

The meetings were recorded by Ari Harow, Netanyahu’s bureau chief who turned state’s evidence. Netanyahu knew he was being recorded. Mozes did not.

In one recording, Netanyahu tells Mozes: “…the law itself [to regulate Israel Hayom] is correct and I’ll support it. But if you take me down, I’ll come after you with everything I’ve got… It will become my life’s mission. You have to get to know me. You know me partially… and you can avoid that outcome, but…”

Mozes then asks, “So can I avoid it and expect a promise of something from you in the future?”

In another recording from December 2014, Netanyahu says to Mozes: “OK, what am I talking about? I’m not talking about honesty and decent media. And it’s not about you lowering the bar of hostility toward me from nine and a half to seven and a half...”

“All right, it’s clear. It’s about ensuring you are prime minister,” Mozes replies.

In another recording, from a meeting which took place two days after Netanyahu announced that he will dissolve the Knesset and head to an early election in 2014, the prime minister and Mozes discuss the Likud slate. “[Moshe] Feiglin?” Mozes asks. “He’s intelligent. How can someone so intelligent be insane?” Netanyahu then answers: “There are smart insane people. He’s smart, not insane, but he’s... You don’t need so many... What do we need? A reasonable face. Take people who are reasonable...”

Harow then asks Netanyahu if he has any suggestions, to which Netanyahu answers that he’s open to suggestions. “My worry for you is that the first six or seven on the list...” “Are difficult. Miri [Regev] is also not... She’s quiet,” Netanyahu interjects. “Yes, but she’s loud,” Mozes says. Netanyahu then mentions Avigdor Lieberman, saying, “I don’t have a problem with Evet, Evet has a problem with me. That’s the truth.” He also mentions Yair Lapid, saying that he hates him, but not as much as he hates his “messed up” proposal for exempting first-time home buyers from paying value added tax.

Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit also plans to indict Mozes in this case on charges of fraud, pending a hearing.

Netanyahu’s pre-indictment hearing regarding three of the four corruption cases against him was held in early October. Mendelblit is expected to announce his decision on whether to indict the prime minister by early December.

In the hearing, Netanyahu’s attorneys argued that there was no evidence on the prime minister’s intent to follow through on the alleged deal and therefore he cannot be charged with breach of trust. They also argued that Netanyahu’s actions were meant to deceive Mozes.

In a response from the Prime Minister’s Office, Netanyahu claimed that his conversations with Mozes were “empty talk” and that “the prosecutor is also aware that there was no intention to pass the law that would shut down Israel Hayom.”

Netanyahu’s office referred to the tapes as “criminal, tendentious leaks whose aim is to harm Prime Minister Netanyahu."

“Anyone who listens to the entirety of the tapes between Netanyahu and Mozes will understand very well that it was Mozes who was extorting and threatening Netanyahu – and Netanyahu, all in all, clarified that he will not respond to media attacks by Mozes, just like the attacks he made during the election campaign,” the statement added.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.pr ... -1.8029010