Harris headline hoodwink faces House GOP investigation, news publishers already mad at Google - Greg Piper

 

​ by Greg Piper

Second time since Harris became presumptive Democratic nominee that Google has blamed technical bugs for search results that favor her. California false advertising law, Google settlement on "deceptive prompts" could cause legal problems.

 

Twenty-six years ago, a new search engine company received its first investment, and rapper Will Smith taught Americans to get jiggy with it.

Facing a potential breakup following a devastating antitrust ruling, Google is getting glitchy with it to discount its search engine's alleged preferences in the 2024 presidential race.

Google has blamed technical bugs for results that favored Vice President Kamala Harris since she became the presumptive Democratic nominee: omitting the attempted assassination of her GOP opponent and former President Donald Trump from "autocomplete" suggestions. It also let the Harris campaign falsely attribute her narratives to media organizations with search ads in which she replaced news organizations’ headlines with her own.

The House Oversight Committee opened a formal probe of the autocomplete omission as well as similar actions by Facebook's AI chatbot Wednesday. A spokesperson told Just the News the committee also "intends to press Google for details about the Harris campaign reportedly manipulating Google’s ad features and news headlines.”

"Big Tech has leveraged their businesses to influence public opinion and have engaged in an alarming pattern of speech suppression and censorship," the spokesperson said.

The left-leaning New Republic expressed puzzlement at the Harris campaign's bait and switch, noting "plenty of positive coverage of Harris since President Joe Biden withdrew from the race and endorsed her to replace him."

 

Kamala Harris literally has every news media outlet plus Google, Facebook and Instagram in her corner helping her.

And she is upset that Trump has Elon on his team. 🤡 pic.twitter.com/wxQCvwOpat

— Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) August 14, 2024

California law and a 2023 settlement with the Golden State could even spell legal trouble for the Harris headline hoodwink, which may also feed into renewed gripes from publishers about Google profiting off their content without a license, the subject of legal and legislative pushes.

A very broad Business and Professions Code punishes advertising "which is known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading," with up to six months in jail and a $250,000 fine. It applies to "any newspaper or other publication, or any advertising device … or in any other manner or means whatever, including over the Internet."

Google paid California $93 million a year ago to resolve an investigation over its representations about "Location History," which the company called "outdated product policies that we changed years ago."

Attorney General Rob Bonta — who succeeded Harris in office — alleged that Google showed users "deceptive prompts" from 2014 to 2018 to mislead them to enable geolocation data collection while telling them it was turned off by default, and that it gathered location data in other ways, such as the default-on "Web & App Activity."

The Silicon Valley behemoth ponied up $1 billion for partnerships with international publishers four years ago, giving them opportunities for "deeper storytelling and more context" in publisher-curated Google News panels.

When clicked, the ad links to a normal news article – not an explicit endorsement. pic.twitter.com/518Ygzxrqb

— AllSides (@AllSidesNow) August 13, 2024

Australia changed its competition law a year later to force Google and others to negotiate licensing deals with media organizations, and Google agreed to pay Canadian outlets $74 million a year, indexed to inflation, shortly before a similar law took effect last year.

But Google started "removing links to California news websites" in April in response to legislation that would force it to pay in-state publishers for linking to their news, while emphasizing the boycott was a "short-term test for a small percentage of California users." 

Google threatened to cut off its grants to nonprofit newsrooms nationwide following another California bill that would tax "digital ad transactions," Axios reported in May. Educational publishers sued Google in June for running search ads for pirated ebooks while "restricting ads for licensed e-books," Reuters reported.

The Harris campaign ads use media organizations' names and icons and link to their articles about her, but rewrite the headlines and descriptions with her own talking points on subjects including abortion and healthcare. 

They are mixed in with so-called organic search results but each has a three-line header: "Sponsored," "Paid for by Harris for President" and "Presidential Campaign." 

The ads can be seen in the Google Ad Transparency Center, invoking well-known outlets including Reuters, NPR, Associated Press, Time, USA Today and U.K.'s Independent and Guardian, though oddly some ads list Reuters but use the AP's icon. 

"VP Harris = Repro Leader" for The Guardian is one of the more loaded ads. An ad that conflates Reuters with AP then quotes an NBC News headline, "The U.S. is winning the inflation fight."  

Media bias rating service AllSides took credit for discovering the ads and issued an open letter calling for Harris to stop misleading voters and making media outlets look biased toward her, and for Google to block such ads, whose format "lacks sufficient context and is ripe for abuse."

Axios compiled the ads, noting the Trump campaign did not run such ads. It reported that several news brands were caught unawares and that The Guardian said Google needs its permission to use its brand. 

"The campaign has complied with all of Google's rules, although a technical glitch in Google's Ad Library made it appear as though some ads lacked the necessary disclosures Google requires when they ran," Axios reported, saying Google confirmed the glitch and is investigating. 

"Election advertisers are required to complete an identity verification process and we prominently display in-ad disclosures that clearly show people who paid for the ad," Google told Axios. It has not responded to Just the News queries.

Trade association NetChoice, which counts Google and Facebook parent Meta as members and convinced the Supreme Court to continue blocking Texas and Florida social media neutrality laws, told Just the News "our expert on this issue is out of the office this week."

Eric Goldman, associate dean for research at Santa Clara University's law school and co-director of its High Tech Law Institute, told Just the News he was unavailable Wednesday. 

An expert in search engine optimization, Goldman expressed skepticism a year ago that the near-absence of Republican presidential candidates' websites in generic Google searches for the party's 2024 bench could mean Google was "hacking these results to steer the election."

The 64-year-old Consumer Federation of California, whose legislative issues include "strengthening campaign disclosure requirements for political contributions and advertisements," didn't respond to queries.

Greg Piper

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/harris-headline-hoax-under-house-gop-investigation-news-publishers

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Comer says House has proof extra security was not given to Trump team before attempted assassination - Charlotte Hazard

 

​ by Charlotte Hazard

Comer went on to say that the Secret Service as an agency needs to be reformed.

 

House Oversight Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., said that the House has proof that the Secret Service did not give former President Donald Trump extra security before the assassination attempt on his life, despite him asking for it. 

"Do you have pretty strong proof that the Secret Service was turning down security recommendations for Trump ahead of July 12?" host John Solomon asked Wednesday.

"Yes, they were," Comer answered on the "Just the News, No Noise" TV show. "We know that the Trump campaign requested more Secret Service, and the Secret Service denied them."

Trump was nearly assassinated on July 13 this year during a rally in Butler County, Pennsylvania. Two people were injured in the shooting and another died. 

There were reports that the campaign had requested more security prior to the event and were turned down. 

"I [would] like to remind people that the Secret Service has 8,100 employees and they have an annual budget of $3.1 billion but what we've seen over the past decade ... they've started farming more and more of their responsibilities out to state and local police," Comer said. 

He went on to say that the Secret Service as an agency needs to be reformed.

Charlotte Hazard

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/congress/comer-says-house-has-proof-extra-security-was-not-given-trump-team-attempted

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Israel Must Not Allow Hamas to Survive Gaza War - A.J. Caschetta

 

​ by A.J. Caschetta

The Netanyahu government's resolve to follow through with the total destruction of Hamas will be tested in the remaining months of the Biden administration.

 

By killing Hezbollah's Fuad Shukr in Beirut and Hamas's Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran within a 24-hour span, Israel demonstrated a commitment to total victory over its enemies. But the rest of the world, from the least free nations (China) to the freest nations (the U.S.), seems committed to saving Hamas. Jerusalem must resist these efforts.

Chinese support for Hamas is no surprise. In December, the IDF discovered massive caches of Chinese weapons in Gaza. In 2014, the IDF disclosed that an enormous Chinese-made tunneling machine with 40 inch blades was used to dig Hamas's underground city.

China has been hosting "unity talks" between Hamas and Fatah since April. In June, Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Webin announced that China supports "all Palestinian factions in achieving reconciliation and increasing solidarity through dialogue and consultation." On July 23 came the announcement that Chinese diplomacy had culminated in the Beijing Declaration, an agreement to form an "interim national reconciliation government" allowing Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist organizations to survive in the light of day as partners in a government.

By killing Hezbollah's Fuad Shukr in Beirut and Hamas's Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran within a 24-hour span, Israel demonstrated a commitment to total victory over its enemies.

The Biden administration's plan for Hamas's survival, on the other hand, is more subtle.

Three days after October 7, President Biden gave perhaps the best speech of his presidency (the bar is admittedly low), condemning Hamas and guaranteeing that his administration would provide military assistance to Israel. "The United States has Israel's back," he said.

Just one week later, President Biden (or someone using his name) wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post that acknowledged, "as long as Hamas clings to its ideology of destruction, a cease-fire is not peace." It soberly pointed out that "every cease-fire is time they exploit to rebuild their stockpile of rockets, reposition fighters and restart the killing by attacking innocents again." However, it also claimed that, "Gaza and the West Bank should be reunited under a single governance structure, ultimately under a revitalized Palestinian Authority, as we all work toward a two-state solution."

National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan took it a step further on December 14, 2023, when he said that, "Ultimately, governance of the West Bank and Gaza needs to be connected. And it needs to be connected under a revamped and revitalized Palestinian Authority."

The administration has since backed away from its October recognition that "a cease-fire is not peace," and in fact has proposed a ceasefire-peace plan that allows for the survival of Hamas by laying the groundwork for a Hamas-infused PA taking over the Gaza strip and potentially a sovereign State of Palestine. David Ignatius of the Washington Post spent most of July anticipating this "cease-fire deal that would halt major fighting in Gaza, release some Israeli hostages and surge humanitarian aid to desperate Palestinian civilians." He called it "a potential valedictory moment" that would mark "a ringing validation of President Biden's patient diplomacy."

In the first State Department briefing after Haniyeh was killed, Vedant Patel, Principal Deputy Spokesman, asserted that the administration was "promoting diplomatic solutions" to the Gaza War. As reporters badgered him about whether Haniyeh's death made a ceasefire more or less likely, Patel stuck to his script and repeatedly said the State Department was trying to "narrow and close the gaps" between Israel and Hamas in order to "get the deal done."

The Oslo Accords allowed Yasser Arafat to pose as a politician while remaining a terrorist.

If this plan seems familiar, it should. The Oslo Accords allowed Yasser Arafat to pose as a politician while remaining a terrorist as he lied about the "transformation" of the terroristic Fatah and PLO into a peace-seeking Palestinian Authority.

Rebranding the Fatah/PLO opened doors to money and legitimacy, but everyone knew that neither had truly changed. Arafat often spoke about peace in English and jihad against Israel in Arabic. At the height the second Intifada, he wore the PA mantle to disguise his terrorist operations, always slyly insisting that the PA was separate from the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Tanzim, Force 17, and the other terrorist organizations he controlled. He gave orders for attacks, including suicide bombings, just as Hamas leaders did, but he did so while pretending to be opposed to terrorism. Most of the world, including Israel, went along with his charade.

As Arafat took over the Palestinian educational system and inculcated future generations into terrorists, Israelis experienced violence worse than anything that came before Oslo. As Kenneth Levin wrote in The Oslo Syndrome, Delusions of a People Under Siege (2005), many Israelis took "refuge in delusions of Israeli culpability, the subtext of which is that the proper self-reforms and concessions by Israel can and would suffice to win peace, despite all evidence to the contrary."

But Israel seems to have learned from the past and seems committed not to repeat past mistakes, such as trusting "the promises of its friends and not the threats of its enemies," as Elie Weisel put it.

Among Palestinians, if not the rest of the world, today's PA is indeed viewed as a moribund organization, limping towards oblivion under an unpopular octogenarian in the 20^th year of his four-year presidential term. Gone is the sheen of the Arafat days. Many critics attribute the PA's tarnished reputation to rampant corruption, but Hamas is just as corrupt. Its leaders are billionaires living far from danger, and its operational commanders steal food and use Gazans as human shields.

The PA's lost vitality and popularity have been transferred to Hamas because of Hamas's militancy, its commitment to "resistance," and its rejection of any kind of cooperation with Israel.

The PA's lost vitality and popularity have been transferred to Hamas because of Hamas's militancy, its commitment to "resistance," and its rejection of any kind of cooperation with Israel. Every poll shows that Hamas enjoys popular support among Palestinians, with majorities in both Gaza and the West Bank approving of the October 7 assault.

The PA understands that it can only regain its lost popularity and credibility among Palestinians by becoming more like Hamas. As the Palestinian Media Watch points out, the PA has been bragging since October 7 that it has more terrorists than Hamas, more prisoners in Israeli jails than Hamas, and that most Palestinian "martyrs" are from Fatah or the PA security forces (i.e., the Palestinian police).

Even though Biden's latest ceasefire plan doesn't specifically call for a unified Hamas/Fatah/PLO Palestinian Authority governing a contiguous Palestinian State, that is the goal of the people running his foreign policy and the people they respect.

A unity government is the policy advocated by Thomas Friedman who wants the U.S. and Israel to "rebuild Fatah, merge it with Hamas, [and] elect an Israeli government that can freeze settlements" in the West Bank."

It is the policy advocated by Jimmy Carter, who fretted after the 2006 Gaza elections that providing aid to the Palestinians would become more difficult and argued that, "there's a good chance" that Hamas would renounce violence. In 2008, Carter claimed that Hamas had accepted a "Two-State Solution." In 2015, he said that Hamas leader Khaled Mashal, "Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau," was committed to peace while Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, was not.

The Biden plan allows Hamas to adopts what Matthew Levitt calls the Hezbollah strategy. Just as Hezbollah participates in the Lebanese government but retains its war-fighting and terrorism capabilities separately, so too "Hamas hopes to exert the same influence and independence with its own movement and militia, neither beholden to nor controlled by a government," Levitt explains.

The Netanyahu government's resolve to follow through with the total destruction of Hamas will be tested in the remaining months of the Biden administration.

Expect Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and maybe even Chinese diplomats, to argue that the PA will be a moderating force on Hamas. The opposite is true. And expect the State Department to make distinctions between the militant and political "wings" of Hamas. It is a ruse.

Israel has already rejected the Beijing Declaration, but it has also signaled willingness to go along with the a "revitalized" or "reformed" PA governing Gaza.

The European Union has sent millions of euros to Ramallah since October 7. It will go to great lengths to save the PA but will exercise minimal scrutiny over Hamas's involvement in a "revitalized" PA, just as it defends and continues to fundthe corrupt UNRWA in spite of Hamas's involvement.

Any ceasefire agreement that allows Hamas members of any "wing" to participate in either a China-approved interim government or a U.S.-approved "revitalized" PA will lead to more October 7-style assaults.

A.J. Caschetta, a principal lecturer at the Rochester Institute of Technology, is a Milstein Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and a senior fellow at the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Source: https://www.meforum.org/66027/israel-must-not-allow-hamas-to-survive-gaza-war

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Ten Things to Know About Tim Walz and His Ties to Communist China - Sasha Gong and Bradley A. Thayer

 

​ by Sasha Gong and Bradley A. Thayer

Walz would not be the first politician bought by the CCP, but he should be the last. His close ties to the CCP alone should disqualify him from office.

 

 

Vice President Kamala Harris’ selection of Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her vice presidential candidate seems to be a case of ideological birds of a feather flocking together. In the wake of the selection, Walz has received considerable criticism for his deception and dissembling regarding his military service. He merits equally great criticism for his ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Here are ten things that you did not know about Tim Walz and the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

First, Walz claimed that he was in the PRC during the June 4, 1989, Tiananmen Square Massacre. One of the authors interviewed him in 2014 when he made this statement, and he later repeated the same falsehood to the media. In reality, Walz did not enter China until September 1989, several months after the massacre. He entered China from Hong Kong as part of the WorldTeach program, which was sponsored by the Harvard Institute for International Development (HIID). HIID was known for being very pro-PRC and had trained many high-ranking Chinese officials. Later, HIID received many millions of dollars from the PRC.

Second, Walz claimed that he went to the PRC in 1989 because it was a rising country. However, China was not rising at that time. In fact, it was still extremely impoverished. The PRC’s rise occurred in the mid-1990s and especially after 2001 when it joined the World Trade Organization. After the Tiananmen Square Massacre, the Chinese government was desperate to recruit foreigners to come to the country. A few did to show support for the communist regime.

Third, the Chinese gave Walz the name “Tian Hua.” Walz misrepresented its meaning by saying it reflected his kindness. In reality, there is no such implication in Chinese. “Tian” means “field,” and “Hua” means “China.” The accurate translation of “Tian Hua” is “the fields of China.”

Fourth, in 2014, Walz explained why he went to the PRC during that critical time: “I felt it was more important than ever to go, to make sure that story was told, and to let the Chinese people know we were standing there, we were with them.” This was clearly a lie. After the massacre, the CCP launched a political crackdown that permeated the PRC and it remains a taboo issue. Hundreds of thousands of people were imprisoned, and no one could even mention the bloody event without risking arrest. Walz would not have been able to say a word to his students unless he wanted to get himself and them into serious trouble. In fact, according to Tim Walz himself, he fell in love with that China, that is, with the CCP’s form of tyrannical and illegitimate rule over the Chinese people.

Fifth, it is well known that after the Tiananmen Square Massacre, Chinese authorities—including the Ministry for State Security, the United Front, and other spy agencies—made concerted efforts to woo every foreigner in the PRC—especially Americans—by showering them with gifts and praise with the promise of more to come. Walz mentioned that he received so many gifts that he could not bring them all back to the U.S. At that time, China was a very poor country, with the average income of a Chinese worker being less than $20 per month. Moreover, it was somewhat dangerous for ordinary Chinese citizens to get too close to foreigners, particularly Americans. The Chinese government did not fully resume its open-door policy until 1992, long after Walz had left.

Sixth, Walz chose June 4 as his wedding day in 1994, which is extremely unusual. Even ordinary Chinese people would avoid selecting that bloody day for celebrations, as it is considered bad luck. The only reason someone might choose that day would be to show submission to the Chinese government by celebrating the crackdown. In Chinese symbolic tradition, this could be seen as a pledge of loyalty to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Seventh, before his honeymoon, Walz launched a company called Educational Travel Adventures, which specialized in bringing American students to China. An article in the local Chinese media reported that he and his bride brought 50 students from America. The company continued to send students to China until 2003. It is important to note that operating a business in China requires all kinds of permits—both official and unofficial—from Chinese authorities at the local, provincial, and central levels. These permits were typically obtained either by paying bribes or by securing endorsements, whether tacit or open, from government officials. For foreigners, the MSS would certainly have been involved. That is as certain as the sun rising in the east.

Eighth, education is one of the most closely monitored activities in the PRC. To operate a business like his, Walz would have needed at least one local partner, if not several, and those partners would have been sanctioned by State Security. There is no way around it. However, Walz has never mentioned any such partnership. After carefully searching Chinese websites, we were not able to find any records, which is very unusual. Typically, local Chinese media would boast about large groups of foreign students visiting and about Americans who loved China. An educated guess would be that such records were completely wiped after Walz entered politics.

Ninth, it is likely that possible partners of Walz’s company in the United States would be local Confucius Institutes and CTG Travel, which is PRC-owned. In the PRC, they would be local or central offices of the United Front Department, the Department of Education, the Communist Youth League, and universities and colleges. These partners underscore strong ties to the CCP.

Tenth, there likely are many more shoes to drop when it comes to Walz’s relationship with the PRC and CCP. It was a longstanding relationship. It is a certainty that the CCP expects something in return for their investment in Walz. The American people deserve to know the who, what, where, why, and when of Walz’s relationship with the PRC. Walz would not be the first politician bought by the CCP, President Biden, his family, and associates have received many scores of millions of dollars from PRC entities. But Walz should be the last. His close ties to the CCP alone should disqualify him from office.

***

Sasha Gong, Ph.D. is a journalist, scholar, author, and Former Director of the Chinese Branch, Voice of America. Bradley A. Thayer, Ph.D., is the coauthor with James Fanell of Embracing Communist China: America’s Greatest Strategic Failure.

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2024/08/15/ten-things-to-know-about-tim-walz-and-communist-china/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Weird, Creepy, Surreal—and Dangerous—2024 Campaign - Victor Davis Hanson

 

​ by Victor Davis Hanson

This warped election violates every prior precedent and is not just creepy but dangerous—even before the campaign was supposed to formally begin.

 

 

The already-long 2024 presidential campaign has become the strangest in modern history.

Here are ten unanswered questions that illustrate how and why we’ve entered this bizarro world:

1. How can Kamala Harris merely promise us fixes to come in 2025 for inflation and an open border when she is still vice president for another six months? Why can’t she enact her proposed solutions to these problems (which she helped create) right now?

2. Would the media prefer to help her win but lose further credibility themselves by failing to ask why she has disowned her last three decades of leftist agendas, or to reclaim some of their reputations and thereby risk her losing?

3. Does the left appreciate the new campaign and election protocols it has now established?

That is to say:

Cancel by fiat their virtual nominee four months before the election when he sinks in the polls?

Nullify the outcome of a year of primaries and the will of 14 million voters?

Threaten a sitting president with removal by the 25th Amendment process unless he steps aside as his party nominee?

Anoint a replacement nominee before the convention and without a single primary—and then prevent any rival candidates from challenging her?

4. After the precedents of 2020 and 2024, is the future orthodox protocol for any Democratic nominee now to avoid all interviews and ex tempore speaking, and stick to teleprompted speeches and scripted responses only?

Is the fear that a transparent progressive messenger with an overt and honest left-wing message will double down on it and thus guarantee defeat?

5. For the next 80 days, has the chameleon-like Kamala Harris now become a temporary MAGA candidate, as she expropriates Trump’s positions from border security to no taxes on tips? Does the media care to ask the new 80-day MAGA Harris why she has renounced many of her once emphatic beliefs?

6. If Democratic presidential reelection candidate Joe Biden was pronounced fit as a fiddle before June 27, but after July 21 was abruptly forced off the ticket as too debilitated to continue as his party’s nominee, what exactly is his status now?

(Half-cognizant and thus able enough to continue his not-so-important task as America’s president, but also half-enfeebled and thus utterly unable to continue as the far more important Democratic nominee, it appears.)

7. Does the new anti-Semitic Democratic Party prefer to risk losing with the radical nonentity WASP Tim Walz as vice presidential candidate rather than likely win with a popular, successful, and moderate Jewish Josh Shapiro?

8. If one vice presidential candidate went to a war zone to serve with his deployed unit, while his counterpart preferred to retire from the military to avoid doing the same and lies about his abdication, how can the media credibly assert that the former’s tour was militarily suspect and yet pronounce the latter’s absence as heroic?

9. If the current president canceled his reelection bid because he was too debilitated and unpopular, and is now rarely seen or heard, and if the vice president is out of Washington running a campaign in his place, but avoiding all press conferences, interviews, and unscripted addresses, who exactly, if anyone, is running the United States for the next six months of the lame duck Biden-Harris administration?

10. If Donald Trump all summer has been compared by his enemies to Hitler and his murderous Third Reich, and if a 20-year-old would-be assassin and murderer with ease took up a sniper’s position to kill Trump—without a notified Secret Service or other law enforcement attempting to abort the shooter’s attempted assassination—what signal does that send to other would-be assassins for the next 80 days of the 2024 campaign?

Is the message that if a 20-year-old amateur sniper can brazenly and visibly for nearly an hour breach all Secret Service security perimeters to shoot eight times at the president, hit him in the ear, kill one innocent bystander, and wound two others, then almost any future, more-experienced serious shooter could match or exceed the ability of that disturbed amateur to get close enough to Trump to fire more than eight shots at his head?

And that shooting Donald Trump in many leftist quarters would subsequently earn the unhinged killer eternal fame, applause, and immortality?

And that if there are such anticipated rewards and perceived opportunities, then we may well see more attempts on candidate Trump’s life?

In sum, presidential campaigns traditionally kick off after Labor Day and mostly follow accepted protocols. But this warped 2024 version violates every prior precedent and is not just creepy but dangerous—even before the campaign was supposed to formally begin.

Victor Davis Hanson

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2024/08/15/the-weird-creepy-surreal-and-dangerous-2024-campaign/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Jordanian who cited ‘racist state of Israel’ charged with bomb threats, attacking Florida energy facility - JNS

 

​ by JNS

“Such acts and threats of violence ... are extremely dangerous and will not be tolerated," said Merrick Garland, the U.S. attorney general.

 

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland at the 2023 United States Attorneys’ National Conference hosted by the Department of Justice in Washington on Oct. 26, 2023. Credit: Tia Dufour/U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Law enforcement arrested a Jordanian national on July 11 who was living in Orlando, Fla., and the 43-year-old has been charged with four counts of bomb threats and a count of destroying an energy facility, the U.S. Justice Department stated on Thursday.

At his detention hearing on Wednesday, Hashem Younis Hashem Hnaihen was ordered detained, pending a trial, the department said. He faces up to 60 years in prison—40 for the four bomb threats and 20 for the other charge.

“We allege that the defendant threatened to carry out hate-fueled mass violence in our country, motivated in part by a desire to target businesses for their perceived support of Israel,” stated Merrick Garland, the U.S. attorney general. “Such acts and threats of violence, whether they are targeting the places that Americans frequent every day or our country’s critical infrastructure, are extremely dangerous and will not be tolerated by the Justice Department.”

Christopher Wray, the FBI director, stated that Hnaihen is accused of attacking the power facility and local business and causing “hundreds of thousands of dollars” of damage, “under the guise of expressing his beliefs.”

The department alleges that Hnaihen attacked Orlando businesses “for their perceived support for Israel” in or around June 2024.

“Wearing a mask, under the cover of night, Hnaihen smashed the glass front doors of businesses and left behind ‘warning letters,'” according to the Justice Department. “In his letters, which were addressed to the U.S. government, Hnaihen laid out a series of political demands, culminating in a threat to ‘destroy or explode everything here in whole America. Especially the companies and factories that support the racist state of Israel.'”

At the end of June, Hnaihen was accused of breaking into a solar-power generation facility in Wedgefield, Fla., where he “spent hours systematically destroying solar panel arrays,” per the department. “He smashed panels, cut wires and targeted critical electronic equipment” and left “two more copies of his threatening demand letter.”

“Hnaihen is believed to have caused more than $700,000 in damage,” the Justice Department said.

He also allegedly left a “warning letter,” in which he threatened to “destroy or explode everything,” at an Orlando industrial propane gas distribution center.

JNS

Source: https://www.jns.org/jordanian-who-cited-racist-state-of-israel-charged-with-bomb-threats-attacking-florida-energy-facility/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Hackers' confab shows vulnerabilities in election machines amid testing concerns ahead of November - Natalia Mittelstadt

 

​ by Natalia Mittelstadt

Increasing the use of voting machines after the 2000 “didn’t fix the Bush v. Gore problem,” but “just made our elections less transparent,” Phill Kline said.

 

Hackers at a conference last weekend found numerous vulnerabilities in election machines while the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) confirmed that current voting systems to be used in the November election have not been tested by third parties for vulnerabilities.

While many vulnerabilities were found in election machines at the conference, Georgia is set to use outdated election machines for the November presidential election, and the EAC doesn’t have a standard testing process in place to search out vulnerabilities in election equipment.

At the annual DEF CON hacker conference in Las Vegas this past weekend, hackers hacked into election equipment from various manufacturers, including voting machines, e-pollbooks, and ballot tabulators, according to Politico. They found many vulnerabilities that they will release in a report soon, and noted that some of them haven't been fixed for a long time.

DEF CON Voting Village co-founder Harri Hursti told Politico on Saturday that there were “multiple pages” worth of vulnerabilities found in election machines, which was similar to previous years and will be detailed in a full report in the coming weeks.

“If you don’t think this kind of place is running 24/7 in China, Russia, you’re kidding yourselves,” Hursti said. “We are here only for two and a half days, and we find stuff…it would be stupid to assume that the adversaries don’t have absolute access to everything.”

“There’s so much basic stuff that should be happening and is not happening, so yes I’m worried about things not being fixed, but they haven’t been fixed for a long time, and I’m also angry about it,” Hursti said.

Hursti didn’t immediately respond to requests from Just the News for comment on Wednesday.

Politico also reported that most of the machines tested at DEF CON “are used in at least one jurisdiction around the U.S.”

One state in particular has had election machine vulnerabilities for the past three years that will not be fixed before November.

In June 2023, a nearly 2-year-old report was finally made public arising from a Georgia lawsuit that showed Dominion voting machines had significant vulnerabilities, which led the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to issue a public advisory in 2022 based on the findings. At the same time, CISA said that although vulnerabilities were found, there was no evidence that "flaws in Dominion voting machines were ever exploited," according to CBS News.

However, Georgia election officials said last year that the machines won’t be updated until after the 2024 elections because it's such a massive undertaking.

Gabriel Sterling, the secretary of state office's chief operating officer, said at the time that Georgia would wait until 2025 to update the voting machines because "legally, logistically and just risk-management wise, this was the safest wisest course."

He also said the new software, to his knowledge, has never been used in any election in the world.

In addition, Sterling said the new software has been certified by the EAC, "which is great, but like any new software, real-world deployment always finds things that may not work the way people intended it to."

EAC Vice Chair Donald Palmer told Just the News on Wednesday that Georgia in particular has had issues updating its Dominion Voting Systems equipment due to a lack of resources. While the EAC tested and updated the Dominion machine, Georgia is having a “funding and timing issue” with it, Palmer said. The state needs to allow for “access to the machines for a length of time.”

Regarding last weekend's hackers conference, Palmer mentioned that “the systems that are being tested at DEF CON are not the frontline systems.”

The voting systems at DEF CON are not updated or “certified to EAC standards” as they are “not supported by manufacturers,” Palmer said.

Also, EAC doesn’t “have any information that” the current voting “systems have any vulnerability that has been exploited.”

Palmer noted that Congress is considering the SECURE IT Act, which he said would allow “vulnerability testing of current voting systems with third parties.”

He added that the “real challenge” is for future “testing for newer systems, those that are being used in the 2024 election.”

Currently, for voting systems to receive EAC certification, they go through “penetration testing,” where they ensure that “any known vulnerability has been resolved,” Palmer said. This testing is only for voting machines and ballot tabulators.

EAC certification of election equipment is voluntary, but even if it isn’t “formally required by states,” the equipment eventually goes through EAC testing on the manufacturing side, he said.

However, Palmer explained that the EAC doesn’t currently test to find vulnerabilities in the voting systems that are being used. “Congress is looking at setting up a system where independent researchers conduct vulnerability testing” annually, providing results “back to the manufacturer and the EAC,” and done with the “latest, frontline voting systems,” Palmer said.

The EAC currently has the Engineering Change Order, which is a process that allows for the “quick turnaround of software updates,” he added. This occurs when the manufacturer identifies vulnerabilities and send them to the “EAC for a quick resolution,” which “can be done in 1-3 days.”

If there is a “known vulnerability” in an elections system, the “key is whether it has been exploited or can be,” Palmer said. “Right now, we don't have any reports indicating the exploiting of vulnerabilities with voting equipment certified by the EAC. We take vulnerabilities very seriously.”

Phill Kline, director of the Amistad Project and former Kansas attorney general, told Just the News on Wednesday that election machines are ‘“vulnerable,” and there is “no way to ensure” they’re “fixed because people who should have the authority – local election officials – have no legal authority to do the job nor understanding of how to do it.”

With increasing the use of voting machines following the 2000 presidential election, the U.S. “didn’t fix the Bush v. Gore problem,” but “just made our elections less transparent,” Kline explained.

He added that these are “worse issues than the hanging chad. The hanging chad everyone could understand,” and “everyone understood that the standard should be the same everywhere in Florida. It was real simple to understand,” which allowed for “accountability and a way to debate and participate in the process.”

Natalia Mittelstadt

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/hackers-conf-reveals-vulnerabilities-election-machines-amid-testing

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump says he told Netanyahu to end Gaza war but criticizes ceasefire call - Reuters

 

​ by Reuters

Washington and regional mediators have tried arranging the Gaza ceasefire-for-hostages deal but have encountered repeated obstacles.

 

PRIME MINISTER Benjamin Netanyahu meets with then-US president Donald Trump in the Oval Office, in 2020. The suppression of the Palestinian cause in global politics was largely due to Israeli efforts during the Trump administration, the writer notes.

(photo credit: TOM BRENNER/REUTERS)

Republican US. presidential candidate Donald Trump said on Thursday he told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during their last meeting in July to quickly end Israel's war in Gaza, but the former president also criticized ceasefire demands.

"He knows what he's doing, I did encourage him to get this over with," Trump told reporters at a press conference on Thursday. "It has to get over with fast. ... Get your victory and get it over with. It has to stop, the killing has to stop."

Trump was referring to his meeting with Netanyahu at his Mar-a-Lago residence in late July, when Netanyahu visited the United States. He also met President Joe Biden and Vice President and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris during his trip.

There has been an increased risk of a broader war in the Middle East after the recent killings of Palestinian Islamist group Hamas' leader Ismail Haniyeh in Iran and Hezbollah military commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut. Both drew threats of retaliation against Israel.

PM Benjamin Netanyahu meets Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago, Florida, July 26, 2024. (credit: AMOS BEN-GERSHOM/GPO)

In an event later on Thursday about tackling antisemitism, Trump criticized Biden and Harris' months-long calls for a ceasefire in Gaza.

"From the start, Harris has worked to tie Israel's hand behind its back, demanding an immediate ceasefire, always demanding ceasefire," Trump said, adding it "would only give Hamas time to regroup and launch a new October 7 style attack."

Trump added: "I will give Israel the support that it needs to win but I do want them to win fast."

In the same event, Trump also labeled pro-Palestinian supporters calling for an end to US. support for Israel's war as "pro-Hamas thugs" and "jihad sympathizers." He threatened to arrest and deport them from the US. if he became president.

Netanyahu's office and Trump both separately denied on Thursday an Axios report that said they had spoken the previous day about Gaza ceasefire and hostage release talks.

The Axios report cited two US. sources. One source said the reported call was intended to encourage Netanyahu to take the deal, but stressed he did not know if this is indeed what the former president told Netanyahu.

Egypt, the United States and Qatar have scheduled a new round of Gaza ceasefire negotiations this week.

Washington, Israel's most important ally, has said that a ceasefire in Gaza will reduce the rising threat of a wider war.

A three-phase ceasefire

Biden laid out a three-phase ceasefire proposal in an address on May 31. Washington and regional mediators have since tried arranging the Gaza ceasefire-for-hostages deal but have run into repeated obstacles.

Reuters

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-814984

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

France: Political Chaos - Guy Millière

 

​ by Guy Millière

France has become almost ungovernable. No political party has a majority. No party can form a government coalition without having to renounce the most essential part of its program.

 

• Rebellious France is not only a far-left party, it is also a party tinged with anti-Semitism and counts supporters of Islamism and terrorist groups such as Hamas in its ranks.

• The left-wing coalition has clearly been gaining ground. Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of Rebellious France, to emphasize that he accepts anti-Semitism and supports Hamas and Islamism, gave a speech about his party's results while standing on stage next to an Islamist pro-Hamas activist, newly-elected Member of European Parliament Rima Hassan. Hassan wore a keffiyeh and displayed on her clothes a small Palestinian flag.

• An unprecedented situation in France took shape: all the candidates from other parties were asked to withdraw from the election and support the candidate of another party better placed to defeat the National Rally candidate, even if the better-placed candidate belonged to a party that they totally rejected.

• The French mainstream media contributed to the operation and fueled fear of "fascism". They accepted the propaganda. Rappers, who are widely listened to in Islamic no-go zones, released a song that calls for the murder of Jordan Bardella, the president of the National Rally, the rape of party leader Marine Le Pen, and the elimination of "Zionist Jews". The song was described by some journalists as a courageous "song of resistance" and was broadcast over the radio. One of the lines from the song goes: "From the Jordan to the Seine, Palestine will be free" – a call not just for the destruction of Israel, but for the submission of France to Sharia law and Islam.

• The "left", with 184 seats, became the largest group in the National Assembly; Rebellious France, its most powerful component. The party's leaders present themselves as the spearhead of the "anti-fascist struggle"; claim that they must govern the country, and that to remove them would be to make "concessions to fascism". They do not bother to hide their anti-Semitism and their support for Hamas and Islam.

• France has become almost ungovernable. No political party has a majority. No party can form a government coalition without having to renounce the most essential part of its program.

• The power acquired by Rebellious France means that a government which does not have its approval cannot claim to govern. In addition, no new parliamentary elections can be organized for a year.

• Polls have shown for months that a majority of French people would like a firm fight against crime, a stop to illegal immigration, and an end to the Islamization of the country. All these points were on the program of the National Rally.

• Every year, on average, 500,000 new immigrants, mainly from the Muslim world, settle in France. Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants reside in the country. Few are expelled. Islamic no-go zones are growing.

• On the evening of July 7, Rebellious France organized a large rally in Paris's Place de la République. Palestinian flags were everywhere; French flags almost nowhere. Speakers presented hateful slogans against the National Rally, Israel, Jewish journalists, and the police. Demonstrators burned cars and trash cans, and destroyed stores.

Rebellious France is not only a far-left party, it is also a party tinged with anti-Semitism and counts supporters of Islamism and terrorist groups such as Hamas in its ranks. Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of Rebellious France, to emphasize that he accepts anti-Semitism and supports Hamas and Islamism, gave a speech on June 30 (pictured) about his party's results in the first round, while standing on stage next to an Islamist pro-Hamas activist, newly-elected Member of European Parliament Rima Hassan. Hassan wore a keffiyeh and displayed on her clothes a small Palestinian flag. (Photo by Victoria Valdivia/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images)

Paris. June 9. 8pm. The results of the European Parliament elections were made public. in In France, the party of President Emmanuel Macron garnered 14.6% of the vote, 8 points less than in 2019; the French population had turned away from Macron. The Socialist Party came out with 13.8% of the vote and Rebellious France, a far-left party, 9.89% of the vote. The moderate right party, The Republicans, received only 7.25% of the vote and continued to slide towards insignificance. The right wing National Rally received 31.3% of the vote, 10 points more than in 2019, an extremely high result for a long-marginalized party.

Macron's policies were clearly rejected by the French electorate. A recent poll showed that only 31% of French people said they were satisfied with his management of the country. He could have decided to wait. He was re-elected in 2022 and can remain president until 2027. His party did not have an absolute majority in the National Assembly (France's parliament) but was the leading party, which could also remain in place until 2027.

Macron could not ignore that the result obtained by the Rebellious France party was worrying: Rebellious France is not only a far-left party, it is also a party tinged with anti-Semitism and counts supporters of Islamism and terrorist groups such as Hamas in its ranks. Macron also did not ignore that the National Rally's growing support has come from all those who rejected his management of the country and were apparently extremely worried about what France is becoming.

Macron could see, according to polls, that if legislative elections were organized immediately, his Together party would lose; Rebellious France would gain even more political weight, and the National Rally could win an absolute majority.

He was also aware that the Olympic Games were about take place in Paris, and that since 2017, when he came to power, demonstrations and riots in France have been frequent; any decision on his part could create massive disorder at an extremely bad time.

He nevertheless decided to dissolve the National Assembly and hold legislative elections on very short notice.

He did not warn anyone. Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, whom he appointed just six months earlier, learned of the decision while speaking on television. He was not shy about showing his anger. Other members of the government learned of the decision at the same time as Attal.

On June 30, the first round of elections led to the expected results. Together (Macron's party) received a slightly larger share of votes than in the European Parliament elections, but a far smaller than in France's 2022 parliamentary elections, and was heading towards a scathing defeat. Rebellious France managed quickly to form a left-wing coalition (the New Popular Front), which it dominated and on which it imposed an extremely radical program. It promised large tax increases, disarming the police and immediate regularization of all illegal immigrants in the country.

The left-wing coalition has clearly been gaining ground. Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of Rebellious France, to emphasize that he accepts anti-Semitism and supports Hamas and Islamism, gave a speech on June 30 about his party's results in the first round, while standing on stage next to an Islamist pro-Hamas activist, newly-elected Member of European Parliament Rima Hassan. Hassan wore a keffiyeh and displayed on her clothes a small Palestinian flag.

The National Rally won an even better result than it had in the European elections: a third of voters gave it their support. The National Rally was well ahead in all electoral districts in the country, except in big cities. It clearly looked able to win a majority in the second round.

Macron then decided to wage total war against the National Rally. He described it in extreme terms and used vocabulary as radical as that used by the leaders of Rebellious France. He could see that the National Rally has a conservative program that is perfectly respectful of institutions, but nevertheless falsely described it as a party belonging to a "fascist" extreme right and a "threat to democracy". He warned that if the National Rally came to power, the survival of the French republic would be at stake, and added that all parties, including Rebellious France, must unite against the National Rally to defeat it.

An unprecedented situation in France took shape: all the candidates from other parties were asked to withdraw from the election and support the candidate of another party better placed to defeat the National Rally candidate, even if the better-placed candidate belonged to a party that they totally rejected. Some candidates from Together asked people to vote for Rebellious France candidates, and some Rebellious France candidates asked people to vote for Together candidates. The Republicans also participated in the mayhem. Former President François Hollande, running for a seat in the National Assembly, supported Rebellious France.

The French mainstream media contributed to the operation and fueled fear of "fascism". They accepted the propaganda. Rappers, who are widely listened to in Islamic no-go zones, released a song that calls for the murder of Jordan Bardella, the president of the National Rally, the rape of party leader Marine Le Pen, and the elimination of "Zionist Jews". The song was described by some journalists as a courageous "song of resistance" and was broadcast over the radio. One of the lines from the song goes: "From the Jordan to the Seine, Palestine will be free" – a call not just for the destruction of Israel, but for the submission of France to Sharia law and Islam.

On the evening of the second, run-off, round, which was held July 7, it became clear that scaring the public had worked. The National Rally won only 142 seats out of 577.

Macron's party, Together, lost a third of its seats and sank from 245 to 166 seats.

Prime Minister Gabriel Attal's anger is apparently still intact. The other members of the government are also less than euphoric. They knew that Attal could resign soon (he resigned on July 16 and remains in caretaker role), and that it will be the end of the government of which they are part. Any support that Macron still had on June 9 has almost completely evaporated. Macron is alone, discredited.

The "left", with 184 seats, became the largest group in the National Assembly; Rebellious France, its most powerful component. The party's leaders present themselves as the spearhead of the "anti-fascist struggle"; claim that they must govern the country, and that to remove them would be to make "concessions to fascism". They do not bother to hide their anti-Semitism and their support for Hamas and Islam. One of them, Raphael Arnault, a leader of the Antifa movement in France, is on the list established by the French police of people dangerous for the security of the country. This is the first time that a leader of a movement that is officially dangerous for the security of the country has become a member of the National Assembly.

France has become almost ungovernable. No political party has a majority. No party can form a government coalition without having to renounce the most essential part of its program.

The power acquired by Rebellious France means that a government which does not have its approval cannot claim to govern. In addition, no new parliamentary elections can be organized for a year.

France seems to be condemned to political instability and disorder.

National Rally leaders emphasize that their party received the largest number of votes and that Macron's maneuverings stole the election from them.

Polls have shown for months that a majority of French people would like a firm fight against crime, a stop to illegal immigration, and an end to the Islamization of the country. All these points were on the program of the National Rally.

By having strengthened Rebellious France, Macron created a situation where there will undoubtedly be less fight against crime, more illegal immigration, an increase of Islamization.

Economic data shows that France is currently in a recession. The country's debt is growing. The debt has increased by 30% in seven years. Year after year, the government budget is in a deficit that is increasing. By the endo of 2024, France's budget deficit will be 5.1%.

Every year, on average, 500,000 new immigrants, mainly from the Muslim world, settle in France. Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants reside in the country. Few are expelled. Islamic no-go zones are growing.

On the evening of July 7, Rebellious France organized a large rally in Paris's Place de la République. Palestinian flags were everywhere; French flags almost nowhere. Speakers presented hateful slogans against the National Rally, Israel, Jewish journalists, and the police. Demonstrators burned cars and trash cans, and destroyed stores.

Many French Jews are aghast. Before the elections, Nazi hunter Serge Klarsfeld and the former president Representative Council of French Jewish Institutions, Dr. Richard Prasquier, said that, faced with the rise of Islamic left-wing anti-Semitism, they had decided to vote for the National Rally. In fact, the National Rally throughout this period was the only party to explicitly denounce Islamic left-wing anti-Semitism.

Commenting on the results of the election, the Rabbi Moshe Sebbag, of the Grand Synagogue of Paris, said, "there is no future for Jews in France". He recommended that Jews who could, should leave France.

The Olympic Games, which ended on August, featured in the opening ceremony a decapitated Queen Marie Antoinette, carrying her severed head in her arms, and a blasphemous reenactment of the Last Supper by drag queens, with a nearly-naked man, painted blue, served on a platter. The author Éric Zemmour responded on X

"The great architects of this spectacle (Macron, Boucheron, Hidalgo, etc.) have taken the beauty of Paris, the most beautiful setting in the world, hostage. But these people are not us. They don't represent us. They are foreign to what we are. Enemies of what we were. They want to impose on us a vision of Man that is not ours."

At the end of the ceremony, Macron, to loud boos from the crowd, declared the Paris Olympic Games open.

The columnist Ivan Rioufol, in a book published seven years ago, analyzing the first decisions taken by Macron at the start of his presidency, noted that Macron had acted impulsively; had sought to destroy the political parties that had governed France for decades; seemed to have no defined guideline, and seemed to despise the French population. Rioufol added: "His reign will end in a nightmare".

Are we about to find that out?

Dr. Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20854/france-political-chaos

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Meanwhile, in Tehran . . . - Amatzia Baram

 

​ by Amatzia Baram

This is an English translation of an article published originally in Hebrew.

 

The tense wait in Israel since the assassination of senior Hezbollah leader Fouad Shukr in Beirut's Dahiya, and the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, continues for two reasons. First, as Nasrallah said, the very tension and anticipation of a blow are part of the punishment for Israeli society. Second, since Haniyeh's assassination, an internal struggle has been waged in Tehran over the heart, mind, and image of the "Rahbar," Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Until a few days ago, even on August 7, there was complete unanimity among the Iranian leadership and media. Even the new president, defined as a "pragmatic" or "reformist," Masoud Pezeshkian, adamantly rejected French President Emmanuel Macron's appeal for Iran to show "restraint." Still, he also said that a regional war would be prevented if Israel stopped the war in Gaza. In other words, a ceasefire in Gaza could prevent or at least limit an Iranian response, but without that a major assault will come.

The Iranian leadership knows that what Israel has done to the Houthi oil harbor and reserves in Hodeidah it can do on a tenfold larger scale to Iranian oil facilities.

Suddenly, on August 9, leaks began that Pezeshkian, the new president, had made an astonishing appeal to Khamenei to reconsider the attack on Israel. According to the report, Pezeshkian fears an Israeli response that could "collapse the Iranian economy." As an alternative he proposed attacking secret Israeli installations in Iraqi Kurdistan or Azerbaijan. If the leak is true, the president is probably concerned about a serious Israeli blow to Iran's oil industry. The Iranian leadership knows that what Israel has done to the Houthi oil harbor and reserves in Hodeidah it can do on a tenfold larger scale to Iranian oil facilities. Almost the entire Iranian budget, the luxuries for the rulers, military spending, imports, arms aid, and money to the allies, is all fueled by the sale of oil and gas. If it burns, Iran and its partners will sink into a deep pit.

How dare a president that was elected by the grace of the Supreme Leader who is not considered a revolutionary, leak a revolutionary opinion such as not attacking Israel? This is enormous chutzpah, which can even be considered an affront to national honor. The most likely explanation is that in their August 8 meeting, Khamenei himself instructed the president to leak that he, the president, had asked for a recalculation of the route. By Sunday, August 11, many senior officials had called for revenge and reported that Khamenei had ordered it, but he himself had not yet said so in his own voice. He seems to be undecided. The main reason seems to be that Iranian intelligence reported that the U.S. Navy was gathering on the Iranian and Lebanese shores and that Israel was planning a painful response. Although Sergei Shoigu, head of Russia's National Security Council, made an urgent visit to Tehran on the 5th, and there are reports of the shipment of new Russian anti-aircraft technology to Iran, there is also international political pressure to avoid escalation. Even Russia and Turkey are pressing to refrain from taking action that would ignite an all-out war.

If Khamenei decides not to respond, the official media will report that he did so in response to a request from the president and others. Indeed, the impression is that most of the Iranian public does not want war to avenge a Palestinian.

There is no certainty that Khamenei wanted the direct attack on Israel last April. The Supreme Leader is cautious and calculating; he is like cold fire. The American intention to help Israel defend itself (and perhaps more, if the crisis escalates) was well known to him. He may have been pushed into the direct attack then because he could not appear to be a defeatist. The former extremist president, Raisi, and his allies, the Revolutionary Guards and the Steadfast Front Party, Jabha Paydari, which is the largest and most extreme party in parliament, were pushing for war. Had it not been for the helicopter crash in which Raisi and his extremist foreign minister died, Khamenei might have been pushed immediately for a direct attack on Israel even now. But at least this time he has a pragmatic president and an acting foreign minister who is both a close associate and a relative. There are no moderates in the Iranian leadership, but there are pragmatists, extremists, and ultra-extremists. Khamenei himself is radical enough, but his fear of the former president and his alliance with the ultra-extremists was known in Iran. Therefore, to this day, many Iranians believe that the helicopter accident that killed former President Raisi was not an accident at all.

What, then, is happening in Tehran right now? Today, the ayatollahs' regime has no interest in a major confrontation with Israel and the United States. The disagreement is over the question of whether to respond now, and if so, with what intensity. Most of the voices heard from official Tehran at the moment demand direct, significant, and immediate revenge. The pragmatic side is mainly represented by President Pezeshkian. The Supreme Leader supported his election, albeit without enthusiasm, because he needed him. After attacking Israel in April and encountering an American coalition, Khamenei realized that in the next crisis, if he decided not to respond directly against Israel, he would need an alibi. Pezeshkian was elected to improve the economy, but no less so to sit on the fence for the Supreme Leader in a moment of crisis. If Khamenei decides not to respond, the official media will report that he did so in response to a request from the president and others. Indeed, the impression is that most of the Iranian public does not want war to avenge a Palestinian. All claims of abandonment of sovereignty and national honor will be directed at President Pezeshkian, and Khamenei will hover over the criticism. The ultra-extremists, for their part, could justify that they demanded a direct, harsh and immediate response against Israel, regardless of the consequences, but were forced to give up because the constitution states that the supreme leader is the final arbiter. If he decides to attack Israel, Khamenei will be able to say that he listened to both sides, weighed their arguments, and concluded that Iran's national interest necessitated a forceful response. At the time of writing, Khamenei has not yet decided, but even if he decides to postpone the Iranian response, Iran has not given up on revenge.

Amatzia Baram is a professor emeritus of Middle East history at University of Haifa and a Milstein Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Source: https://www.meforum.org/66026/meanwhile-in-tehran?goal=0_086cfd423c-03fe8dc053-33750081&mc_cid=03fe8dc053&mc_eid=b369345b72

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter