One of 24 House Democrats visiting Israel this week with the AIPAC-affiliated American Israel Education Foundation, Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) sends a heartfelt message about her experience.

Hello from Israel!

A message from @RepHaleyStevens and a delegation of @HouseDemocrats who are on the ground this week visiting the Jewish state with AIEF.

Learn more about the trip here: https://t.co/aE1EBDsv4D

#AIEF2023 pic.twitter.com/V6aV4Zn1NF

— AIPAC (@AIPAC) August 8, 2023

The post WATCH: ‘A great day to be in Israel,’ says visiting House Democrat appeared first on World Israel News.

Is this the face of the “democracy” that the leaders of the opposition to judicial reform are calling for?

By Yotam Eyal, CEO, Legal Forum for Israel

Last week, the constitutional nature of a Basic Law was raised in the Supreme Court, specifically, the question of the constitutionality of an amendment to the Basic Law: The Government. This amendment was enacted to prevent the legal advisor to the government from declaring that a prime minister who has an indictment against him or her is in fact incapacitated and thus must be dismissed.

It is important to note that the person who is authorized to indict the prime minister is none other than the legal advisor to the government acting in her role as head of the prosecution. Therefore, if the legal advisor has this authority, she would be able to dismiss a prime minister solely by pressing charges against him or her.

The definition of what constitutes “incapacity” was never explicitly defined, but it was always accepted that incapacity was connected to one’s medical condition. No one had imagined that there would even be a possibility in which the legal advisor to the government would consider that she had the authority to declare a prime minister as being incapacitated.

However, from the moment that the legal advisor announced that she believes that she has the authority to declare that a prime minister is unable to fulfil his position and thus has the authority to dismiss him, there was a need to amend the law so that it was no longer ambiguous.

The determination of “incapacity” is an interesting issue, but the really important issue is whether the Supreme Court has the authority to invalidate Basic Laws passed by the Knesset. To briefly review that status of Basic Laws, it was determined in the First Knesset that, as a result of the difficulty in agreeing upon a constitution, Basic Laws were to be enacted as ordinary laws which, upon their completion, would eventually become the constitution and constitute the highest normative source in the State of Israel.

However, in 1995, Aharon Barak, then president of the Supreme Court – and as part of his, in his own words, judicial revolution – determined that in spite of the fact that not all the Basic Laws had been passed, the Basic Laws had the force of a constitution, and therefore, other laws could be invalidated if they contradicted a Basic Law.

Although Barak’s position is very problematic – he gave the Supreme Court the power to determine the constitutional norms of the State of Israel, which should only be determined by elected officials, and the power to invalidate legislation of the Knesset, a power which was never authorized by the government – there is some logic to his position. As the Basic Laws were eventually to constitute the constitution, it makes sense that these laws are more authoritative than ordinary laws.

But what happens when the court doesn’t like a Basic Law? According to Barak’s own logic, the court is unable to rule on a Basic Law. Nevertheless, a number of years ago, Supreme Court judges declared that they have the authority to invalidate Knesset Basic Laws if, in their opinion, the Basic Laws contradict the democratic principles of the State of Israel. (At that time, the issue was resolved without the Supreme Court actually ruling on the Basic Law, as the issue was no longer relevant).

And what are these democratic principles of the State of Israel? It depends on whom you ask, of course, but when it comes to the judges of the Supreme Court in Israel, it seems that anything that contradicts their opinion contradicts democratic principles. Today it could be the question of determining whether a prime minister is fit to serve, or an esoteric matter such as the cancellation of the reasonableness clause. But no matter what their principles are, it shouldn’t matter, for it is simply not within their authority to rule on Basic Laws.

A judicial junta

If that is the case, how did the judges deal with this crucial question in court last week when presented with petitions against the amendment to the Basic Law: The Government regarding incapacity? They simply informed the parties that there was nothing to discuss because they themselves had already determined that they had the authority to rule on Basic Laws, and therefore the matter was already agreed upon. When shown that there was a minority opinion amongst the judges in the Supreme Court who wrote that they did not have this authority, the judges answered in a way that can only be interpreted as mocking, and claimed that they follow “majority rule.”

The hubris of the judges who simply dismiss the most important constitutional question of the day, judges who appropriated the authority to rule with no legal basis, judges who rule contrary to the values of the majority of the public in democratic elections to the Knesset and further justify this because among their exclusive, self-appointed group, there was a majority opinion of 10 judges, is indescribable.

If the judges actually invalidate the amendment to the Basic Law: The Government, then Israel will no longer be a democracy but a country ruled by a judicial junta. The Knesset and the government would have no authority to implement laws for which they were elected, and the court would have no limitations on its power. Is this the face of the “democracy” that the leaders of the opposition to judicial reform are calling for?

The Legal Forum for Israel continues to fight every day to safeguard the national interests of the people of Israel with an emphasis on the legal system. We meet with Members of Knesset on a regular basis, publish articles, are interviewed in the media and work to dispel the misinformation that has caused and causes such a rift amongst ordinary citizens. We continue to fight for a Jewish and democratic state based on the rule of law and the balance of power between the three governmental bodies – the legislative, executive, and judicial.  

The post ‘Now it is, now it isn’t’: The constitutional nature of a basic law in Israel – analysis appeared first on World Israel News.

“Today, we will find out if three judges will throw away Israeli democracy,” wrote Transportation Minister Miri Regev (Likud) on Twitter.

By Lauren Marcus, World Israel News

Numerous ministers and coalition MKs slammed the Supreme Court ahead of an expected decision to strike down the “recusal law” protecting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from being forced out of office by the attorney-general.

“Today, we will find out if three judges will throw away Israeli democracy,” wrote Transportation Minister Miri Regev (Likud) on Twitter.

Arguing that the Supreme Court does not have the authority to overturn Basic Laws, Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu (Otzma Yehudit) said that a decision to strike down the legislation would spark a constitutional crisis and questions around the government’s next steps for the judicial reform.

“If the Supreme Court rejects Basic Laws, they are in fact breaking the law,” Eliyahu said in a statement to Hebrew-language media.

Should the Court nullify the recusal law, “we will have to ask ourselves how we will deal with criminals in suits,” he added.

National Missions Minister Orit Strock (Religious Zionism) told Ynet that if the law is overturned, the Supreme Court is “leading itself in a mad dash to the abyss. It will have an even greater impact on our duty to reform the judicial system.”

The court convened on Thursday to discuss the law, and based on statements in open court by various justices, it appears likely that the legislation will be overturned.

Chief Justice Esther Hayut said that the law was “clearly personal.”

In March 2023, the Knesset passed a quasi-Constitutional Basic Law outlining the conditions for a prime minister to be declared unfit to serve. The law states that a premier can be forced to leave office only after a majority vote by 75 percent of the Knesset or cabinet.

This forced recusal may only be triggered by latent mental or physical incapacitation – meaning that a premier cannot be forced to step down due to legal issues.

Last week, Attorney-General Gali Barahav-Miara filed a bombshell petition with the Supreme Court arguing that the law should be nullified because it was passed to protect Netanyahu.

Barahav-Miara’s move, which marks the first time that an attorney-general has challenged a Basic Law in front of the Supreme Court, sparked speculation that she will attempt to force Netanhyahu’s recusal.

Several left-wing groups have previously filed petitions with the Supreme Court arguing that Netanyahu is unfit to hold office due to an alleged conflict of interest regarding the judicial reform and his ongoing criminal trial.

The post ‘Criminals in suits’: MKs slam Supreme Court before likely ruling to void law protecting Netanyahu appeared first on World Israel News.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke with NBC News about his controversial judicial overhaul plan, the Iranian threat, prospects for peace and the state of Israeli democracy.

The post WATCH: ‘There will be no civil war,’ claims of Israeli apartheid are ‘hogwash,’ Netanyahu tells NBC appeared first on World Israel News.

In the war of words over Israel’s judicial reform, irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the disputants, the word “democracy” appears to have suffered a bit of a roughing-up.

By Steve Apfel, The Gatestone Institute

In the war of words over Israel’s judicial reform, irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the disputants, the word “democracy” appears to have suffered a bit of a roughing-up.

Thomas Friedman, New York Times columnist, proclaimed that “Only Biden Can Save Israel Now.” Meanwhile President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken have extend their not-so-clandestine attacks on the proposed reforms of Israel’s judiciary – and intruded, uninvited, into the internal affairs of a fellow democracy — right on the heels of a free, fair and uncontested election. Friedman wrote in his open letter to Biden:

“… Mr. President, this Jewish democracy urgently needs another airlift to save it from being destroyed from the inside. It needs an urgent resupply of hard truths — something only you can provide…. something very important could break in Israel and in our relationship with Israel. And once it’s gone, it will never come back.”

First of all, Israel’s election was the product of “Jewish democracy.” Unfortunately it seems to have delivered a result the Biden Administration did not like. What was the democratic response from Biden administration? It repeatedly called for and helped fund what some may call a slightly undemocratic attempted coup d’état to remove the newly elected prime minister and his government until Israel can come up with one that the administration likes better. As former National Security Advisor Ambassador John Bolton dryly tweeted:

“For both America and Israel, Biden was wrong to intervene in the debate over Netanyahu’s proposed judicial reforms. US officials who are real friends of Israel should contribute their thoughts quietly, otherwise, Israeli officials may start commenting on Hunter Biden’s plea deal. ”

For both America and Israel, Biden was wrong to intervene in the debate over Netanyahu’s proposed judicial reforms. US officials who are real friends of Israel should contribute their thoughts quietly, otherwise, Israeli officials may start commenting on Hunter Biden’s plea deal.…

— John Bolton (@AmbJohnBolton) July 31, 2023

So, the Biden Administration delivered an “either-or” threat: stop the judicial reform or break our special relationship.

The break had actually already begun with President Barack Obama, who became quixotically committed to a policy to finance and enable Israel’s self-declared arch-enemy — “Death to Israel” should probably qualify one as an arch-enemy — unlimited nuclear weapons, billions of dollars to manufacture them; ballistic missiles to deliver them, and loose change for Iran’s mullahs to continue “exporting” their Revolution into Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, the Gaza Strip and Latin America.

“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” then-presidential candidate Barack Obama declared a few days before the 2008 presidential election, somehow neglecting to say what he was planning to transform it into. The most generous assessment might include putting the incumbent party’s justice system on par with some of Latin America’s finest.

In the latest outrage, Biden’s Department of Justice has acted both as Hunter Biden’s prosecutor and his defense team, according to former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe:

“… the lawyers were all on one side, and they were all working to help Hunter Biden. The were all working to hide a blanket immunity agreement from the judge…”

That is how desperately the White House needed that plea agreement to go through. Why? As Douglas Schoen explained, Hunter Biden’s problems are now Joe Biden’s.

The president appears to have turned America’s system of justice into a family protection syndicate. Biden administration officials also appear to have turned the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation against the American people — such as parents and Roman Catholics who might not agree with them.

‘Simply not true’

Biden Administration officials also appear to have done even more than that. FBI agents, in an illegal “state action,” attempted an end-run around the First Amendment, dishonestly colluding with Facebook and other tech companies to censor news reports about Hunter Biden’s 2020 election-altering “Laptop from Hell.”

Team Biden, in the person of Antony Blinken, had reportedly called Mike Morell to get what ultimately turned out to be 51 former intelligence officials to sign a letter falsely alleging that the Hunter Biden laptop had “all the earmarks of a Russian intelligence operation.” That letter, it turned out, was the real disinformation.

It was countered immediately on Fox Business by former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe. “Let me be clear,” Ratcliffe said, “the intelligence community doesn’t believe that because there is no intelligence that supports… that Hunter Biden’s laptop is part of some Russian disinformation campaign. It’s simply not true.”

A day or so later, Biden waved the letter during his October 22, 2020 debate with Trump, and dismissed his son’s laptop as a “Russian plant.” Most media outlets went with the lie. Tech companies, apparently at the request of the White House, blocked the story.

The outcome – apart from a Biden presidency? Blinken was subsequently rewarded with the post of Secretary of State supposedly for helping Biden get fraudulently elected.

What it all comes down to is that one party seemingly decided that Obama’s promise to radically transform America was too important to trust to the electorate.

Now, Blinken and Biden are supposedly qualified to give Israel’s coalition government a lecture on judicial probity and democracy.

“[A] vast majority of Israelis believe — rightly — that you are a true friend and that your advice came from the heart,” wrote Friedman from the bottom of his heart. What is more immoral: telling lies or covering up lies? That is for the editors of the New York Times and their Biden mouthpiece to answer, from the bottom of their hearts.

Steve Apfel, an author of non-fiction and fiction, blogs at Balaam’s Curse. His new novel, What Man Proposes, is serialized at Substack.

The post The uninvited cackbone of Israel’s anti-reform movement – opinion appeared first on World Israel News.

“In sovereign states, sovereign democracies, the elected representatives of the people make the decisions, and that is how it is going to be in Israel,” the Israeli prime minister said.

By World Israel News Staff

Speaking to host Mark Levin on Sunday on Fox News‘  ‘Life, Liberty & Levin,’ Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the sovereign State of Israel will make its own decisions, based on the will of the Israeli people.”

“I’ve been elected six times democratically…for a total of 16 years, and in all those years I never commented on internal debates in other democracies. I have chosen not to do that,” Netanyahu said.

“Everybody has an opinion on Israel. They don’t have an opinion on the riots in France or the protests there or the debates that happen inside other countries.

“You have a major debate between the Supreme Court and the executive right now in America, and I really don’t care to comment about it. But if people choose to comment about ours. It’s OK. We’ll make our own decisions. In solid states, sovereign democracies, the elected representatives of the people make the decisions, and that is how it is going to be in Israel,” the prime minister stated.

Earlier this month, U.S. President Joe Biden sent a warning to Israel through the media, telling the New York Times’ Thomas Friedman that if judicial reform is not passed with a wide consensus, there is a risk to the allies’ relationship.

“You are going to break something with Israel’s democracy and with your relationship with America’s democracy, and you may never be able to get it back,” Biden said in a message to Netanyahu through Friedman.

According to Biden, it is the “enduring protest movement” against the reform that is “demonstrating the vibrancy of Israel’s democracy.” Neither Friedman nor Biden noted that a majority of the country’s electorate freely elected a right-wing government that had campaigned partially on the promise of judicial reform.

In the interview with Netanyahu on Sunday, Levin noted that the massive ongoing protests across Israel, ostensibly against the planned judicial reforms that would allegedly bring about an end to democracy and turn Israel into a dictatorship, are really about overthrowing the Netanyahu government. To which Netanyahu responded that the opposition has “openly” stated that intent even before the November 2022 national election, which they lost.

Back in March, commenting on the countrywide demonstrations and “Days of Disruption,” Netanyahu said, “Only four months ago we held elections. The government I head received a clear mandate from the citizens of Israel. The fact that for two whole months our repeated calls for dialogue received no response from the opposition proves that what interests the opposition is not the judicial reforms, but the creation of anarchy and the overthrow of the elected government.”

The judicial reforms in fact are “strengthening democracy,” Netanyahu told Levin. “We’re bringing it back in line to where most democracies are. Where Israel was in its first five decades [before the overhaul by then-president of the Supreme Court Aharon Barak] and where it should be now in the coming decades…

The post Netanyahu to Fox News: ‘Everybody has an opinion on Israel, we’ll make our own decisions’ appeared first on World Israel News.

Israeli prime minister breaks down the Israeli Parliament’s judicial reform bill to overhaul the Israeli Supreme Court’s powers on ‘Life, Liberty & Levin.’

The post WATCH: This is what could end democracy on earth, Netanyahu warns appeared first on World Israel News.

The Orwellian doublespeak of the Israeli opposition is so blatant that it’s putting regular propaganda to shame and managed to sow self-doubt in coalition circles.

By Ruthie Blum, JNS

Those of us who were among the hundreds of thousands of participants in the right-wing rally in Jerusalem on Thursday evening weren’t surprised when the “resistance” bloc pulled a two-fer: downplaying the significance of and attendance at the event, on the one hand; and treating the happening as evidence that Israeli democracy is in danger of annihilation at the hands of fanatics, on the other.

Nor did we imagine that coverage from most media outlets would be accurate, let alone fair, since they’ve been acting all along like a branch of the protest movement. Instead, we drew encouragement from the throngs of fellow members of the national camp who turned up to bolster the government and urge it not to be bullied into backtracking on its mandate.

Both were necessary under the circumstances, with the Orwellian doublespeak of the opposition having become so blatant that it’s putting regular propaganda to shame. Indeed, the projection on the part of the protest instigators isn’t merely jaw-dropping (calling the government, rather than those trying to topple it, a “coup,” for instance); it’s actually been successful at sowing self-doubt in coalition circles.

Ahead of the opening of the Knesset’s summer session on Sunday, then, it was particularly crucial for lawmakers to be reminded of the populace that isn’t drinking the Kool-Aid—those still expecting and demanding judicial reform, with or without a broad consensus. It was also important to highlight that compromise on this or any other issue isn’t on the agenda of the forces spearheading the weekly demonstrations.

The points were made amid much good cheer and lots of applause for the speakers. Justice Minister Yariv Levin was given an especially warm welcome, in addition to cautionary chants of “Don’t be afraid!”

The message was that he shouldn’t cave on the judicial-reform process that the government had put on hold. This was done to allow for negotiations to bring about an agreement and prevent civil war.

Levin’s speech was aimed at reassuring his base that he hadn’t abandoned the mission, and assuaging the fears of opponents.

“We are told that the reform is intended to take over the Supreme Court, but the truth is the opposite,” he said. “We want a court for everyone: liberals, conservatives, right and left. Everyone.”

He went on: “They say that the reform is intended to impose the lifestyle of one public on another. The truth, of course, is the opposite. There is nothing in the reform that involves coercion or an infringement on the individual rights that are important to all of us. We are told that if the reform passes, there will be a dictatorship. There is no bigger lie than that.”

He also addressed Labor Party leader Merav Michaeli and the many feminists who’ve been wearing costumes from the Netflix series, “The Handmaid’s Tale,” based on the dystopian novel by Margaret Atwood.

“Join us so that we have a court that punishes rapists and doesn’t seek ways to make it easier for them; a court that cares for an elderly woman in south Tel Aviv and not for infiltrators who harm her; a court that protects the lives of IDF soldiers not terrorists.”

All well and good. But his words were far less noteworthy than the reaction they elicited from protest leader Moshe “Bogie” Ya’alon. The former defense minister, who used to be politically and ideologically aligned with Levin, is now a key promoter of the above-mentioned slurs.

“The fact that he who bears the title of ‘justice minister’ has not yet been fired and arrested, after the mendacious incitement speech that spilled the blood of Israeli judges, is a normalization of the insanity,” Ya’alon tweeted on Friday. “The fact that at the head of the Israeli government, which is trying to carry out a coup d’état, is under indictment for serious crimes and prohibited from dealing with the judiciary due to a clear conflict of interest, is a normalization of the insanity; the fact that the heads of the opposition are conducting negotiations under the auspices of the president of the country on the coup d’état proposal (the Levin-[Simcha] Rothman legislation) is a normalization of the insanity squared.”

So, in Ya’alon’s view, Levin deserves to be sacked and hauled off to jail. Talk about lunacy.

As if any of these statements weren’t sufficient to warrant a psychological examination for their author, he proceeded to command of the representatives engaged in talks at the President’s Residence that they “get out of there and let the criminal government, which has caused and is causing unprecedented damage to the country and its citizens, deal with [its own mess] so that its days will be numbered.”

His next cynical feat was to invoke and appropriate Ze’ev Jabotinsky—the father of Revisionist Zionism, precursor of the Likud Party heading the current government—by using the title of the latter’s famous 1923 essay.

“Join the ‘Iron Wall’ of the mighty protest, which will not allow a dictatorship! Democracy will win,” he wrote, before going on in his lengthy thread to describe the scenes from Thursday’s “extremist messianic incitement demonstration” as “shocking,” and accusing Levin of inciting “blood-curdling libels against Israeli judges, as if they support rapists and terrorists!”

Never mind that Ya’alon is fully cognizant of the specific cases in question, each of which actually did favor the perpetrators. On a roll, he told his “friends in the opposition” that they are the “messengers of the vast majority that supports democracy and independent judges. … The inciters won’t get their way. Israel will not become a messianic dictatorship with an inciting regime. The huge democratic majority—the democratic ‘iron wall’—will defeat this craziness! Democracy will win.”

What he and his ilk have been trying to obfuscate, however, is that democracy never lost; the left did, at the ballot box in November. The 600,000 Israelis who arrived in the capital on Thursday from around the country were simply reasserting this reality. Let the government not forget it.

Ruthie Blum is a Tel Aviv-based columnist and commentator. She writes and lectures on Israeli politics and culture, as well as on U.S.-Israel relations. The winner of the Louis Rappaport award for excellence in commentary, she is the author of the book “To Hell in a Handbasket: Carter, Obama, and the ‘Arab Spring.’ ”

The post The Jerusalem rally was a reminder that democracy didn’t lose; the Left did -analysis appeared first on World Israel News.

Fed up with the months of anti-government demonstrations where protesters, led by the opposition, claim to be fighting for democracy, at least 650,000 Israelis rallied in Jerusalem Thursday night, chanting “We demand judicial reform,” “We want a Jewish state,” and “64 mandates” – referring to the November 2022 election won by the Right.

A significant number of non-religious protesters held signs saying, “I am secular. I demand judicial reform.”

In first video below, the crowd is saying in Hebrew, “The nation demands judicial reform.”

The post ‘MARCH OF THE MILLION’: Massive crowds pack Jerusalem streets, demanding judicial reform appeared first on World Israel News.

Russell Shalev, a researcher at the Kohelet Policy Forum which helped draft the judicial reform package being passed by the Netanyahu government, explains what the reforms are and the motivation to have better representation in the judicial system.

The post WATCH: Israel’s judicial reforms explained by think tank behind the plan appeared first on World Israel News.

According to a recent Direct Polls survey, the civil “unrest” is populated mainly by silver-haired boomers. You know, the ones who think they’re at Woodstock or something.

Ruthie Blum, JNS

Anybody who lives in and loves Israel is aware of its miraculously beautiful mosaic of inherent paradoxes. It’s Middle Eastern, yet Western; war-torn, yet peace-obsessed; provincial, yet cosmopolitan; frenetic, yet relaxed.

It’s religious, yet secular; conservative, yet woke; judgmental, yet empathic; marriage-oriented, yet a singles’ magnet. And it’s a bureaucratic hell, while also an entrepreneurship heaven.

Aside from all of the above, the tiny state—still young at its soon-to-be 75th birthday—is a major player on the world stage. This is both good and bad news for the Jews.

On the one hand, it means that we managed to return to our ancient homeland and make the literal and figurative desert bloom. On the other, such a miraculous success story, against all odds and surrounding enemies, comes with a price.

Indeed, as is the case with many blessings, this one often feels like a curse. The weight of responsibility—the burden of serving as a “light unto the nations”—is only part of it.

Perhaps a greater difficulty for a once-scattered nation demonized and slaughtered in the Diaspora is the realization that the “ingathering of exiles” didn’t put an end to envy-sparked antisemitism. On the contrary, what the late historian Robert Wistrich called the “longest hatred” was simply transferred to the Jewish nation-state under the cloak of “legitimate criticism.”

“Dear God, I know, I know, we are the chosen people, but once in a while, can’t you choose someone else?” cries Tevye in “Fiddler on the Roof.”

It’s not for nothing that this tragically funny line resonates with most of the tribe. Memorialized by Israeli actor Chaim Topol, whose stage-and-screen portrayal of Sholom Aleichem’s character earned him international accolades, it sums up our collective gripe in a nutshell.

Sadly, Topol died earlier this month at his home in Tel Aviv at the age of 87. Despite the political rift and mass demonstrations going on there and in other Israeli cities, prominent figures across the spectrum paid tribute to the award-winning actor.

The outpouring of appreciation was for more than his illustrious career, however. Through his performances as Tevye, the quintessential “Sabra,” who was born in Mandatory Palestine some 12 years before the establishment of the state, represented a merging of Jewish cultures—a thread connecting the tapestry of the “Old Country” to the new.

Today’s protesters against the government in Jerusalem are threatening to unravel that thread. Claims by the movement’s leaders about rescuing Israeli democracy from imminent demise are false.

The root of their rebellion really lies in an aversion to the right-wing-religious coalition and its leader, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Their placards, slogans, chants and epithets make this abundantly clear.

Unfortunately, the campaign has had an effect on many well-intentioned members of society whose familiarity with the reforms is as minimal as their concern (or gullibility) is genuine. Nor do these fellow travelers seem to grasp that nothing short of a coup will satisfy the forces trying to bring down Netanyahu and his partners.

This is precisely why the architects of the endeavor are accusing the democratically elected powers-that-be of staging one. It’s a neat trick of projection, reminiscent of Soviet-inspired Palestinian propaganda, a key element of which is charging Israel with its own crimes. Oh, and enlisting support from the international community by inverting victim and perpetrator.

Observers at home and abroad of the current crisis fear—or hope—that Israel is headed for a full-fledged civil war. Hearing members of Israel’s military and other security forces join the fray by announcing their refusal to fulfill their duties causes them to consider this a real possibility; watching thousands of Israelis march to the beat of former prime ministers and defense officials calling on foreign governments to censure Netanyahu will do that.

What the ill-wishers purposely obfuscate, and the pearl-clutchers don’t take into account, is the way in which average citizens are going about their daily lives behind the lens of TV news cameras. This is certainly true of citizens who have little interest in and no clue about how the branches of government operate. But even activists are hard to discern at supermarket check-out lines and bus stops.

Hungry and thirsty from all that demonstrating

On Thursday night, for instance, as the so-called “Day of Resistance” came to a close, every trendy restaurant, bar and nightclub in the White City was packed to the brim with millennials eating, drinking and making merry. When I pointed this out to a friend, she quipped: “All that demonstrating must have made them hungry and thirsty.”

It’s unclear, though, whether this particular crowd—munching happily on shrimp and pork—had taken part in the protests at all. In fact, according to a recent Direct Polls survey, the civil “unrest” is populated mainly by silver-haired boomers. You know, the ones who think they’re at Woodstock or something.

In a lopsided debate (what else is new?) with two left-wingers, I cited this example of the “life goes on” resilience that’s characteristic of Israelis in the face of adversity. Their response was that the people I was referring to won’t be able to be out enjoying themselves, and certainly not in non-kosher establishments, if the government clips the wings of the Supreme Court.

Sigh.

“Ok,” I said. “So, you and the rest of the protesters can try to change the situation during the next elections.”

Their humorless answer was hilarious. If the judicial reforms proceed, they argued, elections will be banned.

It was a ludicrous pronouncement that Opposition leader Yair Lapid had made several days earlier. It’s baseless hype that he and the pundits parroting him know to be nonsense.

Despite the damage they’re doing to Israel’s standing and security, the one thing they won’t be able to shake is the underlying health of a society that cares deeply about preserving Judaism, Zionism and—yes—popular culture. Faith in this unique blend, which the over-reaching judiciary has been attempting to dilute, is what the majority reasserted at the ballot box on Nov. 1.

Voters must not be bullied into forgetting it. It’s no accident, after all, that Israel just ranked No. 4 in the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network report on world happiness.

Ruthie Blum is a Tel Aviv-based columnist and commentator. She writes and lectures on Israeli politics and culture, as well as on U.S.-Israel relations. The winner of the Louis Rappaport award for excellence in commentary, she is the author of the book “To Hell in a Handbasket: Carter, Obama, and the ‘Arab Spring.’ ”

The post The protest movement can’t unravel the thread of Israel’s unique tapestry – opinion appeared first on World Israel News.

Should this trend be amplified, the bad effects will be felt locally and internationally.

By Dr. Shmuel Katz

In the last few months, we have witnessed governments from across the globe unabashedly and without reservation, draw baseless conclusions about Israel’s newly elected government.

It is difficult to understand why key allies would reflexively condemn a new Israeli government, even before understanding exactly how it will act and what it will try to accomplish.

While Israel is busy defending itself from unjustified attacks on its democracy, antisemites are intensifying their global efforts to influence the oblivious.

The voices of the traditional antisemites from the far right, far left and radical Islam are exploiting controversies surrounding the new Israeli government and are trying to influence many decision-makers to advance their own nefarious agendas.

For example, recently, the terror-supporting Palestinian Authority (PA) decided to lead an anti-Israeli UN resolution to refer the Israeli-Palestinian issue for decisions by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) instead of negotiating in good faith with the Israeli government toward a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

At the same time, the PA continues to receive financial and political support from multiple countries around the world while implementing deception, incitement and bribes, which encourage terror attacks on innocent people and the continuation of the conflict.

The PA-led resolution is turning, yet again, to a third party, trying to press Israel to act against its own interests.

The distraction about the newly elected Israeli government has even gained some traction within the Jewish community in the US, which will definitively hurt them in the future. Several left-leaning Jewish organizations came out openly against the democratically elected new Israeli government. Consequently, the Israeli government should undertake a major global public relations effort to share its agenda and, at the same time, put it in the proper current and historical factual context.

The newly appointed finance minister Bezalel Smotrich tried to address some of these issues in his Wall Street Journal article published in late December, titled, “Israel’s New Government Isn’t What You’ve Heard.” It is definitively not enough.

Some of the most difficult related events to understand were the positions of several political leaders of the previous Israeli government when they called for active resistance to undermine the stability of the legally elected new Israeli government and the troubling intent of the unelected Israeli supreme court, to become a self-serving judiciary dictatorship.

With the world’s second-largest Jewish population, the US government also has a part to play. They should not allow unopposed antisemitic voices to take advantage of the current political situation in Israel and influence decision-making processes.

For example, voices of reason should be encouraged to stand up against the antisemites, and antisemites should not be appointed to serve as diplomats or as members of committees in Congress.

In addition, the US should support truthful and responsible education but should avoid financing corrupt educational systems in the Middle East and elsewhere that brainwash minds against Israel and against the US.

This problem also exists in academia where, for example, a group of antisemites arrived recently at the Florida Atlantic University (FAU) with a “Ye Is Right” sign, trying to engage students with their hatred towards Jews, exploiting “freedom of speech,” to disseminate hate and to promote social unrest. Should this trend be amplified, the bad effects will be felt locally and internationally.

Once the population is properly educated and can engage in a constructive dialogue without recklessly passing judgments, it will be easier to stand up against evil, improve the lives of all good people across the globe, and save our society from unnecessary troubles in the future.

Dr. Shmuel Katz is a Zionist-American leader, speaker and philanthropist.

The post While we get distracted, antisemites undermine societal stability in Israel – opinion appeared first on World Israel News.

One youngster at special protest organized for families with children needed prompting from a reporter in order to say why she was there.

By Batya Jerenberg, World Israel News

Parents in dozens of locations across the country, from north to south, participated in an anti-judicial reform demonstration Monday involving their primary- and high-school-aged children instead of getting them to school for their first hour of class.

The theme of the 8 a.m. protest was, “There is no education without democracy,” which was written on hundreds of signs and chanted repeatedly by the demonstrators.

One child, who looked to be about nine years old, was interviewed by a Ynet reporter. When asked why he was there, the boy replied, “to demonstrate against the coup d’etat.”

The reporter then asked, “What are you afraid of?”

The child answered, “That there will be no rights.”

The reporter continued questioning the child, saying “What, no rights in the country?” to which he replied, “It’s becoming a dictatorship.”

Journalist-turned-politician Yinon Magal posted to his Twitter feed that a Channel 13 reporter fed answers to an even younger child, who was asked why she came, and she didn’t know what to say.

“Did you come to school or to protest?” the reporter prompted.

She answered, “To protest,” but then didn’t know what to reply when asked, “To protest for what?”

The reporter could be seen and heard whispering into her ear, “Democracy,” which the child duly repeated into the microphone.

In contravention of the law, the families also obstructed many roads in the cities as well as major highways, creating major traffic jams.

In Tel Aviv, the parents and children blocked main streets as they marched on two different routes to converge on the major Namir-Rokach junction. At the crowded Sira interchange on Route 2 outside of the suburb of Herzliya, and further on near the exit to Ra’anana, dozens blocked the highway temporarily as well.

In one video clip of demonstrators sitting down on a large highway, one person can be heard sing-songing into a loudspeaker, “Democracy is crossing.”

No arrests were reported at any of the sites.

The post Children start school late to protest judicial reform, but not sure what it means appeared first on World Israel News.

“I already heard from her caregivers that her condition has deteriorated because of this demonstration. It shook her routine and sense of security,” the mother said.

By Batya Jerenberg, World Israel News

When protesters against the government’s plan for a judicial overhaul tried preventing coalition lawmakers from attending a Knesset vote on the amendments Monday morning, one of their targets was Likud MK Tali Gottlieb. As a result, her special-needs child was traumatized.

“I opened the door at 6:10 a.m., and I live in an apartment house, not some villa that has a fence where demonstrators can protest as they wish,” Gottlieb, a single mother who lives in the Tel Aviv suburb of Givat Shmuel, told Ynet Radio.

“The anarchists sat at my door, when I took out the garbage in my nightgown. I closed the door and called the police, and then asked them to be quiet because I have a low-functioning autistic daughter.”

According to Gottleib, they told her, “You can take a vacation day in order to stop the judicial revolution,” and  “Find someone else to take the girl, because you’re staying at home today, ma’am.”

“Thank God, my daughter is now at her daycare. I already heard from her caregivers that her condition has deteriorated as a result of this demonstration, it shook her routine and sense of security,” the MK said.

“In the name of what kind of democracy do you do such a thing to a public figure?” she asked in outrage. “Protest as much as you want, but don’t come into my territory….and violate my privacy in this way and threaten me with false imprisonment.”

When the interviewer asked if she had been frightened, she responded, “Of course. Wouldn’t you be in such a situation?”

Opposition leader Yair Lapid, who is leading the charge against the judicial reform and also has an autistic daughter, assailed those who participated in the incident.

“I strongly condemn the siege on the home of MK Tali Gottlieb, the mother of a child with special needs, and the fact that she was not allowed to take the child out,” he said. “This is not our way. This is not a way of protest. Sending Tali encouragement and her daughter a hug.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu added his condemnation.

“When protesters prevent public representatives from coming and voting in the Knesset, and make an autistic girl miserable, this is not a legitimate protest. The protesters who talk about democracy are the ones who bring about the end of democracy when they prevent public representatives from exercising the fundamental right in democracy – to vote,” he said, calling on police to enable the lawmakers to reach their destination.

The post Protesters against judicial reform block MK’s autistic child from leaving home appeared first on World Israel News.

Scenes from Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee hearing on Monday showed members of the opposition up in arms ahead of the first reading of the legislation to towards reforming the judiciary, with shouts of “Shame on you!” and “Dictator!” at the reform’s chief architect, as well as a chorus of lawmakers singing the Israeli classic “I Have No Other Country.”

The post WATCH – Unruly: Opposition MKs bang on table, sing ‘I have no other country’ during judicial reform hearing appeared first on World Israel News.

Justice Minister Levin and chief reform architect Rothman said they were “saddened” by Lapid’s refusal to sit and talk.

By World Israel News Staff

Opposition Leader Yair Lapid has rejected an offer by masterminds behind the government’s plan for judicial reform to meet at Isaac Herzog’s office to discuss a compromise put forward by the president, saying there needed to be a complete halt to the legislation first.

“As the president stressed yesterday and as explained over and over, the first condition to start a national dialogue is the immediate cessation of all legislation processes for a designated period of time, during which talks will be held with the president’s mediation,” Lapid said in a statement.

Justice Minister Yariv Levin and Constitution, Law and Justice Committee chair, MK Simcha Rothman, said they were “saddened” by Lapid’s rejection.

“We were very saddened to read to opposition leader’s statement, which signals that his only motivation is to stop the legislation and not to hold genuine dialogue,” Levin and Rothman said in a joint statement.

“We would be happy to meet as early as tonight with any opposition official who’s interested in dialogue,” they added, in a possible reference to National Unity party chief Benny Gantz who has yet to issue a response to their invitation.

Lapid in return said that Levin and Rothman’s invitation was insincere.

If they were serious, he said, “they would have agreed to halt the legislation until the end of the talks, and perhaps would have also made the effort to update the president and me of their proposal ahead of time, instead of us hearing about it through the media.”

Protest groups behind the mass demonstrations outside the Knesset and several Israeli cities on Monday had pressured Lapid and other opposition leaders not to agree to conduct a dialogue with coalition MKs over the matter.

Rothman earlier in the day said he “welcomed the president’s initiative to hold real talks” and would be “happy to sit, without any delay, through the mediation of the president and wherever he chooses, with any representative of the opposition who wishes to do so” – but without any “preconditions,” such as delaying the legislative process.

Footage from the committee meeting Monday morning showed opposition members banging on the table and shouting “Shame on you!” and “Dictator!” at Rothman. The commotion became so unruly that 17 Knesset members were thrown out of the room, but they and others congregated at the door and continued shouting.

When order was restored, the coalition passed several judicial reforms by a 9-7 vote, including disallowing the Supreme Court to reject the validity of Basic Laws passed in the Knesset and changing the composition of the Judicial Selection Committee so that coalition members are in the majority.

The post Lapid refuses to meet with judicial reform lawmakers without preconditions appeared first on World Israel News.