In the latest evidence that the British Labor party’s problem is one of anti-Semitism rather than criticism of Israel, a recording surfaced Monday night of a party official, Peter Willsman, delivering a tirade about Jews at a meeting of its executive committee. Helen Lewis examines his words:

Importantly, there is no record of [the party leader Jeremy] Corbyn intervening to stop Willsman fulminating about how Jewish “Trump fanatics” were spreading false claims of anti-Semitism, or criticizing the 68 rabbis who signed an open letter saying that the party had a problem. . . .

[T]he “Trump fanatic” comment is typical of the pro-Corbyn memes which circulate on social media and are given impetus through pro-Corbyn websites. . . . Put simply, for sites such as these, the default assumption is that criticism of Corbyn is motivated by a “centrist” or “Blairite” agenda—or perhaps even by actual right-wingers. . . . Corbyn’s team, and Corbyn himself, have encouraged this narrative: that criticism is never valid, can never be valid, because it is never motivated by anything other than knee-jerk opposition to Corbyn’s socialist program. This line of thinking is, frankly, conspiracist. We also know where it ends: with one Labor councilor wondering if there is a “Mossad-assisted campaign to prevent the election of a Labor government pledged to recognize Palestine as a state” and another hosting Facebook posts under his name about “blood-drinking Jews.” . . .

Corbyn—a lifelong anti-racist activist and campaigner against apartheid—seems unable to recognize that he might have a blind spot, even when hundreds of members of a community try to tell him so. Some of his supporters, meanwhile, appear to want an impossible standard of proof before they will acknowledge the existence of anti-Semitism in the party. A higher standard of proof than posts about blood-drinking Jews. . . .

There is nothing left to say on Labor’s anti-Semitism row. If you don’t think there is a problem by this point, then surely nothing can change your mind. In fact, you are the problem.

On Tuesday, a Hizballah drone attack injured three people in northern Israel. The next day, another attack, targeting an IDF base, injured eighteen people, six of them seriously, in Arab al-Amshe, also in the north. This second attack involved the simultaneous use of drones carrying explosives and guided antitank missiles. In both cases, the defensive systems that performed so successfully last weekend failed to stop the drones and missiles. Ron Ben-Yishai has a straightforward explanation as to why: the Lebanon-backed terrorist group is getting better at evading Israel defenses. He explains the three basis systems used to pilot these unmanned aircraft, and their practical effects:

These systems allow drones to act similarly to fighter jets, using “dead zones”—areas not visible to radar or other optical detection—to approach targets. They fly low initially, then ascend just before crashing and detonating on the target. The terrain of southern Lebanon is particularly conducive to such attacks.

But this requires skills that the terror group has honed over months of fighting against Israel. The latest attacks involved a large drone capable of carrying over 50 kg (110 lbs.) of explosives. The terrorists have likely analyzed Israel’s alert and interception systems, recognizing that shooting down their drones requires early detection to allow sufficient time for launching interceptors.

The IDF tries to detect any incoming drones on its radar, as it had done prior to the war. Despite Hizballah’s learning curve, the IDF’s technological edge offers an advantage. However, the military must recognize that any measure it takes is quickly observed and analyzed, and even the most effective defenses can be incomplete. The terrain near the Lebanon-Israel border continues to pose a challenge, necessitating technological solutions and significant financial investment.