It may seem silly, writes Seth Mandel, to worry too much about the exclusion of Israeli athletes from so obscure a pastime as lawn bowling, but it is in fact a deadly serious example of the ability of anti-Semites to get their way in supposedly apolitical organizations. The World Bowls Tour, the international organization for the sport, recently announced a ban on all Israeli competitors in its upcoming World Indoor Championship, singling out by name three athletes who have been disinvited. Mandel writes:

The Telegraph reports that the WBT decision was likely influenced by a ramped-up campaign of anti-Semitism aimed at disrupting last month’s Scottish International Open. The anti-Semites were very angry and noisy, and there is no similar constituency in Europe for non-anti-Semitism, so here we are. In fact, that Scottish campaign seems to have found some success as well, forcing an Israeli competitor out of the Scottish International Open. Scottish Sport for Palestine rejoiced: “Scotland can be proud once again.”

Last month, a youth Maccabi Berlin soccer team was chased home from the field by attackers wielding knives and clubs. As I noted at the time, Maccabi Berlin is a legacy organization: prior to the Holocaust, Jews established clubs like Maccabi precisely because they were excluded from mainstream national sports leagues.

So although it may sound unimportant, especially to an American ear, the fuss over lawn bowling is significant. The intent of these campaigners is to sweep Jews out of every corner of nonpolitical social life in Europe, and beyond.

While I’ve seen much speculation—some reasonable and well informed, some quite the opposite—about why Jerusalem chose Friday morning to begin its campaign against Iran, the most obvious explanation seems to be the most convincing. First, 60 days had passed since President Trump warned that Tehran had 60 days to reach an agreement with the U.S. over its nuclear program. Second, Israeli intelligence was convinced that Iran was too close to developing nuclear weapons to delay military action any longer. Edward Luttwak explains why Israel was wise to attack:

Iran was adding more and more centrifuges in increasingly vast facilities at enormous expense, which made no sense at all if the aim was to generate energy. . . . It might be hoped that Israel’s own nuclear weapons could deter an Iranian nuclear attack against its own territory. But a nuclear Iran would dominate the entire Middle East, including Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain, with which Israel has full diplomatic relations, as well as Saudi Arabia with which Israel hopes to have full relations in the near future.

Luttwak also considers the military feats the IDF and Mossad have accomplished in the past few days:

To reach all [its] targets, Israel had to deal with the range-payload problem that its air force first overcame in 1967, when it destroyed the air forces of three Arab states in a single day. . . . This time, too, impossible solutions were found for the range problem, including the use of 65-year-old airliners converted into tankers (Boeing is years later in delivering its own). To be able to use its short-range F-16s, Israel developed the “Rampage” air-launched missile, which flies upward on a ballistic trajectory, gaining range by gliding down to the target. That should make accuracy impossible—but once again, Israeli developers overcame the odds.