While the rampant anti-Semitism among the coordinators of the now-annual Washington, DC Women’s March has finally cost it the support of many individuals and institutions, some local groups that had disaffiliated from the national organization nonetheless held their own simultaneous demonstrations on Saturday. Nicole Guzik, a Los Angeles rabbi, spoke beforehand with the leaders of the march in her city and received assurances it would not be allowed to become a platform for anti-Semitism. Unfortunately those promises proved hollow, as she writes in an open letter to the organizers of the Los Angeles gathering:

I was assured by . . . the founders of this march, [repeatedly], in a private meeting, that . . . in Los Angeles (unlike at the national march), Israel would not be attacked, labeling Israel as an apartheid state would be unwelcome on the stage, and if a speaker went off- script, the managers of the program would raise the music. In the very first hour, . . . all those promises were broken.

Marwa Rifahie, representing the Council on American-Islamic Relations, used her allotted time [addressing the gathering] to focus on the Palestinian agenda, a [subject] that I was told would not be a focus [of speeches]. I waited. When she called Israel an apartheid state, I waited. Where was the music? Where was someone asking her to remain on-script? Who vetted this speaker? Why was I assured that anti-Semitic statements would not be permitted or tolerated in this anti-hate arena? Why was someone allowed to defend the organizers of the march in Washington? . . .

If you want me back at next year’s march, someone like me [ought to] vet and screen your speakers. Someone like me must be willing to say that anti-Zionist speech is the language of hatred and won’t be allowed on stage. But until you take this course of action, it will be quite a while until I give someone like you the benefit of the doubt. I held a sign that read, “Jewish and proud Zionist standing for women’s equality.” . . . I hoped to find a place where those signs would be welcome and not attacked. It’s with the heaviest of hearts that I admit I was wrong. This march was clearly not meant for me.

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.