At Berkeley, Professors Are Inciting Students into Anti-Semitic Mobs

On February 26, a riot broke out among pro-Palestinian protestors at UC Berkeley. The protestors broke windows and hurled anti-Semitic slurs at the Jewish and pro-Israeli students there.

Daniel Solomon, a current history PhD student at UC Berkeley, has a firsthand account of the events, along with the climate, encouraged by professors and administrators, leading up to it.

The anti-Semitic riot capped months of harassment, terror apologia, and occasional outbursts of violence from the campus “Free Palestine” movement. The university’s response has been consistently craven. Meanwhile, some faculty members, such as in the history department, where I am a PhD student, have justified and covered for this behavior. My department has been a microcosm of a larger institutional failure, in which “equity” and “anti-colonialism” act as shields for rank anti-Semitism.

Chief among these faculty members is Ussama Makdisi, who “rhapsodizes about a 19th-century convivencia in the Levant that Zionism supposedly ruined,” and who “told a lecture hall full of students that Jews should have founded their state in postwar Germany.”

On October 7,

Makdisi posted a thinly veiled justification of the slaughter: “Just waking up to the news. Go read CLR James, Black Jacobins, on the violence of the oppressed. And then try to ignore the utterly racist double standard of Western politicians and media when it comes to questions of resistance and occupation and international law.”

And after October 7, Makdisi “has addressed the crowds that have gathered on campus for ‘Free Palestine’ marches and participated in a slew of events with Bears for Palestine.” Then, in the wake of the riot in February, “Makdisi has defended the campus malefactors in a flurry of posts on X.”

Read more at Tablet

More about: Anti-Semitism, Berkeley, Hamas, Politics & Current Affairs

Hizballah Is Learning Israel’s Weak Spots

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.

Read more at Ynet

More about: Hizballah, Iron Dome, Israeli Security