The United Kingdom’s Office of Standard in Education has censured a ḥasidic girls’ school three times for its refusal to teach its students—who range in age from three to eight—the latest ideas about homosexuality and “gender reassignment.” Now the school is threatened with closure, as Elliot Kaufman explains:

Even though it appears to excel at teaching secular subjects—a challenge for many Orthodox schools—the school [according to the official report] does not “teach explicitly about issues such as sexual orientation” and thereby “restricts pupils’ spiritual, moral, social, and cultural development and does not promote equality of opportunity in ways that take account of differing lifestyles.” Consequently, the inspectors conclude, “pupils are not able to gain a full understanding of fundamental British values.” It is important to remember that they are writing about girls under the age of eight.

This is nothing short of the imposition of secular dogma. The government’s arrogance is astounding; how exactly do they presume to know what is necessary for the “spiritual” and “moral” development of these Orthodox girls? In that realm, bureaucrats are simply out of their depth and unfit to dictate rules to parents who know well enough how to raise their own children. Indeed, why should we presume that the bureaucrats’ fashionable dogmas about “lifestyles” are any wiser than the dogmas of the rabbinic or Christian traditions?

Simply put, religious liberty is an empty promise if it does not extend to the education of children. That is the issue here. Orthodox children will be fine, productive members of society even if they do not approve of gender reassignment. Far more important than crushing all dissent on issues of sexuality and gender is preserving the bedrock right peaceably to express one’s religion. Is this any less a “fundamental British value” than teaching about gender reassignment to prepubescent children?

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.