Law School Commencement Speech Is No Place for Far Left Diatribe 

Education ought to be the bedrock for fostering critical thinking and providing a landscape for the exploration of diverse perspectives, rather than serving as an incubator for extremist ideologies.

That essential ethos of education, unfortunately, is under threat, exemplified recently by the graduation speech of City University of New York law graduate and soon-to-be lawyer, Fatima Mousa Mohammed.

Mohammed, as she claimed the spotlight, leveraged this platform to broadcast an array of extreme left-wing cliches. She demonstrated profound disrespect for American institutions that form our nation’s backbone, criticizing entities ranging from our police force and military to our long-standing ally, Israel.

Her rhetoric exhibited nothing but contempt. The speech was an unsettling recital of the extreme left-wing rhetoric that’s been increasingly infecting our national discourse. It was unequivocally inappropriate for a commencement address, an occasion meant to be a celebration of academic achievement.

What was concerning was not only Mohammed’s blatant attempt to tarnish America’s image, but also the seemingly complicit behavior of the CUNY Law administration. They allowed, and arguably sanctioned, her to deliver a highly divisive and hateful address. They knew her background as an anti-Israel activist, and they should have approved a copy of her speech prior to her reading it.

The law school must have been fully aware that she intended to propagate a narrative painting our society as a dystopian wasteland under attack by systemic racism. If not, then they should come out and say so. The school has tarnished its reputation by having well-known individuals speak at the same event as Mohammed, making them seem radical, too.

Contrary to Mohammed’s portrayal, the United States has made considerable strides over the past two decades in fostering a more inclusive society and fostering racial harmony. Our societal fabric is such that public figures risk severe backlash and potential career termination for a single discriminatory remark. That’s hardly reflective of a nation inherently racist, particularly considering the rigorous anti-discrimination standards enforced across our public sectors, from the police to the military.

Indeed, America is a land of immense opportunities where individuals, irrespective of their backgrounds, can thrive, based on their merit and diligence.

It’s rather disheartening that Mohammed chose to vilify the very police officers who place their lives on the line daily to ensure our communities’ safety. Similarly, our military, which she so casually criticized, serves as the linchpin of our national security, ceaselessly protecting our freedoms and way of life. Her disdain toward these entities glaringly overlooks the innumerable sacrifices made for our societal well-being.

In a similar vein, Mohammed’s remarks about Israel were deeply unsettling. Israel has long been a staunch ally of the United States, sharing our democratic values and standing as a beacon of stability in a volatile region. To attack our ally in a graduation speech is not only disrespectful, but also shows a complete disregard for the importance of maintaining strong international relationships.

Nonetheless, the issue extends beyond Mohammed’s speech, flagging a more systemic problem pervading our college campuses. Universities, originally meant to stimulate respectful debate and the sharing of diverse perspectives , are increasingly morphing into hotbeds for radical ideologies. The promotion of such extreme left-wing narratives, exemplified during the commencement address, only serves to stifle intellectual diversity, thus intensifying societal polarization.

Despite the discord Mohammed’s speech caused, it inadvertently catalyzed a united response. Figures from both sides of the political spectrum came together in a rare echo of disapproval. New York City Mayor Eric Adams said, “I was proud to offer a different message at this year’s CUNY Law commencement ceremony. … We cannot allow words of negativity and divisiveness to be the only ones our students hear.”

Similarly, Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-N.Y., said, “Imagine being so crazed by hatred for Israel as a Jewish state that you make it the subject of your commencement speech at a law school graduation. Anti-Israel derangement syndrome at work.”

The board of trustees and chancellor of the entire CUNY system even condemned the speaker, stating, “This speech is particularly unacceptable at a ceremony celebrating the achievements of a wide diversity of graduates, and hurtful to the entire CUNY community.”

Yet, at the time of writing, the administration of CUNY Law has been silent .

It is disheartening to witness the indoctrination of young minds with radical ideologies that demonize our country and its foundational institutions. Education should be a platform for critical thinking and the exploration of diverse perspectives , not a breeding ground for extremist ideologies .

As conservatives, we must stand up against the suppression of conservative voices and push for a balanced education that promotes patriotism, respect for law enforcement, and appreciation for the sacrifices made by our military. Only then can we ensure that the next generation understands the true greatness of America and works toward its continued prosperity.

COPYRIGHT 2023 CREATORS.COM

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post Law School Commencement Speech Is No Place for Far Left Diatribe  appeared first on The Daily Signal .

Click here to see original article

End American Gerontocracy

President Joe Biden’s viscerally jarring fall on Thursday in Colorado Springs, while on stage dispensing diplomas to new U.S. Air Force Academy graduates, underscores a terrifying reality: The octogenarian denizen of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, palpably in the throes of debilitating mental and physical senescence, is not well.

The sight of the commander in chief physically falling in front of a graduating Air Force Academy class, no less, is outright depressing to active-duty servicemen and telegraphs national weakness to America’s many adversaries abroad.

Make no mistake about it: Joe Biden is an absolutely massive liability as president of the United States, in charge of the nuclear football and primarily responsible for issues of war and peace.

His vice presidential junior sidekick and would-be successor, the cackling nincompoop Kamala Harris, may well be totally insufferable, but this column has argued—and still maintains—that Biden should resign for the good of the country. At a bare minimum, it is foolish and selfish in the extreme for the doddering dolt from Delaware to seek reelection in 2024.

Biden’s Centennial State fall is hardly the only recent example of a high-ranking senior citizen appearing less-than-stellar in the public eye. The 89-year-old Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., whose political career first began in 1970 (one year before Biden’s), recently missed over two months of senatorial work while recovering from a nasty bout of shingles and encephalitis.

When she finally made her way back to the Capitol, Feinstein, in the words of a May 18 New York Times article, “appeared shockingly diminished.” Since returning, the now-wheelchair-bound Feinstein has required additional staff assistance to merely cast her votes and has apparently forgotten she was ever out of commission to begin with: “No, I haven’t been gone,” she told Slate on May 16. Come again?

Overall, an incredible 68% of U.S. senators in the current Congress are aged 60 or older. The single most popular subgroup, at a whopping 34% of the putative “world’s greatest deliberative body,” is the sexagenarians—most of whom are old enough to receive Social Security benefits.

The constitutional minimum age for being a U.S. senator is 30, but the cumulative share of senators in the current Congress under the age of 50 is a paltry 10%. There are three times as many senators in the current Congress aged 70-79 than there are senators aged 30-49. That ought to be alarming—these men and women are charged with decisions pertaining to declaring war and assessing our most sensitive intelligence, among other crucial matters.

As for the U.S. Supreme Court, Amy Coney Barrett is the youngest justice at age 51, and five of the nine black-robed oracles are old enough to potentially receive Social Security benefits.

Nor, of course, is American gerontocracy limited to the political and judicial arenas. As American Affairs Editor Julius Krein wrote in a 2020 essay:

The average ages of university professors and administrators, banking executives and corporate CEOs, and many other leading figures have all been steadily rising for some time. Perhaps Silicon Valley has been so successful precisely because it is the only place in America where people who are not on the cusp of senility can get promoted or raise capital. Conversely, perhaps the pharma lobby is so successful because it is not only the biggest donor but probably the largest vendor to the assisted living facility that is Congress.

Even holding aside the obvious civilizational pitfalls and national security risks of placing issues of war and peace in the hands of so many baby boomers (and even some from the Silent Generation that preceded the boomers), there is a more fundamental problem here that cuts to the very core of the rot now afflicting so many once-great American institutions.

That problem, from higher education to the Fortune 500 boardroom to the political arena, can in one sense be summarized as a failure of long-term vision.

Just as “short-termism” in the boardroom can take over and misdirect the market’s “invisible hand” away from the general welfare of the broader community, so too are politicians incentivized to merely care about their impending short-term election results, rather than leading with any grand vision or presenting any grand strategy.

It is extremely difficult to foresee how this situation might be remedied so long as the elderly generations, which are more wedded to outmoded conventions and definitionally more prone to short-term thinking than the more longer-term-thinking younger generations, remain in power.

As a Millennial conservative commentator myself, I know all too well the dangers of letting the boomer conservatives—or “BoomerCons”—continue leading us astray and repackaging stale 1984 dogma instead of advancing cutting-edge 2023 solutions that actually deal with our present problems.

As America loses its competitive edge in increasingly more areas and as China rises to unprecedented heights in our new 21st-century great power competition, it is imperative that we get younger, scrappier, hungrier men and women in positions of prominence across the countless institutions comprising the nation’s public and civic life.

Private entities should increasingly utilize mandatory retirement ages, and the Constitution should be amended to mandate retirement ages for all constitutional oath-taking actors in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. These are nonpartisan, commonsense steps to help reinvigorate our sclerotic, late-stage republic.

Unfortunately, polling for the 2024 Republican presidential primary is currently dominated by a highly visible boomer. That boomer, in many ways, embodies the follies of his generation.

As Republicans gear up to take on the oldest president in American history next year, perhaps their chances would be buoyed if they were to instead nominate a younger, scrappier, hungrier Gen Xer. Perhaps that Gen X conservative might even be a highly successful governor of one of the nation’s largest states, known for his ruthless competence and broader worldview orientation toward American renewal.

Wouldn’t that be something?

COPYRIGHT 2023 CREATORS.COM

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation. 

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com, and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post End American Gerontocracy appeared first on The Daily Signal .

Click here to see original article

Supreme Court’s ‘Waters of US’ Ruling a Milestone in Curbing EPA’s Unlawful Overreach 

At long last, the nightmare of building a dream house is over for Michael and Chantell Sackett.

The Supreme Court’s unanimous Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency  decision handed down on May 25 marks another important milestone in the court’s continuing effort to correct and rein in the abusive, unlawful overreach of the administrative state.

The decision reaffirms the rule of law and the right of Americans to protect their rights by holding abusive regulators to account in courts of law. 

The EPA informed the Idaho couple in 2007 that the dry lot on which they intended to build contained wetlands, which in this case meant a ditch . That ditch feeds into a non-navigable creek, which feeds into Priest Lake, which is a navigable, intrastate lake.

The EPA used that tenuous string of logic to allege that by backfilling the “wetlands” on their own property with dirt, they had discharged pollutants into “the waters of the United States ” in violation of the Clean Water Act. The EPA threatened the Sacketts with bankrupting fines of $40,000 per day  if they did not abandon their project and fully restore the lot. 

The Clean Water Act authorizes the EPA to regulate only “navigable waters” involved in interstate commerce. Yet in the case of the Sacketts—and in too many other cases—the EPA tried to leverage its statutory authority and extend its Clean Water Act regulation far beyond any reasonable interpretation of the term “navigable waters.” 

In a 2006 decision, Rapanos v. United States, a majority of the court could not agree on how to define the scope of the EPA’s Clean Water Act authority over wetlands. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing alone, opined that the EPA’s authority under the act extends to any land that has a “significant nexus” to a waterway.

Unfortunately for the Sacketts, the EPA seized on that ambiguous test to aggressively expand its Clean Water Act regulation. Fortunately for those Americans plagued by government overreach and overregulation, the Sacketts fought back , all the way to the Supreme Court.  

Ultimately, the court was unanimous in ruling that the EPA had overstepped its Clean Water Act authority in dealing with the Sacketts, yet it was not unanimous on how to define the scope of the EPA’s authority under the act generally. Four justices wrote that the CWA should be interpreted broadly to cover land that is “adjacent” to navigable water, but not necessarily “adjoining” the water so long as it is “close” or “near” to the water.  

Such a vague and expansive formulation would have simply perpetuated the “significant nexus” ambiguity and its license for EPA overreach. Thankfully, a controlling majority of five justices rejected the “significant nexus” test altogether and replaced it with a scope-of-authority test clearly aligned with the text of the Clean Water Act, easier to administer, and much fairer to property owners such as the Sacketts.

The fact that the decision aligns the EPA’s regulatory authority with the text of the Clean Water Act is particularly important because it limits the EPA’s potential for overreach in the future. 

The majority of five justices held that for property to be considered a “wetland” covered by the Clean Water Act, it must “be indistinguishably part of a body of water that itself constitutes ‘waters’ under the CWA.”  

However, we mustn’t lose sight of the sad fact that it took the Sacketts 16 long years to beat back the EPA bureaucrats and secure their right to build the home they wanted on the land they owned. Far too often, when dealing with the administrative state, the process is the punishment. 

Had the Sacketts not been ably represented by public interest attorneys they—like countless other Americans who fall under the threatening gaze of federal bureaucrats—would have been forced to abandon their legitimate project.  

Yes, the Sackett decision represents a significant victory. But the war for the constitutional rule of law will not be won until some future president and Congress take steps to minimize effectively the time and money it now takes to challenge federal agency overreach, steps to ensure that the process is due process, and no longer the punishment for asserting our legitimate rights. 

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post Supreme Court’s ‘Waters of US’ Ruling a Milestone in Curbing EPA’s Unlawful Overreach  appeared first on The Daily Signal .

Click here to see original article

Judge Likens Biden-Big Tech Censorship to Orwell’s ‘1984.’ Admin’s Answers on Free Speech Prove Him Right.

President Joe Biden’s censorship efforts with Big Tech companies have shocked even a federal judge, who asked the administration last week whether the president’s staff had ever read George Orwell’s famous dystopian novel “1984,” because the court case reminded him so much of the censorship in that book.

Judge Terry A. Doughty, chief district judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, asked the question in a hearing May 26 on the ongoing case of Missouri v. Biden, focusing on the administration’s efforts with Big Tech to censor free speech. The administration’s lawyers went on to answer questions about free speech that only cemented the judge’s suspicions.

The transcript won’t be available for a few weeks, but Missouri Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey shared the highlights on Twitter.

“The federal government had a hard time convincing a judge last week that it hasn’t been working with and coercing social media companies to censor free speech,” Bailey wrote.

“The judge asked the feds if they had ever read George Orwell’s ‘1984,’ pointing out the similarities between the case and the book,” he added. Doughty was appointed by former President Donald Trump.

Orwell’s dystopian novel presents an alternate reality, in which a totalitarian government uses constant video surveillance and mind-conditioning to constrict the thoughts of its citizens. Terms from the book such as “Big Brother,” “thoughtcrime,” and “doublethink” have become common parlance in English as they capture the tools that some elites use to enforce ideological orthodoxy and conformity.

The Biden administration has not directly ordered Facebook or Twitter to censor speech on their platforms, but various government agencies have advised the social media companies to watch out for “misinformation” and suggested that certain narratives must be quashed. Big Tech has collaborated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI to enforce the official narratives on the COVID-19 pandemic and other issues in the name of safety under what critics call an illusion of scientific consensus.

Bailey’s free-speech lawsuit has turned up documents in which Facebook admitted to the White House that it suppressed “often true” content regarding COVID-19 vaccines on the platform, because it might make people hesitant to take a vaccine.

In the hearing last week, the judge proceeded to ask the Biden administration a series of hypothetical questions, asking whether the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech applied to people voicing positions that are unpopular with the administration.

“He asked if an American citizen questioning the safety or efficacy of masks or a vaccine was protected under the First Amendment,” Bailey recalled. “The feds’ answer? ‘It COULD be,’ but often won’t be.”

The Missouri attorney general noted that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention limited the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine due to safety concerns, but the federal government encouraged Big Tech companies to censor people expressing concerns about safety.

“The judge also asked Biden’s lawyers if the First Amendment covered Americans’ right to say that Biden is responsible for high gas prices and inflation,” Bailey added. “Their answer? It depends.”

“The judge also asked them if the First Amendment applied to Americans’ right to say that the 2020 election was stolen,” the attorney general wrote. “Their answer? It depends.”

“The judge also pointed out that it seemed to be only conservatives who are targeted for their speech, asking the feds if they could provide one example of a liberal who was censored due to ‘misinformation,’” Bailey wrote. Biden’s lawyers mentioned one liberal who faced censorship—and that person is a political opponent of the president. Bailey did not reveal the person’s identity.

Bailey also noted that the judge asked Biden’s lawyers why he should believe them when they claim the censorship has stopped. Bailey’s office has asked for a preliminary injunction to halt the censorship enterprise.

“This vast censorship enterprise stemming from the Biden White House is absolutely Orwellian,” Madeline Sieren, the attorney general’s spokeswoman, told The Daily Signal in a statement Friday, June 2. “Their answers to the judge’s hypotheticals absolutely underscored the ‘1984’ comparison and proved the judge’s point.”

The White House did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post Judge Likens Biden-Big Tech Censorship to Orwell’s ‘1984.’ Admin’s Answers on Free Speech Prove Him Right. appeared first on The Daily Signal .

Click here to see original article

‘Their Aspiration Is World Domination’: Retired Israeli General Breaks Down the Threat of a Nuclear Iran

ORLANDO, Fla.—Israel recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, and many Jews and Christians see the state’s existence as a fulfillment of biblical prophecy, but a former Israeli general also raised the alarm about the growing threats from Iran and its allies in the East.

“Things have changed dramatically in the last year,” Amir Avivi, a retired brigadier general in the Israeli Defense Forces, told The Daily Signal in an interview at the National Religious Broadcasters Convention last week. “We’ve seen the East moving towards adapting to the sanctions the West is imposing in the last year, especially on Russia and rightly so. But China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, all of these countries are getting closer and closer together. It enables them to overcome sanctions.”

In April, China brokered a deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia , signaling a new balance of power in the Middle East.

“When they look at the West, they see a strong military power, but with zero willingness to use power,” Avivi warned. “When this is the reality, they feel they can pretty much do whatever they want and this is destabilizing the whole globe.”

“We see the Chinese aggression in the Pacific. We see Russians fighting on European soil, and in the Middle East, Iran is getting more and more emboldened, building forces all around Israel,” the retired general added. “They’re building Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza. They’re building Hezbollah in Lebanon. They’re building the militias in Iraq and in Yemen, and trying to create this nuclear umbrella that will enable them basically to take over the whole Middle East.”

“From there, their aspiration is world domination,” he warned. “This is what the Iranians want, and we are seeing lack of leadership on behalf of the U.S. Without the U.S. presence in the Middle East, the Middle East is not stable and the prospects of a large war are growing steadily.”

Avivi, who currently serves as founder and chairman of the Israeli Defense and Security Forum, suggested the U.S. should engage more in the Middle East.

RELATED: Rabbi Explains How Israel Rejected Socialism, Grew More Religious, and Fights Terrorism … and Why It Matters for the US

“The other option is the U.S. stepping forward, building a coalition in the Middle East, posing a credible military threat on Iran, and by doing so, stabilizing the region,” the retired general said. “Bringing peace agreements—because the Saudis are willing to do peace with Israel. They’re willing to expand this peace also to Pakistan and Indonesia and Oman.”

“But they will not go forward with a peace agreement without American commitment to stand strong with Israel and the Sunni world,” Avivi said.

The retired general, who also served as aide-de-camp to the chief of the General Staff of the IDF, said that Israel can defend itself by itself and has extremely strong capabilities, which he cannot reveal.

Avivi also shared the story of how a visit to Jerusalem’s holy sites inspired his men to fight harder on the front lines against Palestinian terrorism.

Rabbi Dov Lipman, a former Knesset member and CEO of Yad L’Olim, also joined the podcast. He spoke about “this incredible miracle called Israel” that he views as the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. His organization has helped over 30,000 Jewish families from over 41 different countries to move to Israel and adjust to life in the Holy Land.

Listen to the podcast below or read the lightly edited transcript:

Tyler O’Neil: This is Tyler O’Neil, managing editor at The Daily Signal. I’m joined by Amir Avivi, a retired brigadier general in the Israeli Defense Forces and founder and chairman of the Israeli Defense and Security Forum. Brigadier General, it’s an honor to speak with you.

Amir Avivi: Thank you very much, Tyler. It’s good to be here.

O’Neil: Awesome. I’d like to start off, you’re focused on telling Americans how important it is for the U.S. to stand with Israel against the growing Iran, China, Russia axis. How would you describe Israel’s strength and the threats that it faces right after its 75th anniversary?

Avivi: I think we are in a very unique time. Things have changed dramatically in the last year. We’ve seen the East moving toward adapting to the sanctions the West is imposing in the last year, especially on Russia, and rightly so.

But China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, all of these countries are getting closer and closer together. It enables them to overcome sanctions. When they look at the West, they see a strong military power, but with zero willingness to use power. When this is the reality, they feel they can pretty much do whatever they want and this is destabilizing the whole globe.

We see the Chinese aggression in the Pacific. We see Russians fighting on European soil, and in the Middle East, Iran is getting more and more emboldened, building forces all around Israel. They’re building Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza. They’re building Hezbollah in Lebanon. They’re building the militias in Iraq and in Yemen, and trying to create this nuclear umbrella that will enable them basically to take over the whole Middle East. From there, their aspiration is world domination. This is what the Iranians want.

And we are seeing lack of leadership on behalf of the U.S. Without the U.S. presence in the Middle East, the Middle East is not stable and the prospects of a large war are growing steadily.

O’Neil: What has Israel been doing to counter these aggressive forces and what should the United States do?

Avivi: Israel is preparing to be able to defend itself by itself. We are building our capabilities for many, many years. I can tell you, as somebody who has been the aide-de-camp of the chief of General Staff, and also the chief auditor of the whole Israeli defense establishment, I remember as a pretty young officer, lieutenant colonel, when I became aide-de-camp of the chief of General Staff, that what amazed me is the ingenuity of the IDF. People cannot even imagine what we are capable of doing. There is really amazing capabilities and we might need to use them pretty soon.

O’Neil: No, that’s shocking and terrifying, but comforting that they have those capabilities. What did your experience in the IDF teach you about the threats that Israel faces?

Avivi: Well, there are many threats, but I think the most important thing that I found out in my 30 years of service is that the greatest power we have, and we have to cultivate, is our ability to stand to our values. It’s all about Judaism and Zionism. National security is first and foremost about national values. If you have the drive, if you have the spirit, that’s the key.

When I was a battalion commander in Operation Defensive Shield, I found myself 10 months fighting with my soldiers day and night, day and night, operating inside Palestinian cities. Fighting fiercely, knowing that if we do one mistake, there will be a major terror attack and many people will get killed.

After 10 months when the soldiers are really tired for this fight, we were told we have three weeks to organize and we’re going back to 10 months more, which is unbelievable.

I took my whole battalion, to talk with them, and I found myself asking them very strange questions talking about Israeli soldiers: “How many of you have ever visited Jerusalem?” I found out that half of my battalion, although they’re Israeli soldiers, have never been in Jerusalem, which was shocking to me. The ones that actually were in Jerusalem, half of them have never been in Temple Mount in the Kotel (the Western Wall).

I had three weeks. One week, it was vacation, one week to organize the equipment, and one week of training. I said to myself, “We’re not going to train. I am taking my whole battalion to Jerusalem.” Indeed, the whole battalion spent the whole week in Jerusalem.

We went to David’s City. We connected back to who we are as Jews who have been living in Jerusalem for more than 3,000 years. We went to the Kotel and to the Old City. We visited the Knesset and also the Supreme Court. On the last day, 800 soldiers sat at the president’s house and talked to the president.

When this battalion came back to combat, it was a completely different battalion. People were full of spirit, strong. They fought as no battalion fought at that time. We managed to foil a 100% of all terror attempts. I didn’t lose even one soldier.

This captured the attention of the chief of staff. He invited me to a meeting and asked me, “What did you do? How come this battalion is performing the way it is?” I told him, “It’s not about what we did, it’s about what Israel did for us. It’s about the connection they got from visiting Jerusalem. It’s about spirit.” Since then, every soldier in the IDF goes to Jerusalem because it’s really all about spirit.

O’Neil: That’s an inspiring story. Would you mention a few of those capabilities you say that Israel has that you hope they’d never have to use? Of course, I understand some of them are state secrets, so whatever you can hint at or speak without endangering anything.

Avivi: Well, I cannot really speak about what are the capabilities because they are secret and have been developed for a long time. But I can say that Israel has a variety of capabilities. We can defend ourselves by ourselves. But we have to understand that if Israel goes to war alone, this will bring regional war, and this regional war will destabilize the whole globe economically. Every single American will be impacted by that.

I say it because I visit Washington, D.C., quite often, and even when I talk to our biggest supporters, they say, “Yeah, you know you Israelis, you do what you need to do. If you need to attack Iran, attack.” They don’t understand the consequences of us attacking alone, but there is another option.

The other option is the U.S. stepping forward, building a coalition in the Middle East, posing a credible military threat on Iran, and by doing so, stabilizing the region. Bringing peace agreements because the Saudis are willing to do peace with Israel. They’re willing to expand this peace also to Pakistan and Indonesia and Daman. But they will not go forward with a peace agreement without American commitment to stand strong with Israel and the Sunni world.

It can go two ways. Either we’re on our way to prosperity, to peace agreements, to building back the American deterrents against China, Russia, and deterring Iran from becoming nuclear, or regional war. We need to choose.

And I think it’s clear not from an Israeli point of view, from an American global point of view, that America must stand strong with Israel and the region. By doing that, this will stabilize not only the Middle East but the whole globe because America will build the deterrence once again.

O’Neil: We saw under President [Donald] Trump the forging of historic pacts in the Abraham Accords with majority-Muslim countries there in the area, even establishing embassies in Jerusalem, like the United States did. But that progress slowed under President [Joe] Biden, if it hasn’t stopped entirely. We begin to hear that Saudi Arabia might make that deal. You’re saying that they are on the cusp if they have the right U.S. leadership?

Avivi: Well, the reason why the region is doing peace with Israel is that they feel Iran is an existential threat for them. So is, by the way, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Sunni extremists—as we saw in Afghanistan—ISIS, al-Qaeda, all these groups are endangering the moderate Sunni regimes. They feel that in order to exist, in order to be able to maintain stability, they need Israel and they need the U.S.

When President Trump said, “I am with you and I am supportive,” this encouraged them to move toward peace agreements. They knew that by joining with Israel, they have American support. Without this American support, it’s very, very hard to expand these peace agreements.

And not only that, it might endanger the existing agreements because when we see Saudis starting to move toward Iran, renewing relations, a deal brokered by China, contemplating maybe to move toward the Chinese and the Russians, this is very, very bad news to the Middle East and to the U.S. dominance in the Middle East, which is crucial in order to maintain stability and prosperity.

O’Neil: We just saw the 75th anniversary of Israel. Is there anything particularly resonant about that for you and about Israel’s situation on the world stage that you would talk about in connection with?

Avivi: For me, as a general that looks to Israel’s national security for generations, I think that after two exiles, after 2,000 years in the diaspora, after persecutions, after the Holocaust, we cannot take for granted our existence.

We need to be proactive. We need to build our capabilities. We need to be able to defend ourselves by ourselves. But more than anything else, we need spirit. We need to build a resilient young generation connected to their roots because it’s all about spirit. This is what enables, really, a nation to thrive.

We are working very hard educating the young generation in high schools and in pre-army programs, reaching to the societies through media and social media, and in this way really building the Israeli society.

Now that we have done it very successfully in Israel with thousands of officials that we deploy, we’re expanding these education programs also to the Jewish community and to the evangelical world. Because I think it’s all about really connecting with leaders and with strong Jews who know exactly who they are and what the purpose of their existence is to promote, really, world peace and what Jews need to do in this world.

O’Neil: Well, thank you so much for joining me, General Avivi.

Avivi: It’s a pleasure. Thank you very much.

Tyler O’Neil: This is Tyler O’Neil. I’m managing editor at The Daily Signal. I’m joined by Rabbi Dov Lipman, a former Knesset member and CEO of Yad L’Olim. It’s a pleasure to speak with you.

Dov Lipman: It’s great to be with you, Tyler.

O’Neil: So, would you first explain, Rabbi Lipman, what Olim is and the whole concept of Aliyah?

Lipman: It’s a great question. There’s an undercurrent of the story of Israel, which no one really talks about very much, and especially not in the faith-based world. We talk about security issues and Iran and terrorism, and those are all obviously important. We talk about diplomacy. But the real story of what’s happening in Israel is the fulfillment of biblical prophecies in front of our eyes and part of that is the in-gathering of the exiles.

Olim is the terminology that’s used for someone who moves to Israel, but in Hebrew it means “those who are moving up,” it’s a spiritual uplifting that’s taking place.

And we’ve seen in 75 years of this incredible miracle called Israel a country that in 1948 had somewhere around 600,000 Jews living there and now you’re talking about over 7 million. In 75 years, a growth exponentially.

And the incredible part is you open up the Bible and you see a description of the Jews being exiled all around the world and persecuted. And then it says, “A time will come when God will gather them from around the world and come back.”

My organization is just in existence for two years and we’ve had over 30,000 families from Jews living in 41 different countries reach out to us and get our assistance to get to Israel and settle successfully in Israel. So there’s a story of biblical proportions that’s taking place, and that’s what I’m blessed to be part of in Yad L’Olim.

O’Neil: So those are just the families that you’ve actually helped, not the ones who might have also reached out and haven’t moved yet?

Lipman: That’s correct. And there’s also people who were able to move with the help of the government and didn’t need [a nongovernmental organization] to assist them with bureaucratic issues. So the numbers are just staggering.

I myself was blessed to—it’s called—“make Aliyah” from the United States in 2004, and I was on a flight with 300 people who said, “Israel’s going to be our home. We’re not running away from anything in America, but running to something in Israel.”

And I’ve been blessed to raise my four children as Israelis in a Jewish state, a son who is a commander in an elite combat unit in the IDF, and by the way, also a pitcher for the Israel baseball team, so we got the American side going as well.

But just amazing things that are happening as you see Jews from around the world saying, “I want to make Israel my home.” And the truth is, that gives more strength to Israel.

As more Jews come and more Jews make Israel their home and we cement the statement that we’re not occupiers, we’re not conquerors, we’re not aggressors, we’re just people who are rightfully taking our birthright in our biblical ancestral homeland, that’s an important message for the world as well.

O’Neil: Yeah, I think that’s key because we hear so often the narrative of the Palestinians, the narrative that there should be two states, all of this, these claims. How does biblical prophecy equip us to respond to those claims?

Lipman: It’s a fantastic question, and in the question, you actually gave the answer. What I mean by that is, I wrote a book called “Fact Over Fiction: A Challenge to Barack Obama’s History of Israel” because I read Chapter 25 of his memoirs, which is all about Israel, and literally sentence after sentence was a revisionist history that’s just not based on the reality and it’s portrayed as if we’re some people who just woke up one morning and decided, “Yeah, there might be Arabs living in Palestine, we want to be there as well.”

The term Palestine comes from a time when the Romans were trying to eradicate a Jewish presence in the land. That’s where the term comes from. We returned it to Palestine for hundreds of years. There were no nation called the Palestinians. That didn’t exist there.

But if you read the Bible and you understand that this is a land that God has given to the Jewish people—but more than that, we were there, we lived there. You can feel it in the soil, you can tour the land. And I invite Christians from all around the world to come and see it themselves and see your own history in that land. That is the answer to this revisionist history. It’s just opening up your eyes.

And I want to tell you, I often host delegations in Israel and I don’t have to say a word. They can just travel around and they see the Jewish history there. They can go to King David’s palace from thousands of years ago and they say, “Wait a minute, the Jews were here. You can’t be occupying your own land.”

Judea and Samaria, which the world calls the West Bank, which they want us to give to the Palestinians, that was the biblical heartland, every story in the Bible that took place there. So when you go there and you see it with your own eyes, it gives you your own answer. These are not occupiers.

And the second part is studying the history.

How many times have we as peace-loving people made offers to our Arab neighbors and even our Palestinian neighbors? And not only are they rejected, usually it leads to greater terrorism, even more attacks against us. So our answer to that is we’ll continue making it our home, we are going to live in this land.

Those who are listening can go to yadlolim.org and literally see the story of the Jewish people returning to their homeland. That is our response. We are not going to cower to terrorism. We’re not going to give in to anybody. We actually build more. You want to hurt us.

The Bible talks about, at the time of Egypt, the more Pharaoh persecuted the Jewish people, the more they increased and multiplied. That’s what we’re doing as well.

And therefore our response—and people of faith, first of all, prayer, pray for us. We need the prayers. We all should pray for each other, but also to be supportive of this effort and be partners with us in bringing the Jewish people home and cementing our stake in our biblical and ancestral homeland.

O’Neil: So how would you describe the movement of the modern state of Israel compared to the return of the exiles under the Persian Empire? It’s fascinating because you had the 70 years of exile and then now you have 2,000 years.

Lipman: It’s an excellent question. The truth is, it’s interesting that both of those exiles come to an end with the permission of kings of the world, so to speak, in the times of Persia, certainly with Cyrus and others that were involved in that. And here we have the United Nations that somehow miraculously, on Nov. 29, 1947, says, “The Jews have a right to have a peace of the land of Israel” and gave us permission, so to speak, to do so.

But the biggest difference is what was formed when those people came back. In the time of the first return, there were small numbers that came back. The Bible even talks about 40 families or so that decided—most of the people were very comfortable in Babylonia and the Persian Empire and they stayed there.

And what we’re seeing here is an awakening of Jews from every single continent. We have every single continent, like I said, 41 different countries, saying, “It’s time to go back home.” And that is the significant change.

So the kingdom, so to speak, that we’re building in Israel today, which has literally, in seven decades, become a world power in security and in intelligence and in technology and the good that we bring to the world, I think that’s a result of the awakening of the Jews around the world to say, “It’s time for us to go back to the land,” which didn’t happen the previous time. And that’s why we feel so confident with God’s help that this effort will not only last 75, 100 years, but this is going to be something which is there forever.

O’Neil: And which prophecies do you point to that are being fulfilled by the modern state of Israel?

Lipman: So, I’m just going to read one to you straight out because the words are just so obvious. Isaiah, Chapter 11, Verse 12, “He will raise a banner to the nations, gather the exiles of Israel; he will assemble the scattered people of Judah from the four quarters of the earth.”

That’s a literal description of what you can see happening at Ben Gurion Airport in Israel every single day as flights come in and you’ll see people get off the plane and kiss the ground and give thanks to God that after 2,000 years of persecution, literally as Isaiah says it, we will come back.

But you also have the prophecies of the flourishing of the land of Israel taking place. You can open up Amos Chapter 9 where he says, “A day will come when the fruits will grow from the trees, and you’ll see vineyards flowing with wine.” And for 2,000 years, people of faith read that and must have scratched their heads because it was a wasteland.

Mark Twain visited Israel in 1867 and said, “Palestine sits in ashes and sackcloth because there was nothing growing there,” as the Bible says what happened. And then the 20th century comes and a bunch of refugees return from all around the world and everything that’s growing there today, this lush land of fruits and flowers and trees, that’s fulfillment of biblical prophecy as well.

So we are so blessed to live in a time where we can open up the Bible and not just say, “I believe in God and his word,” but I can actually see it happening and it’s happening in the land of Israel on an hourly basis.

O’Neil: Well, it’s interesting because those prophets wrote before the Babylonian captivity and the Jews did have the smaller return under Cyrus. But you’re saying that those prophecies didn’t fully get fulfilled until now.

Lipman: Correct. That’s what we’re saying. There’s no doubt about it that they had an intention of a time when 7 million Jews in the land of Israel, who could have imagined such a thing?

And I’m sitting here as the grandson of a Holocaust survivor who survived Auschwitz-Birkenau, and I mean, she survived that hell. And 70 years later, she was sitting in my Knesset office with a grandson as a member of the Israeli Knesset. And she said, “This doesn’t make any sense. Jewish state, Israel, Jewish capital, Jerusalem, Jewish Parliament, the Knesset, my grandson is a member.” And she’s right, it doesn’t make any sense because it’s God’s work happening in front of our eyes.

So yes, our understanding is that those prophecies are really taking hold today and we almost see word-by-word how they’re being fulfilled.

O’Neil: And we’ve seen a lot of turmoil in Israel, not just countries around saber-rattling, but also huge protests against [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s attempt to restructure the judicial system, which appears not to have any checks and balances. But how do you see that movement and the future of Israel at this 75th anniversary?

Lipman: When I travel around, a lot of people say to me, “Oh my goodness, Israel’s democracy is falling apart.” And I say, “I think it’s just the opposite.”

In November, we had a democratically-elected government. There are people who are bothered by some of the decisions about the government. They are protesting in the streets and they’re, for the most part, very peaceful demonstrations. And that led to some discussion of compromise. That’s a democratic process that’s playing out in front of our eyes.

So I was never in this doomsday place of, “Oh my goodness, it’s falling apart.” I think that this is the way democracy works. And there have been times that the opposite—there have been times that the Left has been in power and the Right went to the streets and demonstrated and had some success, had some failures. That’s part of the democratic process.

So when I look at what’s happening in Israel, I actually see a vibrant democracy, which follows the rule of law. We have peaceful transfer of power from election to election, and even those who are against Netanyahu, but we don’t see armed resistance in the street. They’re using democratic tools at their disposal to try to bring down a government and that’s allowed in our system.

At 75 years, I see an Israel that is so strong and so vibrant and contributing so much to the world. And I do believe that this discussion that we’re having in Israel right now about the courts and oversight, and we don’t have a constitution, maybe this is forcing that issue and this is a good time for that to happen.

We haven’t had it for 75 years and maybe the time has come for all the powers that be to sit together and try to figure out, “OK, what do we want the next 75 years to look like? What is the relationship between religion and state in a Jewish and democratic state?”

That’s complicated. This is really difficult to work out, but I feel like this controversy and this internal conflict is forcing us to talk about those issues even more. And that’s good for a country. That’s a vibrancy of a country that we can have that process.

So I look forward to an incredible 75 years to come.

I’m blessed now to see little Israeli grandchildren being born and going to play their role in the continuation of this story. And as a Jewish person, but as a person of faith, and that’s why I’m here with my Christian brothers and sisters as well, we share in this story, we share in the belief of the righteousness of Israel and that it is the homeland for the Jewish people.

And as long as we continue working together on that front and fighting against all the anti-Israel forces in the world who are sharing false narratives and revisionist history, and really targeting those who don’t deserve to be targeted at all, if we stick together through prayer and through support and work together, I think that Israel will just continue to get stronger and stronger, and the U.S.-Israel relationship will continue, hopefully, to light up the world as well.

O’Neil: Thank you so much, rabbi, for joining me. And where can people follow your important organization and help the work of helping the Olim?

Lipman: Thank you so much. So, they can go to yadlolim.org . They can see all the information there about the organization.

We actually invite Christians to partner with us in this effort. We’re doing the work of God by bringing Jews home to Israel, and the opportunity is there to partner with us. You can reach out to me via the website or my own personal email, dov@yadlolim.org, and we would welcome that partnership.

I also am willing to travel to churches and to people of faith around the world and share the tidings of the prophecies that are coming true in Israel. People are always inspired by that and you’re welcome to reach out to me via the website for that as well.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

The post ‘Their Aspiration Is World Domination’: Retired Israeli General Breaks Down the Threat of a Nuclear Iran appeared first on The Daily Signal .

Click here to see original article