הפייק שנקרא ״האזהרה המצרית״

אחת ולתמיד, כי זו שאלה ששואלים אותי כל הזמן. אני מתכוון להצביע בבחירות הקרובות למפלגת הציבור החרדי. ולא, לא מעניין אותי כל הדיבורים על אחוז החסימה וגם לא הסיפורים על שריפת קולות לגוש. לגוש הזה היו מספיק הזדמנויות להוריד את אחוז החסימה, אז מי שכל כך מודאג משריפת קולות מוזמן ללכת להתלונן לחברי הכנסת של הגוש ולא אליי. אני מצביע למה שאני חושב שחשוב לי, למדינה ולעם ישראל. ואני חושב שהעתיד של החברה החרדית והיחסים שלה עם המדינה חשובים הרבה יותר מעוד מנדט או שניים לגוש הימין. אותו גוש שנתן לש"ס ויהדות התורה צ'ק פתוח לעשות מה שבא להן. אני מאוד רוצה שהם יעברו, אני חושב שיש לזה סיכוי. אבל גם אם בסוף זה לא יקרה, אני עדיין חושב שזו הצבעה חשובה מאוד. חשוב ששס וג' יבינו שתם הטקס. החגיגה נגמרה.

Al Qaeda calls for copycats to target US citizens on planes while praising Dubai flight hijacker: America will end' trib.al/U6wSAjR

The decline in Israel's standing in the United States -- in both parties, across all demographics -- is undeniable, as this post shows. And given many events of the past three years -- far too many civilian casualties in Gaza, even as Israel fought a necessary war against Hamas after 10/7; multiple conflicts on multiple fronts, without any prospect of an endgame; an unpopular and unsuccessful war with Iran that Israel advocated for -- it's hardly surprising. If Israelis care about their country's standing in the United States, and how that affects their national security, they may want to internalize this fact: There is no way to reverse this decline without a change of leadership in Israel. Israelis will decide who they choose to vote for, and on what basis. Americans have no say in that decision. But that is a fact they may want to keep in mind as they head to the polls on October 27. Netanyahu is simply too connected to all the pain points in this relationship to be part of reversing this dynamic. Whether it is the fight with Obama over the Iran nuclear deal in 2015, or the seeming disregard for civilian casualties in Gaza, or the current misguided Iran war, or the wave of Jewish terror against Palestinian civilians in the West Bank that his government, with its extremist ministers, refuses to shut down, he is associated with all of it. Here's something that those who care about a positive US-Israel relationship need to understand: It's not healthy for the prime minister of Israel to be a main character in American politics. Netanyahu is so present in our politics, in our media, in our social media feeds, in our water cooler conversations that it keeps these issues burning at absurd levels of attention. Israel-Palestine is an important issue. It, and the U.S. role and policy in the issue, deserve to be debated. But it has come to dominate political discourse in the United States at absurd levels. Different Israeli leadership is one step that would help return the issue to its normal proportions in American politics -- an important issue, about which some people feel passionately, but about which the majority may hold views (often negative views), but don't necessarily define their politics around it. And it would help keep the debate centered on how we work with a partner whose cooperation we benefit from even as we sometimes disagree, and on how to reach outcomes in which both Israelis and Palestinians enjoy security, dignity, and self-determination in their own states, instead of where some are trying to pull it -- should the United States adopt a policy of opposing the existence of Israel as a Jewish state at all. For the purposes of stabilizing the US-Israel relationship, the best thing about a new government in Israel is that 95+% of the American people would have no idea of the name of the prime minister of Israel. Much healthier, and a much better environment for both better foreign policy outcomes and a better U.S. political debate. An opposition victory in Israel would not solve everything, not by a long shot. I'd expect some important positive changes: a serious law-enforcement effort to shut down extremist Jewish violence in the West Bank; more efforts to cooperate with, rather than weaken, the Palestinian Authority; more serious efforts to improve humanitarian conditions in Gaza; reduced expansion of Israeli settlements; a greater chance of an Israel-Syria security agreement; and a better attitude toward implementing Trump's Gaza plan, which calls for disarming Hamas, full withdrawal of Israeli forces, no displacement of the Palestinian population, extensive reconstruction, and establishing a credible pathway to a Palestinian state. But there would still be important points of difference: no Israeli government will endorse a Palestinian state at this point; removing settlements will not happen in an early phase; Israel will still have a post-10/7 mindset of acting beyond its borders to preempt threats before they materialize, including by seeking to disarm Hezbollah in Lebanon if the Lebanese government cannot do it; escalations with Iran will remain possible. These can all continue cause tension and disapproval by many Americans (even as the reality of enemies and terrorist organizations still sworn to Israel's destruction should not be ignored). Opposition to military aid to Israel, which is now baked in and on its way to becoming policy, will not change. But when you are in a hole, the first rule is to stop digging. Removing Netanyahu from the stage, along with the extremists in his supporting cast, Ben Gvir and Smotrich, is the "stop digging" phase. There will still be much work to do to improve conditions on the ground in the region, seek adjustments to Israeli policy, work to ensure Palestinians and Arab states are doing their part, and stabilize the US-Israel relationship so it is a source of mutual benefit, not a constant cause of discord. Changing the Israeli leadership is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to even begin this process. Something for Israelis to bear in mind, if it is important to them.

When the US VP praises Iran's moderate leadership but attacks Israel's extremism, you know we have a problem

Antisemitism.