The Israeli army attacked two Syrian military targets on the Golan Heights after stray Syrian fire damaged the security fence along the demarcation line, a spokeswoman said Monday.
"In response to errant fire yesterday from Syria that hit the border with Israel, damaging the security fence, the IDF (Israeli Defence Forces) responded and targeted two Syrian military targets in the central Golan Heights," an Israeli military spokeswoman told AFP.
While Israel has sought to avoid being dragged into the Syrian civil war, it has attacked Syrian military targets when fire from the conflict spills over into its territory.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also acknowledged in April that Israel had attacked dozens of convoys transporting weapons in Syria destined for its enemy Hezbollah.
Israel seized 1,200 square kilometres (460 square miles) of the Golan Heights from Syria in the Six-Day War of 1967 and later annexed it in a move never recognised by the international community.
Riyadh (AFP) - Three suicide bombings have struck across Saudi Arabia in a single day, including a shocking attack at Islam's second holiest site, the Prophet's Mosque in Medina, where four security guards were killed.
Monday's attacks on Islam's spiritual home came as Muslims prepare for the feast this week marking the end of the holy fasting month Ramadan.
There were no claims of responsiblity, but the Islamic State group had urged its supporters to carry out attacks during the holy month and has claimed or been blamed for a wave of Ramadan shootings and bombings including in Orlando, Bangladesh, Istanbul and Baghdad.
The suicide bombing in Medina came during sunset prayers at the Prophet's Mosque -- where Islam's Prophet Mohammed is buried and which attracts millions of pilgrims each year.
The Saudi interior ministry said in a statement that security forces became suspicious of a man who was heading for the Prophet's Mosque through a parking lot.
"As they tried to stop him, he blew himself up with an explosive belt causing his death and the death of four security personnel," the statement said, adding that five others were injured.
The targeting of Medina caused widespread outrage.
Cairo-based Al-Azhar, the highest authority in Sunni Islam, condemned the attacks and stressed "the sanctity of the houses of God, especially the Prophet's Mosque."
Saudi Arabia's supreme council of clerics said the attacks "prove that those renegades... have violated everything that is sacred."
The head of Saudi Arabia's Shura Council, the kingdom's main advisory body, said the attack was "unprecedented".
"This crime, which causes goosebumps, could not have been perpetrated by someone who had an atom of belief in his heart,” Abdullah al-Sheikh said.
Iran, the main Shiite power, also condemned the bombings and called for Muslim unity against extremists.
- 'No more red lines' -
"There are no more red lines left for terrorists to cross. Sunnis, Shiites will both remain victims unless we stand united as one," Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Twitter.
IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has called for attacks on Saudi Arabia, which is taking part in the US-led coalition bombing the jihadists in Syria and Iraq.
The group also considers Shiites to be heretics.
An aspect of the kudzu-like expansion of Sharia is the takeover by Muslims of prayer rooms in international airports.
Here in Hong Kong, a prayer room, officially nondenominational, is located in Terminal 1 of the Hong Kong airport, and another is located in Terminal 2. Each “non-denominational” prayer room supports Mohammedism, to the detriment of all other religions.
The Terminal 1 prayer room has an Islam-required washup area. It is a permanent installation. There is a similar permanent installation in Terminal 2.
Also, each prayer room has an indicator of the way that Muslims are to face for prayers. The indicator is permanent. In Terminal 1, the indicator is etched into the ceiling.
There is an accompanying square, etched into the floor. The square, which is permanent, is of the right size for the side-by-side placement of two prayer rugs.
Further, each prayer room has cubbies for storage of religious articles. Only Muslim prayer rugs were in cubbies. No religious articles of any other religion.
I observed, at times, Muslim men at prayer. Only men.
Christians are shut out of the prayer rooms in the Hong Kong airport. No prayer room has a cross or a crucifix, etched or otherwise, permanent or temporary. No prayer room has a vestry. There is neither tabernacle nor aumbry.
A Muslim murder spree of airport passengers would be ignited, were consecrated wine stored in a cubby.
Jews are shut out of the prayer rooms as well. No prayer room has a mezuzah. No prayer room has a lectern for resting a siddur, and no prayer room has an ark. There is no mizrach (indicator of the direction to face for prayers).
Buddhists are shut out of the prayer rooms. No prayer room has a niche wherein a statue of the Buddha can be placed for veneration. No prayer room has shelving, whereon offerings of incense sticks, candles, fruit, and flowers can be displayed.
There are mosquelike prayer rooms in six American airports. In the seventh American airport, there is more than a prayer room. Kennedy Airport in New York City has a mosque.
The Time article has a photograph of the interior of the Kennedy Airport mosque. The photograph shows men at prayer. Only men.
The imam of the mosque was quoted. “It’s the only mosque of its kind in the country… It’s its own mosque, not just a room, which is what most airport mosques are… We are our own place, we have our own services, we are our own community within the chapels here. It’s very different from anything in America.”
Very different, but not for long. Within a decade, mosques will be standard facilities in all major American airports. The portent is Denver Airport. A description of its two prayer rooms: “One room is for Muslims and the other for Christians and Jews.” Muslims will be favored with a large space. Everyone else will be squeezed indiscriminately into a small space.
The dust of conflict has not yet settled and surely it will take some time for it to settle, for the simple reason that many people had not even been aware that we as a nation no longer ruled ourselves. We had our own Parliament – of course we ruled ourselves. Alas, that simply was not true. We were under the dominion of a foreign body called the EU, whose laws pre-empted our laws, whose Courts were superior to our Courts.
It all happened by stealth, by bits and pieces, by treaties like Maastricht, so that the man-in-the-street hardly noticed that his liberties were being eroded piece by piece. Regulations appeared from Brussels and suddenly they were law. Companies were bound down with useless and time-consuming red tape, and there was no recourse. There was nobody to appeal to. We were under the dominion of a body that could simply demand from us any amount of money that they chose.
Not what we as a nation chose, but what Herr Juncker and his 27 Commissars chose. It is useless for the Remainders to argue that it was a lie to say that we were and are presently paying into the EU some £350 million a week, since we get some of it back as a rebate, since these figures can clearly be looked up on the Internet.
Let us be clear, then. We are taxed, by our own government, we are taxed by our local authority, and in addition we have given a blank cheque to the EU to tax us for whatever they deem to be a budget to support their overweening bureaucracy. Bit by bit our liberties were taken away.
Some people now argue that the Referendum was unfair. While over 17 million voted to leave the EU, some 15 million voted to remain. So the Remain camp feels deprived. However let us imagine what the result would have been if the Referendum question had been worded differently.
Do you wish to be governed by Brussels/Strasbourg?
Or, do you wish to be governed by Parliament at Westminster?
Had the question been phrased in this manner, can anyone doubt that the vote for self-governance would have been overwhelming? Could any warm-blooded Englishman or Scotsman, for that matter, have ever voted to be ruled by a foreign entity, however benign it may have seemed? Of course not! The vote would have been 85% to 15%, which is why the Independents have to make clear their case, even though they have won. For it is imperative that the British people understand just what they have achieved and let it not slip from their hands through ignorance of the realities.
The question is ‘Does our Parliament decide on the question of immigration or does the EU? Does our government, however bad or good, govern our country or have we surrendered to the EU?’
That is the crux. We are either a puppet State with a puppet Prime Minister and a puppet Parliament or we are a Sovereign State under the Crown. There are arguments both ways, but one way is treason.
Philly-area campgrounds overflowing with reservations by ‘Occupy DNC’ Bernie supporters planning demonstrations at Democrats’ convention