Mortor Shells Over Golan Heights: Accident Or Border Threat? Thousands Protest TTIP In Germany, Tensions Rising Against Immigration, The Madness Of Putin-Bashing

Analysis: Mortar shells over the Golan Heights, accident or border threat?

Regardless of who was behind the shells intercepted yesterday, official Israeli policy is to hold the Assad regime responsible for its territory and enforce its sovereignty.

For the first time since 2011, when the Iron Dome anti-rocket defense system became operational, it succeeded in intercepting two long-distance mortar shells over the Golan Heights on Saturday afternoon. Until now, all its interceptions were on the southern front – rockets fired from the Gaza Strip and Sinai.

According to the IDF, the two rockets launched from Syria are considered “spillover” from the fierce battles between Assad’s army and the rebel groups not far from the Israeli border. The IDF estimates that it wasn’t intentional fire, but according to its policy intends to retaliate.

Regardless of who was behind the shells intercepted yesterday, official Israeli policy is to hold the Assad regime responsible for its territory and enforce its sovereignty.

What really worries Israel, more than the random shelling from Syria, is the intensity of these events, as it was the sixth incident of this kind in the past two weeks. In every instance, Israel was forced to retaliate by artillery or fighter planes against Assad’s forces, which are stationed near the border.

In one rare and unexpected case, the Syrian army fired two missiles at Israeli planes and missed. This chain of incidents lends to the concern that maybe the “unintentional” fire is actually intentional, with the ultimate goal of changing the rules of the game between Israel and the regime. So far, except for the aforementioned incident, the Syrian army has never responded to Israeli retaliatory attacks.

Israel had previously sent strong warnings, via the coordination channels with Russia, that it won’t tolerate any change in the border equation.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday and asked him to make Israel’s feelings clear to Assad.

Thousands defy rain to join anti-TTIP and anti-CETA rallies in Germany

Tens of thousands of protesters rallied in Germany on Saturday to raise their voices against pending free trade deals the EU wants to seal with the US and Canada.

The demonstrations in seven major German cities attracted at least 100,000 protesters, Deutsche Welle reported, citing the German police. 40,000 people braved heavy rain to march through the streets of the German capital. In Hamburg, 30,000 showed up for the protest, while Cologne saw 18,000 demonstrators. Rallies also took place in Frankfurt, Leipzig, Munich, and Stuttgart.

The protest was organized by various groups who see the two major free trade deals, which the European Union is expected to sign with the US and Canada, as a threat. Critics says the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) benefit big corporations and undermine national governments’ ability to protect their citizens by enforcing environmental standards, safety requirements, and other rules.

Tensions Rising in Germany

Germany is blowing up again over migration. The Saxon town of Bautzen has, like dozens of similar places across Germany, a barracks for some of the million or two Middle Eastern migrants who have been streaming across the Mediterranean for the past year-and-a-half. People in Bautzen aren't used to foreigners, and now groups of young men have taken to congregating in city's central square, the Kornmarkt. The migrants say they come there for the free internet. This upsets the locals, 80 of whom waged a pitched battle against 20 teenage migrants on Wednesday evening. Alcohol was involved on both sides. 

To judge from the video at FAZ.com, accounts differ on who is to blame. The Germans say that the young migrants (whom they refer to as UMAs, the German acronym for unaccompanied minors seeking asylum) are harassing women and smashing things. The UMAs, in turn, say the locals (whom they refer to as "Nazis") accost them every day with shouts of "Foreigners out!"

The confrontations take place against the background of a more general society-wide anger in Germany. Last Saturday, Bautzen's right-wingers and left-wingers confronted each other on the streets, rather as they did a century ago in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution and Germany's defeat in World War I. On Thursday night, following the fights, 350 people, most of them natives, were on the streets again. A cordon of police was required to separate the pro-immigrant and anti-immigrant sides—again, much as they once tried to separate the Communists and anti-Communists. More protests are planned for this weekend.

The Existential Madness Of Putin-Bashing

Official Washington loves its Putin-bashing but demonizing the Russian leader stops a rational debate about U.S.-Russia relations and pushes the two nuclear powers toward an existential brink.

Arguably, the nuttiest neoconservative idea – among a long list of nutty ideas – has been to destabilize nuclear-armed Russia by weakening its economy, isolating it from Europe, pushing NATO up to its borders, demonizing its leadership, and sponsoring anti-government political activists inside Russia to promote “regime change.”

This breathtakingly dangerous strategy has been formulated and implemented with little serious debate inside the United States as the major mainstream news media and the neocons’ liberal-interventionist sidekicks have fallen in line much as they did during the run-up to the disastrous invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Except with Russia, the risks are even greater – conceivably, a nuclear war that could exterminate life on the planet. Yet,despite those stakes, there has been a cavalier – even goofy – attitude in the U.S. political/media mainstream about undertaking this new “regime change” project aimed at Moscow.

Official Washington can’t get enough of demonizing Putin. A year ago, Obama’s White House – presumably to show how much the President disdains Putin, too – made fun of how Putin sits with his legs apart.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest cited a photo of the Russian president sitting next to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “President Putin was striking a now-familiar pose of less-than-perfect posture and unbuttoned jacket and, you know, knees spread far apart to convey a particular image,” Earnest said, while ignoring the fact that Netanyahu was sitting with his legs wide apart, too.

Amid this anything-goes Putin-bashing, The New York Times, The Washington Post and now Hillary Clinton’s campaign have escalated their anti-Putin rhetoric, especially since Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has offered some praise of Putin as a “strong” leader.

Despite the barrage of cheap insults emanating from U.S. political and media circles, Putin has remained remarkably cool-headed, refusing the react in kind. Oddly, as much as the American political/media establishment treats Putin as a madman, Official Washington actually counts on his even-temper to avoid a genuine existential crisis for the world.

If Putin were what the U.S. mainstream media and politicians describe – a dangerous lunatic – the endless baiting of Putin would be even more irresponsible. Yet, even with many people privately realizing that Putin is a much more calculating leader than their negative propaganda makes him out to be, there still could be a limit to Putin’s patience.

Or the neocons and liberal hawks might succeed in provoking a violent uprising in Moscow that ousts Putin. However, if that were to happen, the odds – as even Soros acknowledges – might favor a Russian nationalist coming out on top and thus in control of the nuclear codes.

In many ways, it’s not Putin who should worry Americans but the guy that might follow Putin.

Pipe bomb detonates along route of 5km US Marines charity race in New Jersey

Like Hillary, The MSM Is on Life Support

How About Presenting The Facts & Letting Voters Decide Who's "Fit To Serve"?