Breaking: Houthi Drone Hits Israel’s Eilat Airport
Drone struck the arrivals hall of Eilat’s Ramon Airport, at least five people reported injured.
Israel’s Ramon Airport has been struck by a drone launched by Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi terrorist group, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) confirmed Sunday afternoon.
The drone hit the arrivals hall at Ramon Airport near the southern Israeli city of Eilat, injuring several people. “A drone launched by Iran-backed Houthi rebels from Yemen struck the arrivals hall of Ramon International Airport near Eilat, forcing the closure of Israeli airspace and halting all flights in and out of the airport. Military and civil emergency teams confirmed the disruption and said investigations are underway,” Tel Aviv-based ILTV reported on its Telegram channel.
The Houthis launched three explosive drones at Israel. One struck the passenger terminal at Ramon Airport, causing damage.
A man in his 50s was wounded by shrapnel, while several others suffered acute anxiety.
Where is the UN’s call for peace? Or does that not apply to Jews? pic.twitter.com/p1ezzxxLRh
— Hen Mazzig (@HenMazzig) September 7, 2025
The Houthis fired multiple drones towards Israel. “A short while ago, an additional UAV that was launched from Yemen fell in the Ramon Airport area,” the IDF said in a statement Sunday afternoon.
Earlier, the IDF announced that it had “intercepted three UAVs that made their way from Yemen, adding that “[t]wo aerial vehicles were intercepted prior to crossing into Israeli territory.”
❗️ A Houthi suicide drone from Yemen just hit the Ramon Airport terminal building in Israel.
This is the airport used to evacuate sick Gazans for treatment abroad. pic.twitter.com/TUYZX0Bct4
— Eylon Levy (@EylonALevy) September 7, 2025
Israel’s Ynetnews placed the number of people injured in the strike at five:
Two Ramon Airport employees, a man about 63 years old and a woman about 52 years old, were lightly injured from the UAV strike at the airport. In addition, a 28-year-old man, a 24-year-old woman and a 63-year-old man were also lightly injured. Three others were diagnosed as suffering from anxiety. MDA teams evacuated them to Yoseftal Hospital in Eilat.
Ramon Airport has reopened following the Houthi drone attack, the Israeli Airport Authority says.
— Emanuel (Mannie) Fabian (@manniefabian) September 7, 2025
The airport resumed operations shortly after the strike, Reuters reported:
Israel’s Ramon Airport near the southern city of Eilat resumed operations after being briefly shut on Sunday when a drone launched from Yemen struck the arrivals hall, Israel’s Airports Authority said.
Two people were injured by shrapnel, the national ambulance service said.
“Following the completion of all safety and security checks, compliance with international civil aviation standards, and receipt of final approval from the Air Force – Ramon Airport has now been reopened for full operations, for both departures and arrivals,” the authority said in a statement.
The Houthis, Iranian proxy Islamic terror group, declared war on Israel in November 2023, a month after Hamas’s October 7 massacre. Besides trying to impose a maritime blockade on Israel in the Red Sea, they have fired hundreds of missiles and drones at the Jewish State.
The IDF responded to Houthi terror with retaliatory strikes, eliminating several key terrorists and regime operatives.
UPDATE: Two people — a 63-year-old man and a 52-year-old woman — were lightly injured after a Houthi drone struck Ramon Airport.
Both are receiving treatment and have been taken to hospital. pic.twitter.com/n5wThCrnx3
— Hen Mazzig (@HenMazzig) September 7, 2025
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
It’s more likely to seem like fair retaliation than an outrage. Think of it a more like a war and less like oppression and you’ll do better in the publicity market.
Let others do their own thinking, please, rather than telling them what to think, especially when it’s based on something removed from any reality. Sick to think that publicity is the driver of things.
How are things going on campus? The young listen to both sides and then pick a side.
Both sides presented on campus? Not on this planet. Professors are more the problem than how Israel presents itself. Pretty easy stuff for most to understand.
They hear your side. They reject it. You’re not being oppressed. They could understand self defense if you tried it, but they can’t understand you being oppressed.
Last comment. They do not hear both sides and your ideas are laughable. It’s not about oppression or the other silly, bigoted stuff you tell people they must think. You’re the one playing outside the ballpark and it’s sad to watch as you persist despite the feedback.
Yes, well thank you for giving me an opportunity to rephrase what must have been badly put and so misunderstood. Disagreement is a compositional resource.
“The young listen to both sides and then pick a side.”
Risible.
How ignorant can you possibly be? There are NEVER 2 sides presented on campus. Their peer group in RL and online is overwhelmingly pro-Pali and anti-Jew.
Did you say ‘yuths’ “listen to both side?” lolololol
Pull this leg and it plays the “Black National Anthem.”
You’re at the wrong place.
You need to go and post your comments at HouthiInsurrection.com.
I’m giving advice to Israel’s side not the idiot opposition. Use the right arguments not the wrong ones.
The advice is ridiculous and removed from reality. It has no value other than than ego inflation, or so it seems. Write to the IDF, rather than telling people what to think.
The Houthis want to provoke Israeli retaliation because they win the rhetorical battle when they’re attacked. It’s the genocide taunt again, invalidating Israel’s favorite Holocaust card again.
Stop depending on the Holocaust card and their plan won’t work. They get no advantage out of being attacked if Israel just frames it as self defense in a war and is otherwise at pains to be the good guy.
Yeah, it’s just for rhetoric’s sake. Can one present a more foolish notion?
No one played a Holocaust card here, antisemite! A antisemite playing the fool.
So not your last comment. Finding antisemitism everywhere is the Holocaust card.
“The Houthis want to provoke Israeli retaliation because they win the rhetorical battle when they’re attacked. It’s the genocide taunt again, invalidating Israel’s favorite Holocaust card again.”
Autistic.
“Finding antisemitism everywhere”
No, with people playing Holocaust card games, as here.
I dislike saying this but you’re feeding a mentally ill troll; I would preferably just ignore it (referring to the individual)
Your reality check bounced some time ago.
It doesn’t matter one whit how careful Israel is.
Hamas locates a weapons repository in an apartment building. Israel hits the roof with non-detonating missiles to warn the inhabitants to get out, accepting that the Hamas fighters and one load of the most useful weaponry will get out in order to try to save the people. Hamas gets out and barricades the door behind them. The second set of missiles destroy the apartment building.
The media, the Arabs-on-the-street (give them credit, the Arab governments have quietly learned better), the Europeans, and now the European governments all blame Israel.
So forget it. Do what’s tactically sound and forget appearances. Civilian casualties are going to be spun against Israel no matter how necessary the attack was, no matter how hard Israel tried to avoid civilian casualties, and no matter how actively Israel’s enemies forced the civilian casualties to happen.
I think you’re agreeing with me. Point out the good in Israel. Mention that there’s nothing good to be said about Palestinians. Antisemitism is legal and defeated by good arguments, not by whining about antisemitism.
Whining about antisemitism is an internal move to keep up alienation and keep down any desire to assimilate. It doesn’t work externally.
Now there’s some words NEVER used to explain anything the Jews do 🤔
Show me in the article where the Israelis claimed the “oppression” mantle for this attack.
While you seem to feel the need to keep beating the “oppression” drum, the Israelis are undoubtedly readying a strike of their own.
The Israelis have been treating the Houthi attacks like they’re in a war.
Seems you may have missed that.
Israel by and large does the right thing. Indeed they treat sick Palestinians in their hospitals, ship in food, etc. It’s commanded by the religion. The public battle waged on their behalf by their supporters though is the problem. It seems that that’s what has to be beaten, and it’s easy to defeat.
Their supporters ought to be pointing out what makes Jews the good guys, not the oppressed guys.
I’m moderately familiar with Judaism. I don’t know where it is commanded by their religion to be kind to people who have sworn to eliminatet them
Most clearly in Sanhedrin 98b-99a. Commentary (Jewish Messianism):
“We have just seen that the Messiah is the just man who suffers, who has taken on the suffering of others. Who finally takes on the suffering of others, if not the being who says “Me”? The fact of not evading the burden imposed by the suffering of others defines ipseity itself. All person are the Messiah.”
Levinas “Difficult Freedom: Essays on Judiasm” p.89 if you’re interested. Other places outside of Messianism:
The knowledge of God which we can have and which is expressed, according to Maimonides, in the form of negative attributes, receives a positive meaning from the moral ‘God is Merciful,’ which means: ‘Be merciful like Him.” The atttributes of God are given not in the indicative, but in the imperative. The knowledge of God comes to us like a commandment, like a Mitzvah. To know God is to know what must be done…” p.17
He takes apart the religion as if it’s “a religion for adults,” as that chapter head has it.
Offered as where you can find it if you’re interested.
Not a nobody, Levinas was often invited to speak to Jewish scholars. Mostly known for moral phenomenology in philosophy.
Paracelsus:
It isn’t.
rhhardin:
You’ve tried this nonsense before, and I corrected you. There is not one word on either of those pages that in any way implies any such thing.
This is not just nonsense but outright heresy. The messiah will be a single human being. Not multiple people, and certainly not everyone. Not divine, just an ordinary person whom God will charge with this mission and will carry it out. One who does not believe this is not a believing Jew and has no share in the Next World.
This is on Sotah 14a. The commandment to “follow” God can’t be understood literally, since it’s impossible to do that, so it means to act as He does. He clothed Adam and Eve when they were naked, visited Abraham when he was ill, comforted Isaac when he was in mourning, and buried Moses when he died, so we should clothe the naked, visit the ill, comfort mourners, and bury the dead.
But God the Warrior (Exodus 15:3) is not merciful to His enemies. When God wages war He wages total war. (Deut 32:41-43) And He commands us to do the same. (Deut 20:10-15)
Yes, a nobody. I don’t know which “Jewish scholars” he was invited to speak before. Maybe HUC or some such institution where Jewish scholarship is unknown. Few genuine Jewish scholars have ever heard of him. I think I’ve heard of him more from you than from anyone else in the rest of my life. The extent of his Jewish education seems to have been a few years at the Schwabe Jewish high school in Kovna. I’ll bet he never set foot in a yeshiva, and he was certainly never invited to speak in one.
“There is not one word on either of those pages that in any way implies any such thing. ”
That’s why you read commentary. I gave you the reference. I’d bet you’d find it friendly, but who knows.
Levinas also has a book “Nine Talmudic Readings” if you want to expand.
As for the Messiah being a single individual, that’s what the commentary is about, and where Judaism becomes an adult religion. The conversion of that to the result that everybody is the Messiah, starting from “R. Nahman: if [the Messiah] is of those living [today], it might be one like myself, as it is written, ‘And their nobles shall be of themselves, and their governors shall proceed from the midst of them (Jeremiah 30:21’, getting it down to every man. See the reference. It’s excellent reading.
Somebody intent on rigorously showing that your religion makes sense.
Here’s Wittgenstein on Christianity:
Kierkegaard writes: `If Christianity were so easy and cozy, why should God in his Scriptures have set Heaven and Earth in motion and threatened eternal punishments?’ – Question: But in that case why is this Scripture so unclear? If we want to warn someone of a terrible danger, do we go about it by telling him a riddle whose solution will be the warning? – But who is to say that the Scripture really is unclear? Isn’t it possible that it was essential in this case to “tell a riddle?” And that, on the other hand, giving a more direct warning would necessarily have had the wrong effect? God has four people recount the life of his incarnate Son, in each case differently and with inconsistencies – but might we not say: It is important that this narrative should not be more than quite averagely historically plausible just so that this should not be taken as the essential, decisive thing? So that the letter should not be believed more strongly than is proper and the spirit may receive its due. I.e. what you are supposed to see cannot be communicated even by the best and most accurate historian; and therefore a mediocre account suffices, is even to be preferred. For that too can tell you what you are supposed to be told. (Roughly in the way a mediocre stage set can be better than a sophisiicated one, painted trees better than real ones, – because these might distract from what matters).
– Wittgenstein, Culture and Value p.31
No, rhhardin, that’s not how it works. If you give a reference to two specific pages in Sanhedrin it needs to be there in the text. The commentaries are there to elucidate the text, not to add things that aren’t there.
Besides which, none of the classic commentaries on those pages says anything like that either. Commentaries are Rashi, Tosfos, Maharsha, Rif, Rosh, Ran, etc. Levinas is not a commentary. He is a nobody. Not everyone can just write something and be counted as a commentary.
You mean where it becomes a foreign religion. None of the commentaries suggest that he is not an individual, because anyone who would suggest that would never have been printed on the page in the first place, and his works would have been burned. A heretic cannot be a Talmudic commentary.
This is bullshit. Rav Nachman, like everyone else on that page, held that the messiah would be a single individual. And he certainly could not be just anyone. See the real commentaries, in this case Maharsha, who explains that Rav Nachman said if the messiah is someone living today then he must be someone like Rav Nachman himself, who was already in a position of authority. He could not be a nobody who suddenly appeared and started a revolution. That is the exact opposite of your claim.
But it has no connection to the Talmud. It’s someone who never attended a yeshiva, had no knowledge of or connection to how to study Talmud, and apparently rejected one of the fundamental beliefs of the Jewish religion. Such a person can never speak for that religion, and can’t be cited to explain it. You might as well cite Pope Benedict, who I seem to recall also wrote a little about Judaism, from an outsider’s perspective.
google “Levinas speaking to Jewish Scholars” among which:
The philosopher Emmanuel Levinas
spoke extensively to Jewish scholars through his famous “Talmudic Readings”. Beginning in 1963, he delivered annual lectures at the Colloques des intellectuels juifs de langue française (Colloquia of French-Speaking Jewish Intellectuals) in Paris, which were later compiled into essay collections like Nine Talmudic Readings and New Talmudic Readings.
His teachings for Jewish audiences focused on reinterpreting ancient Jewish texts through the lens of modern philosophy and demonstrating the enduring relevance of Jewish ethics for contemporary life.
but look for yourself what else is listed. Nothing prompts it to take “my” side. The result seems to be that if Judaism has any relevance to modern day life, every man is the Messiah.
The chapter in the book goes into Zionism which I found not interesting but perhaps is the controversial point to somebody.
I should have said that’s from the google leading AI results, and deeper dive. You get quite a selection to choose from. The listed one seems to me closest to my point while replying to people who “know better.”
Somewhere is a quote I haven’t been able to locate, why do you want some god to save Israel when the point of ethics is that you can do it yourself. Which also leads to every man is the Messiah.
Look up on Amazon Ethan Kleinberg “Emmanuel Levinas’s Talmudic Turn: Philosophy and Jewish Thought (Cultural Memory in the Present)” to get to the Read Inside, where there are several pages of Levinas’s Talmudic credentials, including director of some school on the matter that you’d be better qualified to accept or dismiss.
This “Colloques des intellectuels juifs de langue française”, of which I’ve never heard until now, may be scholars who are Jewish, but they are not Jewish scholars. When you say “Jewish scholars”, that obviously doesn’t mean Jewish chemists or doctors, or Jews who are scholars of existentialist philosophy, Icelandic history, or grievance studies. It means scholars of Judaism, within the 3300-year-old tradition of Jewish scholarship, which is learned and taught in yeshivos and kollelim. I would expect that none of his audience at this secular talk shop had ever been in a yeshiva, any more than he had.
No, thank you. Modern secular philosophy has no place in Jewish scholarship.
And as soon as you say that, it’s not Judaism.
Imagine telling Christians that if they want Christianity to have any relevance to modern life they must declare that Jesus wasn’t literally resurrected, but rather is resurrected in each of his followers’ hearts. Sorry, as soon as you do that it’s not Christianity.
And again, that is not Judaism, or anything even close to it.
He wasn’t director of a school on the Talmud. He was principal of a French Jewish teachers’ college, which probably didn’t even teach Talmud.
“Imagine telling Christians that if they want Christianity to have any relevance to modern life they must declare that Jesus wasn’t literally resurrected, but rather is resurrected in each of his followers’ hearts. Sorry, as soon as you do that it’s not Christianity. ”
Christianity as an allegory for ethics is popular and probably its saving idea. Also it has great classical music, which keeps it around. I could cite a thousand examples.
Levinas has an appendix on the felix culpa that will seem related or not:
Pardon in its immediate sense is connected with the moral phenomenon of fault. The paradox of pardon lies in its retroaction; from the point of view of common time it represents an inversion of the natural order of things, the reversibility of time. It involves several aspects. Pardon refers to the instant elapsed; it permits the subject who had committed himself in a past instant to be as though that instant had not past on, to be a though he had not committed himself. Active in a stronger sense than forgetting, which does not concern the reality of the event forgotten, pardon acts upon the past, somehow repeats the event, purifying it. But in addition, forgetting nullifies the relations with the past, whereas pardon conserves the past pardoned in the purified present. The pardoned being is not the innocent being. The difference does not justify placing innocence above pardon; it permits the discerning in pardon of a surplus of happiness, the strange happiness of reconciliation, the *felix culpa*, given in an everyday experience which no longer astonishes us.
The paradox of the pardon of fault refers to pardon as constitutive of time itself. The instants do not link up with one another indifferently, but extend from the Other unto me…
sorry see also Wittgenstein quote on Christianity above. ambiguous reply links
That’s not a “saving” idea, it’s a destroying idea. If you see Christianity as an allegory, then it’s no longer Christianity.
“And if Christ has not been raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your faith is useless. And we apostles would all be lying about God”
It’s not useless if it’s an allegory for what is actually going on. That just accounts for its appeal. It says something about something that is going on but has not been brought out explicitly yet.
Which is how Jewish scholarship is excellent, and likewise Christian.
You are saying it’s the wrong scholarship but I say it’s the correct one and the others still miss something that’s subtle but important.
But try reading Levinas and see. My introduction to him was Totality and Infinity, which I’d characterize as phenomenological ethics. Levinas reading the Talmud is even better. He goes into his reasoning, in support of a certain kind of reasoning that you could call Talmudic.
I guess it sort of moves authority around which isn’t going to play well with certain authorities, but it brings out its point, which is probably more important.
Did you not recognize the quote? That’s not me calling it useless, it’s Christianity itself calling itself false and useless, if the Resurrection didn’t happen. It’s Paul, the author of Christianity, saying it.
“Scholarship” that denies the Resurrection is, by definition, not Christian scholarship. I can deny the Resurrection, because I’m not a Christian. Any scholarship I might commit would not be Christian scholarship, unless I deliberately wrote it from the Christian point of view; i.e. one that accepts the Trinity, the Resurrection, etc. as if they were true.
I have no interest in reading your obscure French philosopher, let alone his outsider’s views on the Talmud, a subject on which I have more expertise than he did.
Sure hardin you sadistic Jew-hating MF, you’re really concerned about Jews getting good “publicity” lol
And hardin is where we get all our Talmudic expertise from, along with Stormfront.
If you want something looked up in the Talmud, I can do it for you. In the original, with the commentaries that have been accepted for centuries, not in the regurgitations of some French philosopher.
GFY hard and often hardin you savage bigoted crackpot
Pipe down, Adolf.
The rise of the pro-Houthi protestors is around the corner. New heroes. Maybe a flotilla manned by Greta is in order. Sail to the straits. It would make it even more surreal.
Savage the bastards. They deserve no less. Also their Iranian handlers.
time to gaza the houts
Ramon airport is named after Ilan Ramon, the Israeli astronaut who died in the Columbia disaster.
He was also a veteran F-16 pilot who participated in the 1991 raid on the Osirak nuclear site in Iraq. An all around stud of a man.