Enter your keyword

Tuesday, May 31, 2022

The Bush Assassination Plot Shows How Broken Our Immigration System Is

By On May 31, 2022
Shihab Ahmed Shihab Shihab, an Iraqi Muslim, entered the country using a tourist visa. Seven months later, just before his visa was about to expire, he asked for political asylum and planned to bring his entire family into the United States.

A year later the Iraqi refugee was arrested as part of a plot to kill George W. Bush for ISIS.

According to a confidential informant, Shihab was actually Abu Ahmed, who boasted of being related to Al-Baghdadi, the deceased Caliph of ISIS, and claimed to have aided the Jihadist group, "with killing many Americans in Iraq between 2003 and 2006."

He worked at an Islamic Halal market in Indianapolis and then similar jobs in Columbus, Ohio, and while waiting for his political asylum to kick in, he got into the immigration business.

Shihab, according to the government's complaint, had only received a tourist visa to come to America "through the assistance of a corrupt Iraqi American contractor at the U.S. Embassy".

If applying for political asylum didn't work, Shihab was going to enter into a fraudulent marriage with a U.S. citizen after having already obtained fake Iraqi divorce papers for his current wife.

Since Halal markets and personal immigration fraud weren't keeping him busy enough, the aspiring refugee allegedly began brokering illegal migration through Biden's open border. He charged $40,000 to bring illegals to America through the Mexican border, and according to the Iraqi, they had already brought three Iraqi illegals in one trip.

Everyday illegal alien smuggling took a turn for the worse when Shihab announced that another four incoming Iraqis were members of ISIS, including "the secretary of an ISIS financial minister" and that once he was here, they "would have access to large amounts of money". ISIS was going to move money to a Columbus, Ohio car dealership using an Islamic "hawala".

The four ISIS terrorists were also coming to kill former President George W. Bush. The ISIS refugee began trying to secure fake FBI IDs and formed a plan to get the assassins out through Mexico after the attack. He took videos of Bush's home, his office, and other locations, and allegedly coordinated with a terror cell operating out of Qatar.

Shihab is now under arrest, but it’s unclear if the ISIS cell in Qatar, an Islamic terror state that hosts the Muslim Brotherhood, hosted the Taliban, and other terror groups, will try again.

All of this could have been averted with Trump’s “Executive Order 13769: Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States”, the so-called "Muslim ban", which blocked entry to the U.S. from the terror states of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.

Democrats fought the move tooth and nail, but so did some Republicans.

George W. Bush had criticized the travel ban, claiming, “I am for an immigration policy that is welcoming."

A welcoming immigration policy is how we got 9/11 and numerous other Muslim terrorist attacks.

“It’s very important for all of us to recognize one of our great strengths is for people to be able to worship the way they want to," he argued. While that's laudable, Islamic worship is terrorism.

Or as a 15-year-old Yazidi girl who, under Islamic law had been made a sex slave by ISIS related, "Every time that he came to rape me, he would pray" and describe the sexual assaults as "worship." Had ISIS succeeded in killing Bush, that would have been considered worship too.

After numerous legal battles, the original travel ban was replaced with a weaker version. And under pressure from Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and the Iraqi government, Trump took Iraq off the list while Americans were promised that Iraqis would receive the best possible vetting.

Tillerson claimed that an "intense review over the past month identified multiple security measures that the State Department and the government of Iraq will be implementing to achieve our shared objective of preventing those with criminal or terroristic intent from reaching the United States.”

So much for that.

Removing Iraq from the travel ban was a foreseeable disaster with a predictable outcome.

The Iraqi government consists of Shiite terrorists and Sunni terrorists. And apparently even our embassy has been infiltrated by corrupt contractors who provide ISIS members with visas.

Two years ago, Hawazen Sameer Mothafar, an Iraqi member of ISIS living in Portland, was indicted for helping manage the ISIS propaganda operation. When the media broadcast ISIS propaganda showing attacks on American cities, the material was coming out of Oregon.

Mothafar was one of a series of Iraqi terrorist immigrants including Ali Yousif Ahmed Al-Nouri, whose extradition bid to Iraq was finally approved in April 2022.

Al-Nouri was allegedly the Emir of an Al Qaeda terrorist group in Fallujah who applied for Social Security disability benefits because his “injuries” in Iraq had made it too hard for him to work.

He came to America as a refugee and managed to become a military contractor.

Other Iraqi refugees include Waad Ramadan Alwan and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi. Alwan had boasted that of how he had “f___d up” Hummers using IEDs and admitted to having taken part in an attack that killed Americans. He had even left his fingerprints on an IED in Iraq. But the thorough vetting had failed to turn that up. Alwan and Hammadi were then accused of trying to send grenade launchers, plastic explosives, missiles and machine guns to Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Omar Faraj Saeed Al Hardan came here as a refugee. When the FBI searched his Houston apartment, agents found an ISIS flag. Hardan had been planning to leave bombs in the trash cans of two Houston malls. Al-Hamzah Mohammad Jawad, an Iraqi refugee from Michigan, was arrested while trying to join ISIS. Abdullatif Ali Aldosary set off a bomb outside a Social Security office in Arizona. The authorities found plenty of bomb making materials in his home.

Vetting doesn’t work. If it did work, our country wouldn’t be crawling with ISIS members.

Unfortunately there’s no sign that President George W. Bush or anyone else has learned anything from the experience. A travel ban for terror states, especially Iraq, protects Americans.

And most Americans, unlike former presidents, don’t have their own secret service details.

The media has long ago stopped telling its old lie that claimed no refugees have been involved in terrorist plots in America. It just buries the stories on Page 22, knowing that most Americans are no longer paying attention. At least until one of those terrorists pulls off another major attack.

And then maybe we can finally get permission to secure our own country against the “refugees”.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Monday, May 30, 2022

Memorial Day in a Divided Nation

By On May 30, 2022
It has been over 150 years since our nation’s last civil war. Time enough has passed that we have come to associate the holiday once known as Decoration Day with the graves of soldiers fallen on other continents far from home.

It is important to honor our wartime dead. But Memorial Day has a powerful meaning that we have forgotten. It was the holiday that reunited our country after the Civil War. It began when Americans, from the North and the South, entered the cold gray stone fields of the dead, and decorated the graves of the fallen from the Grand Army of the Republic and the Confederacy with freshly cut flowers.

They followed no presidential order. They acted under no regulation. Instead the mothers and wives of men who would return home no more brought flowers to the graves of their fallen sons and husbands, and to the resting places of the young American men who might have slain them, who had been the enemy, but who still deserved honor and respect.

Those women, of the North and the South, brought America together.

Today a new breed of leftists gleefully tears down Confederate memorials. And it will not end with flags and statues. They will not be satisfied until the cemeteries that were once decorated have been desecrated. It is ominously fitting that the event which marked the end of one civil war now arrives to foreshadow the beginning of another war between brothers.

On a Memorial Day long ago, President Theodore Roosevelt praised the Union soldiers who “left us the right of brotherhood with the men in gray, who with such courage, and such devotion for what they deemed the right, fought against you.”

The Right of Brotherhood is what binds a nation. It cannot be imposed by force even when a war is won. It can only be won through mutual respect. Out of the brutality of the Civil War, came respect for the courage of those who fought and died on both sides. And once more, we called each other brothers.

“They not only reunited States, they reunited the spirits of men. That is their unique achievement, unexampled anywhere else in the annals of mankind,” President Wilson said in his Memorial Day address.

Like the American Revolution, the aftermath of the Civil War was indeed a unique achievement. It is now vanishing before our eyes. And Memorial Day has become a sad reminder of its diminution.

A day once marked by mutual respect for the courage of former enemies is now being ushered in with the deliberate desecration of Civil War memorials in New Orleans. And beyond this ugliness, Memorial Day sharply divides the country between conservatives who believe this country is worth fighting for and leftists who see it as a racist colonial monstrosity that must be erased with open borders and terror.

While there are no armies of the Blue and the Gray exchanging fire on grassy hills, earlier this month cities across America remembered the courageous men and women in blue murdered by the racist supremacist and separatists of Black Lives Matter who deny that the lives of other races matter.

The left-wing tactics of racist terror are a deliberate effort to divide us.

Millions of Americans on both sides recognize that a conflict is underway. Many of them feel helpless to stop it. And they wonder what can be done to avert it.

Memorial Day’s origins offer us one answer. 

Certain disagreements are intellectually, culturally and emotionally irreconcilable. The Civil War emerged out of such a conflict. The civil war we are sliding toward now is being born out of another. But mutual respect can make coexistence possible even in the face of fundamental divisions. And where there is no such respect, even minor differences become impossible to reconcile except through force.

The left expresses its radicalism as violent contempt. If it wants to understand where Trump came from, it need look no further than the contempt that its political and cultural leaders express for opponents. Its conviction of moral superiority makes it impossible for it to accept President Trump or his voters, and leads it to assault Trump supporters, vandalize memorials, attack the Constitution and openly plot subversion and secession.

Memorial Day arose not only as a way to honor those who fought for our side, but even those of our brethren who fought on the enemy side. Its lesson is that heroism does not occur only on the battlefield, but in the aftermath in which after trying to kill each other, we learn to live together as one people.

It takes one sort of moral courage to win a victory and another form of moral courage to rebuild afterward. Victory demands conviction. Rebuilding requires that we cast aside the conviction of superiority that war requires and to understand that our enemies are men like us.

The left is convinced of its utter moral superiority and the total moral inferiority of its enemies. Its utopian projects are pursued with ruthless violence and secured with unlimited power. Its enemies exist only to be brutally ground under. Those who are not of the left have no right to exist upon the earth. They are accorded no rights, no freedoms and no respect. Only a choice between slavery and death.

That is why the left wins its victories and then covers the land in blood. Its societies collapse into misery and repression. This was where the American Revolution differed so fundamentally from the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution. We celebrate that difference on the Fourth of July. It is also where the Civil War differed from so many other civil wars not in its battles, but in its aftermath. That is the great moral victory that we remember on Memorial Day. A mutual victory of national reunification.

The Civil War saved the Union. But the mutual respect of Decoration Day preserved it. If the Union is to survive, the Democrats must learn to respect those they have come to consider their enemies. History teaches us that mutual respect can either avert a civil war. Or it must be learned after a civil war.

Sunday, May 29, 2022

Liberating Our Jerusalem

By On May 29, 2022

When Jordan's Arab Legion seized half of Jerusalem, ethnically cleansed its Jewish population and annexed the city-- the only entity to recognize the annexation was the United Kingdom which had provided the officers and the training that made the conquest possible. Officers like Colonel Bill Newman, Major Geoffrey Lockett and Major Bob Slade, under Glubb Pasha, better known as General John Bagot Glubb, whose son later converted to Islam, invaded Jerusalem and used the Muslim forces under their command to make the partition and ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem possible.

The Jews living in the free half of Jerusalem continued to be killed by Jordanian Muslim snipers. The victims of those years of Muslim occupation included Yaffa Binyamin, a 14-year-old girl sitting on the balcony of her own house and a Christian carpenter working on the Notre Dame Convent.

Under Muslim occupation, while Muslim snipers were  murdering their children, the Jewish residents living under fire couldn't so much as put in an outhouse without being reported to the UN for illegal construction. In one case a UN observer organization held four meetings to discuss an outhouse for local residents before condemning Israel for illegal construction.

It did not however condemn Jordan when one of its soldiers opened fire on a train wounding a Jewish teenage girl.

Not very much has changed.

The hysterical condemnations of “illegal construction” did not end when the Muslim occupation did. The great outhouse of the United Nations and the smaller outhouses of the foreign ministries of countries whose leaders tremble whenever Muslims grow agitated over a cartoon or a YouTube video fill the air with the vilest of substances whenever a Jewish family moves into a home in Jerusalem.

It would be inconceivable for the international community to denounce an ethnically cleansed group which survived attempted genocide for moving back into its own city. It is, however, standard policy at the State Department and the Foreign Office to denounce Jews living in those parts of Jerusalem that had been ethnically cleansed by Muslims, as "settlers" living in "settlements," and accuse them of being an "obstruction to peace."

Peace being the state of affairs that sets in when an ethnic cleansing goes unchallenged.

What we are talking about here is not peace, but ethnic cleansing. In 1948, the Jews were ethnically cleansed from Jerusalem to Islamize the city. Their synagogues were blown up by the Muslim occupiers. Their tombstones were used to line the roads traveled by the racist Muslim settlers. In 1948, the Jews were ethnically cleansed from Jerusalem to Islamize the city. Whether they were Zionists or anti-Zionists did not matter. They were not Muslims. That was all that counted.

“For the first time in 1,000 years not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter,” Abdullah el-Talal, a commander of the Muslim invaders, had boasted. “Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews' return here impossible.” In his memoirs he wrote, “I knew that the Jewish Quarter was densely populated with Jews who caused their fighters a good deal of interference and difficulty…. Only four days after our entry into Jerusalem the Jewish Quarter had become their graveyard. Death and destruction reigned over it.”

Every politician who denounces Jews building houses in Jerusalem, but not Muslims doing the same thing is endorsing Abdullah’s genocidal vision and all the terrorism that goes with it.

In 1920, racist Muslim settler mobs in Jerusalem had chanted "Mohammed's religion was born with the sword", “Death to the Jews” and “the government is with us” as Muslim policemen under British colonial rule had joined with them in the rape and murder of the indigenous Jewish population.

Too many governments are still with those who wave the sword of Mohammed and cry death to the Jews. They encourage them, defend their agenda and issue weak rebukes when blood is spilled in the name of Islamization in Jerusalem, as it is in Kobani by ISIS and a thousand other places. Those who endorse the Islamization of Jerusalem cannot escape responsibilities for the crimes of the Islamizers.

Describing Jewish homes in Jerusalem, one of the world's oldest cities, a city that all three religions in the region associate with Jews and Jewish history, as "settlements" is a triumph of distorted language that Orwell would have to tip his hat to. How does one have "settlements" in a city older than London or Washington D.C.?

To understand that, you would have to ask London and Washington D.C. where the diplomats insist that one more round of Israeli compromises will bring peace.

They say that there are three religions in Jerusalem, but there are actually four. The fourth religion is the true Religion of Peace, the one that insists that there will be peace when the Jews have been expelled from Judea and Samaria, driven out of their homes in Jerusalem, and made into wanderers and beggars once again. Oddly enough, this religion's name isn't even Islam-- it's diplomacy.

Diplomacy says that the 1948 borders set by Arab countries invading Israel should be the final borders and that, when Israel reunified a sundered city in 1967, it was an act of aggression, while, when seven Arab armies invaded Israel in 1948, it was a legitimate way to set permanent boundaries. When Jordan ethnically cleansed East Jerusalem, it set a standard that Israelis are obligated to follow to this day by staying out of East Jerusalem. To violate that ethnic cleansing endangers peace.

When Muslims move into a Jewish town, there's no clamor. When Muslim countries fund Muslim housing in Israel, there are no angry statements. Muslim housing in Jerusalem or anywhere in Israel is not a problem. Only Jewish housing is.

The issue is not Israel. If it were, then Arabs with Israeli citizenship would also be condemned. It's only the Jews who are the problem.

The entire Peace Process is really a prolonged solution to the latest phase of the Jewish Problem. The problem, as stated by so many diplomats, is that there are Jews living in places that Muslims want. There were Jews living in Gaza before 1948, but they were driven out, they came back, and then they were driven out again by their own government in compliance with international demands. Now only Hamas lives in Gaza and it's as peaceful and pleasant without the Jews as Nazi Germany.

But there are still Jews in the West Bank and they have to be gotten rid of. Once enough Jews have been expelled, there will be peace. That's not a paragraph from Mein Kampf, it's not some lunatic sermon from Palestinian Authority television-- it is the consensus of the international community. This consensus states that the only reason there still isn't peace is because enough Jews haven't been expelled from their homes. The ethnic cleansing for peace hasn't gone far enough.

There will be peace when all the Jews are gone. That much is certainly undeniable. Just look at Gaza or Egypt or Iraq or Afghanistan, which has a grand total of two Jews, both of them in their seventies. Or Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Syria where peace reigns now that the Jews are gone. Some might say that violence seems to increase proportionally with the number of Muslims, but we all know that would be Islamophobic. On the other hand suggesting that violence increases with the number of Jews living on land that Muslims want, that's just diplomacy. A common sense fact that everyone who is anyone in foreign policy knows to be true.

How will we know when the Muslims have gotten all the land that they want? When the violence stops. Everyone knows that agreements mean nothing. No matter how many pieces of paper are signed, the bombs and rockets still keep bursting. The only way to reach an agreement is by groping blindly in the dark, handing over parcel after parcel of land, until the explosions stop or the Muslims fulfill their original goal of pushing the Jews into the sea.

That's the wonderful thing about diplomacy if you're a diplomat and the terrible thing about it if you are anyone else without a secure way out of the country when diplomacy fails. And diplomacy in the region always fails. Camp David and every single agreement Israel has signed with Muslim countries aren't worth the paper they're written on. The only peace treaty that counts is the one made by tanks and rifles. It's the one made by Israeli planes in Egyptian skies and Israeli soldiers walking the border. It's the one made by Jewish farmers and ranchers, tending their sheep and their fields, with rifles strung over their backs. The only peace that's worth anything is the peace of the soldiers and settlers.

In 1966, Jerusalem was a city sundered in two, divided by barbed wire and the bullets of Muslim snipers. Diplomacy did not reunite it. Israel pursued diplomacy nearly to its bitter end until it understood that it had no choice at all but to fight. Israel did not swoop into the fight, its leaders did their best to avoid the conflict, asking the international community to intervene and stop Egypt from going to war. Read back the headlines for the last five years on Israel and Iran, and you will get a sense of the courage and determination of the Israeli leaders of the day.

When Israel went to war, its leaders did not want to liberate Jerusalem, they wanted Jordan to stay out of the war. Even when Jordan entered the war, they did not want to liberate the city. Divine Providence and Muslim hostility forced them to liberate Jerusalem and forced them to keep it. Now some of them would like to give it back, another sacrifice to the bloody deity of diplomacy whose altar flows with blood and burnt sacrifices.

As we remember Yom Yerushalayim, Jerusalem Day, it is important to remember that the city is united and free because diplomacy failed. The greatest triumph of the modern state happened only because diplomacy proved hopeless and useless in deterring Muslim genocidal ambitions. Had Israel succumbed to international pressure and had Nasser been as subtle as Sadat, then the Six-Day War would have looked like the Yom Kippur War fought with 1948 borders-- and Israel very likely would not exist today.

Even as Jews remember the great triumph of Yom Yerushalayim, the ethnic cleansers and their accomplices are busy searching for ways to drive Jews out of Jerusalem, out of towns, villages and cities. This isn't about the Muslim residents of Jerusalem, who have repeatedly asserted that they want to remain part of Israel. It's not about peace, which did not come from any previous round of concessions, and will not come from this one either. It's about solving the Jewish problem.

As long as Jews allow themselves to be defined as the problem, there will be plenty of those offering solutions. And the solutions invariably involve doing something about the Jews. It only stands to reason that if Jews are the problem, then moving them or getting rid of them is the solution. There is less friction in defining Jews as the problem, than in defining Muslims as the problem. The numbers alone mean that is so.

Yom Yerushalayim is a reminder of what the real problem is and what the real solution is. Muslim occupation of Israel is the problem. The Islamization of Jerusalem is the problem. Muslim violence in support of the Muslim occupation of Israel and of everywhere else is the problem. Israel is the solution. Only when we liberate ourselves from the lies, when we stop believing that we are the problem and recognize that we are the solution. Only then will the liberation that began in 1967 be complete.

Only then will we have liberated our Jerusalem. The Jerusalem of the soul. It is incumbent on all of us to liberate that little Jerusalem within. The holy city that lives in all of us. To clean the dross off its golden gates, wash the filth from its stones and expel the invaders gnawing away at our hearts until we look proudly upon a shining city. Then to help others liberate their own Jerusalems. Only then will we truly be free.

Thursday, May 26, 2022

Is Biden's Terror Exemption for Blind Sheikh's Terror Group Prepping a Second Arab Spring?

By On May 26, 2022
In 1993, the United States finally arrested Omar Abdel-Rahman, popularly known as the Blind Sheikh, the religious leader of the Egyptian Jihadist group Gamaat Islamiya after three years during which his followers bombed the World Trade Center and plotted to bomb the Statue of Liberty and a range of targets all across New York City.

The Biden administration has now announced that it’s taking Gamaat Islamiya off the terror list.

During the original Jihad in New York, an undercover informant described meetings to case potential targets in which a member of the terror cell told him, “Stand here, brother, let me take your picture with the Statue of Liberty because it will not exist anymore" and "Brother, let me take your picture with the World Trade Center because it will not be here anymore".

“The Jews and Christians are the ones that are fighting every Muslim resurrection,” the imprisoned sheikh later urged, “Oh, Muslims everywhere! Cut the transportation of their countries, tear it apart, destroy their economy, burn their companies, eliminate their interests, sink their ships, shoot down their planes, kill them on the sea, air, or land.”

Throughout the 90s, Gamaat Islamiya continued engaging in terrorist attacks. In 1997, the Islamic terrorist group carried out its ugliest atrocity in Luxor, Egypt, where European and Japanese tourists were mutilated and disemboweled. Among the horrors, the terrorists cut off the ears and noses of several of their victims. A note praising Islam was found inside one disemboweled body. Among the victims was 5-year-old Shaunnah Turner: a little British girl.

The massacre had been funded by Al Qaeda which was allied with Gamaat Islamiya.

After September 11, Gamaat Islamiya was divided between two Jihadist pathways, that of Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, both of which had Egyptian origins. In 2006, some leaders of Gamaat Islamiya announced that the terror group was merging with Al Qaeda. But under Obama, the Muslim Brotherhood forced out Mubarak, one of Gamaat Islamiya’s targets, and the Blind Sheikh’s terror group joined the Brotherhood in reinventing itself as a political party.

In 2011, the terror group relaunched as the Building and Development Party and was welcomed by the Obama administration. Even though Gamaat Islamiya was still on the list of foreign terrorist organizations, one of its political figures, Hani Nour Eldin, not only received a visa to enter the United States, but was also able to meet with senior Obama administration officials including then Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough.

"Abdel Rahman’s ordeal in America has been very severe," Eldin complained. "I was encouraged that I was able to raise the issue with the Deputy National Security Advisor in America."

Obama’s State Department reportedly even considered freeing the Blind Sheikh.

Instead the Blind Sheikh died in prison, but the United States, bizarrely, allowed his body to be transferred back to Egypt when he received a hero's funeral.

"Don’t let the Americans enjoy safety and security. Kill them, keep a watch on them and plant the fear in their hearts. Seek vengeance for your sheikh," Al Qaeda declared.

When the Obama administration brought Eldin to America, Gamaat Islamiya’s presence on the list of terrorist organizations had been awkward. Now the awkwardness has been resolved.

The Biden administration has chosen to remove Gamaat Islamiya from the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. The official reason for the move is that the terror group is “defunct”. But Gamaat Islamiya isn’t defunct, it just morphed into an Islamist political party that the Obama and Biden administrations want to see ruling over Egypt alongside the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Building and Development Party has never disavowed its own atrocities and continues treating the Blind Sheikh as a role model. It was banned by the Egyptian government during the wave of terror that followed the popular overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood regime.

Indeed, the State Department's latest human rights report on Egypt complains about the ban on the Islamist party. Previously, the Egyptians could have retorted that the party had been listed as a terror group by the United States. Biden has conveniently removed that argument.

Under pressure from the Biden administration, Egypt's President Sisi has called for "a national political dialogue with all forces without exception or discrimination." Egypt has been freeing imprisoned members of the Muslim Brotherhood even as the country’s courts continue sentencing other Brotherhood members to death for their role in the violence.

Tarek al-Zumar, the head of Gamaat Islamiya's Building and Development Party, has welcomed the prospect of being legalized again.

Secretary of State Blinken justified the decision to delist Gamaat Islamiya by claiming that "the circumstances that were the basis for the designation ... have changed in such a manner to warrant revocation of the designation". The change in question is entirely political.

The State Department did not remove Gamaat Islamiya from the terror list because it was defunct. Just the opposite. It’s been removed from the terror list because the Biden administration expects it to be active again. And wants to be able to provide support for it.

What might that look like?

Tarek al-Zuma, like many Islamist terror leaders, is hiding out in Qatar. Egypt had accused Zumar of playing a role in ISIS terrorist attacks in the Sinai. After his initial release from prison, he defended Al Qaeda terrorism as a response to “extreme provocations” by the West.

"The whole Al-Qaeda issue has been blown out of proportion internationally. Do the mistakes made by Al-Qaeda over the past 12 or 15 years equal one-billionth of the mistakes and crimes perpetrated by the US and Britain against the Arab and Islamic nation?" he argued in another interview.

His cousin, another major movement figure, who had served time in prison with Ayman al-Zawahiri, described the head of Al Qaeda as a “man who loves his religion and justice.”

“Bin Laden will become a symbol of resistance to occupation," Tarek Al-Zumar ranted after the Al Qaeda leader's death. "The U.S. killing of bin Laden will undoubtedly galvanize reaction and retaliation attempts.”

This is what Biden’s decision to remove Gamaat Islamiya from the terror list is whitewashing.

Gamaat Islamiya is not defunct. It has longstanding ties to Al Qaeda and now ISIS, even while its political arm seeks power by copying the Muslim Brotherhood’s political strategy.

The Biden administration wants another Arab Spring in Egypt and it hopes that Al-Zumar and other Gamaat Islamiya Jihadists will help restore its Islamist allies to power. It’s embracing Tarek Al-Zumar, the author of such key Jihadist tracts as, "Our Struggle With the Jews is a Resolved Struggle" and "Bonds of Jihad" to pave the way for supporting his new Jihad.

The delisting of Gamaat Islamiya betrays those seven Americans, born and unborn,who were killed during the original World Trade Center bombing as well as every innocent victim murdered by the terror group and its allies.

Biden's treasonous actions disrespect the memories of American men and women like John DiGiovanni, a sales manager, who was parking his car when the bomb in the World Trade Center went off, Stephen Knapp, a father of two on his lunch break, and Monica Rodriguez Smith, who was seven months pregnant and was on her last day of work before taking maternity leave.

And above all else, Biden has once again betrayed America.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Wednesday, May 25, 2022

Did Biden’s Appeasement of China Cause a Communist Church Shooting?

By On May 25, 2022
On May 14, 2022, Payton S. Gendron, a white supremacist, opened fire on black people in a New York supermarket. The next day, thousands of miles away in California, David Wenwei Chou, a militant supporter of Communist China, opened fire in a Taiwanese church.

While Gendron’s mass shooting has been widely covered, with every detail of his manifesto made public, Chou’s motives have received very little coverage. Biden visited Buffalo, NY where the supermarket shooting took place, but has shown no signs of visiting Laguna Woods, CA.

Unlike Gendron, Chou may not have passed around the usual 4chan manifesto, and probably never used Discord or Twitch, but his motives are certainly no great mystery. He had his own manifesto, “Diary of an Independence-Destroying Angel” (a reference to Taiwan’s independence) that he sent to an alleged pro-Chinese paper operating in the United States.

While we’ve been regaled with excerpts from Gendron’s manifesto, the contents of Chou’s manifesto have yet to be printed. And that’s certainly a convenient double standard.

But even without Chou’s manifesto, we know that he had been recruited by Communist China and was a member of a ChiCom front group aimed at the very people whom he set out to kill.

Chou had told a neighbor that he saw himself as Chinese and "strongly believed China and Taiwan were one country". Notes left behind by Chou referred to the same ChiCom idea. A photo shows Chou next to a banner in Chinese reading, "Swiftly and violently exterminate the independence demons." The reference was to efforts by Taiwan to maintain its independence.

It’s also typical of the violent rhetoric being directed by China at the people of Taiwan.

Chou had been a director of Las Vegas Chinese for Peaceful Unification where the eliminationist banner in question had allegedly been displayed. The Vegas organization was apparently a chapter of the China Council for the Promotion of Peaceful National Reunification which is run by China's United Front Work Department.

In 2020, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had announced the designation of NACPU as a foreign mission controlled by Communist China.

"Peaceful reunification" is China's euphemism for taking over the nation of Taiwan.

A year after Pompeo's designation, China's Xi had urged that "compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, must come together and move forward in unison. We must take resolute action to utterly defeat any attempt toward 'Taiwan independence.'" And called for "peaceful national reunification" while warning that "no one should underestimate the resolve, the will, and the ability of the Chinese people to defend their national sovereignty and territorial integrity."

In March 2022, the Communist regime emphasized that it intended to solve the problem of Taiwan “in the new era”: a term widely taken to mean during Xi's rule.

In April, China's Los Angeles consul warned that his regime would "reserve the option of taking all necessary measures" in response to, among others, "Taiwanese independence separatists."

Chou's attack at the Geneva Presbyterian Church where he opened fire was not a random act.

It was a Communist terrorist attack.

While the mass shooting only killed one person and wounded four others, Chou had made plans for a massacre. He glued the locks and nailed a door shut. He had brought explosive devices and had clearly studied previous mass shootings.

It was only Dr. John Cheng's heroism in tackling Chou, at the expense of his life, that prevented the Communist mass shooter from racking up a much bigger death toll.

The FBI and local authorities are treating this Communist attack on a church as a hate crime, yet there’s been virtually no national coverage and no action from the Biden administration.

“Beijing’s pro-unification campaign has been sending out dehumanizing languages such as ‘annihilating the people and saving the island’ and dismissing the Taiwanese independence movement as a violent separatist crime,” an academic warned.

Secretary of State Pompeo had warned that China "uses front organizations like the NACPU to advance propaganda and malign influence."

Even while the Biden administration tries to stamp out domestic free speech under the guise of fighting “disinformation”, it’s dialing back the Trump administration’s efforts against China’s influence operations.

In February, Biden's DOJ shut down the “China Initiative” while falsely claiming that it had "fueled a narrative of intolerance and bias". Using leftist talking points, it dishonestly contended that the attempts to stop Communist China's persecution of Asians in America was somehow connected to a "rise in anti-Asian hate crime and hate incidents".

The church shooting in Laguna Woods shows however that fighting China’s Communist infiltration saves Asian-American lives.

Numerous Chinese Americans have complained of being stalked, followed, spied on and threatened by ChiCom agents operating in the United States.

This latest attack escalates the assaults and kidnapping plots to Communist terrorism.

Had the Biden administration taken China’s influence operations seriously, the church shooting in Laguna Woods might have been averted. By shutting down the China Initiative, Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland betrayed America and Asian-Americans in particular.

That’s why the Biden administration is focusing on Buffalo and not Laguna Woods.

The racist supermarket shooting was a failure by New York authorities, however the Geneva Presbyterian Church shooting was a crime whose roots were in Beijing. While Democrats have deployed counterintelligence resources to target domestic political opponents, they have surrendered to China’s intelligence assault while claiming that opposing it would be racist.

Biden can go to Buffalo to score some political points for the midterm elections, but he can’t go to Laguna Woods because the blood from the Geneva church shooting is on his hands.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Monday, May 23, 2022

ACLU Files Motion Denying Existence of Women

By On May 23, 2022
The ACLU claims that there’s a War on Women… and it’s fighting it.

"We're Not Stupid: Outrageous Quotes from the War on Women," the ACLU had headlined a post about its pro-abortion activism in 2013.

A decade later the ACLU is arguing in court that women don't exist.

Not only does the ACLU’s current abortion coverage eliminate any mention of women, but in response to a civil rights lawsuit by women, it actually filed a motion arguing they don’t exist.

Last year, the Women’s Liberation Front, one of the few remaining feminist groups that have rejected transgender intersectionality’s displacement of women, filed a lawsuit against California’s prison system over housing men who claim to identify as female together with women.

The feminist groups filing the lawsuit noted that, "of the incarcerated men seeking to transfer to women’s prison 33.8% — FULLY ONE THIRD — are registered sex offenders."

Krystal Gonzalez, one of four women being represented in the lawsuit, reported being sexually assaulted by a man who claimed to be “transgender” in prison. The California penal system however insisted that her male attacker was actually a “transgender woman with a penis.”

The ACLU, along with Lambda Legal and the Transgender Law Center, filed a bizarre motion in response denying that, “‘men as a class’ are defined and differentiated from ‘women as a class’ by their ‘anatomy, genitalia, physical characteristics, and physiology.’”

Are there physiological differences between men and women? Science says there are while the ACLU denies it in what may be one of the most surreal motions ever submitted to a court.

Denying sexual dimorphism is up there with a motion claiming that the earth is flat.

But the ACLU motion went on “to deny the allegation that ‘human beings’ are ‘sexually dimorphic, divided into males and females each with reproductive systems, hormones, and chromosomes that result in significant differences between men[] and women[.]’”

Biology 101 is now an “allegation” to be denied in court.

Maybe the ACLU’s next motion will deny the “allegation” that the earth revolves around the sun.

The civil rights lawsuit the ACLU is fighting uses textbook terminology. Literally. The language of a basic biology textbook is being denied by a former civil rights group fighting against a civil rights suit by a sexual assault victim. The ACLU now hates science, women, and civil rights.

Not to mention free speech.

Within a decade the ACLU has gone from falsely accusing Republicans of a “War on Women” to waging an actual war on women in court. The ACLU has also switched from claiming that Republicans were tolerating sexual assaults on women to fighting women in court so that male sex offenders can continue to sexually assault them. That’s what a War on Women looks like.

It’s hard to know whether this is worse than the ACLU also throwing out freedom of speech.

Even while the ACLU files motions denying the existence of women in court, it still maintains the ACLU Women's Rights Project that was founded by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

The ACLU denies that women are a class when filing a motion against a lawsuit by a woman who was sexually assaulted, and then argues that they are a class in employment law.

Women are apparently still a class when they’re being paid less than men, but they’re not a class when a man wearing a dress wants to sexually assault them in the prison system.

The ACLU Women's Rights Project claims that it “addresses the harms to women and girls caught up in the criminal and juvenile justice systems” even while its California chapters are fighting women who have been caught up in the criminal justice systems and suffered harm.

Even while the ACLU fundraises off defending women, it denies they exist. Its legal advocacy has begun to shift away from mentioning pregnant women to referring to “pregnant people”.

The ACLU promises to advocate for women while erasing them in court.

The former civil rights group accuses abortion opponents of supporting “forced pregnancy”, but women in prison have become pregnant while it insists on forcing them to live alongside male rapists. The actual agenda of the ACLU is even worse than its wildest accusations that it and its radical leftists allies have been hurling for decades at social conservatives.

In Washington, the ACLU went to court to stop the release of documents about the transfer of male prisoners, including a serial rapist, into the Washington Correctional Center for Women.

The men included Douglas “Donna” Perry, a serial killer who violently hated women, was charged with murdering three prostitutes and may have killed between nine and twenty women.

Douglas Perry explained that he killed women because he "couldn't breed" and the "women had the ability to have children".

A family member of one of his murder victims had specifically asked that Douglas be kept out of a women's prison so he would not be able to hurt any more women.

But in California’s progressive jurisprudence, only the rights of criminals matter to the Left.

The ACLU's male attorney went so far in that case as to file an injunction against the woman requesting information about the number of men being housed in women's correctional facilities.

“The War on Women 2.0: Do They Think We're Stupid?” the ACLU headlined its arguments a decade ago. The ACLU is waging a War on Women 2.0 and it thinks its supporters are stupid.

In the name of diversity, equity and inclusion, the ACLU wants to force women to live alongside a male serial killer who piled up their naked corpses near the Spokane River.

Douglas Perry was caught because a cold case investigation allowed a "forensic scientist… to be able to develop a male DNA profile from blood" found under one of the victim's fingernails.

Perry is still a man. He was caught because of a male DNA profile. That’s actual science.

But how long will it be until the ACLU argues that DNA evidence can’t be used to stop serial killers like Perry because he now identifies as a woman and therefore he can’t be the suspect.

Perry's defense for the murder of those women was, "I'm not going to admit I killed anybody, I didn't. Donna has killed nobody." When he was asked if "Doug did", he answered, "I don't know if Doug did or not, it was 20 years ago and I have no idea whether he did or did not."

What used to be insanity a mere eight years ago is now the official position of the establishment.

In an extraordinary document, the ACLU denies everything we know about biological science and it does so in the name of not only erasing women, but exposing them to sexual abuse.

The ACLU claims to be fighting to protect women even as it’s forcing them to share a space with serial killers, rapists and sex offenders. What else would you call that except a War on Women?

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Sunday, May 22, 2022

Amazon’s Mega-Yacht Owner Funds $10 Billion “Great Reset" to Save Planet

By On May 22, 2022
Amazon’s founder and executive chairman announced a $10 billion Bezos Earth Fund. The billions will be spent by the Washington Post’s owner to save the planet from people.

The Bezos Earth Fund calls for "a great reset that will lead us all toward a more sustainable, prosperous future." The term, "great reset" became highly controversial after its embrace by the World Economic Forum and the Bezos Earth Fund is touted by the WEF.

The Bezos Earth Fund's version of the Great Reset argues that the "economy in 2030 must be dramatically different from what it is today" and insists that "radical changes will be needed" that will encompass "some 40 to 60 shifts".

Those changes however will probably not involve Jeff Bezos abandoning his mega-yacht, the 14th largest on the planet, which reportedly may require the dismantling of the historic Koningshaven bridge in Rotterdam just to get it out of the harbor.

The Bezos Earth Fund warns that most people will have to shift “transport modes (e.g., walking and public transport)”. Bezos will have his mega-yacht, you will walk or ride a bus.

While the Bezos Earth Fund calls for the "replacement of the internal combustion engine", his $500 million mega-yacht is powered by two diesel engines which together can deliver 12,000 horsepower in order to move it anywhere one of the richest men in the world wants to go.

Meanwhile, the Bezos Earth Fund proposes to use satellites to “identify methane pollution, hold those responsible accountable and highlight opportunities to manage and minimize oil and gas methane emissions. Actionable data will be produced and used to implement advocacy campaigns to spur regulations and secure commitments to reduce methane pollution globally.”

Will those satellites be tracking their boss’ colossal yacht?

Americans are facing impossible car and gas prices due to the environmental policies of the Biden administration. While the working class and middle class are being cut off from car ownership, the mega-yacht proletariat of the world are demanding even further crackdowns.

The Bezos Earth Fund claims that the economy needs to be "decarbonized". His mega-yacht has a second “support” yacht with a helicopter pad. The Fund says that "radical changes will be needed in the way we power our world”, “manufacture and consume products" and "grow our food". The Bezos yacht has its own swimming pool, and 25 rooms across three decks.

But everyone else can expect to live in a cramped urban gulag that “co-locates housing and jobs”. Perhaps entire families can occupy a room in an Amazon warehouse that will allow them to wake up and then shuffle out bed to sort packages with maximum efficiency.

The Bezos Earth Fund will also spend money forcing agriculture to comply with environmental demands and push non-billionaires to shift their “diets towards plant-based sources”. Bezos however reportedly enjoys a "Mediterranean octopus breakfast" with bacon. Even after the Great Reset, he’ll be able to eat whatever he wants. Ordinary Americans will get soy.

“The economy in 2030 must be dramatically different from what it is today,” the Bezos Earth Fund decrees. And in 2022, it already is, in no small part thanks to Jeff Bezos.

Amazon destroyed retail, wiping out countless businesses and jobs. It’s evolved into a platform for rapidly moving Chinese knockoffs of American products through third party sellers into this country in a move that will doom the last remnants of manufacturing in this country.

While 200,000 American businesses were destroyed by pandemic regulations, Amazon profits tripled. The vast wealth looted from the middle class is now being injected into calls for “systemwide transformations” and “environmental justice”.

Perhaps the staff at the Bezos Earth Fund could take a minute to discuss "environmental justice" with the Amazon delivery drivers who were killed during the collapse of its Illinois warehouse during a tornado.

The Bezos Fund’s version of “environmental justice” promises to focus on “women of color”,

The dead at Amazon's warehouse were four white men, a black man and a black woman.

The family of one of the victims, Austin McEwen, has sued Amazon claiming that there were structural flaws and no safe shelters. Maybe the Bezos fund can cut loose a few thousand from the $43 million it’s spending on “environmental justice” for “women of color” for actual justice.

Instead, the Bezos Earth Fund is moving $12 million to NDN Collective, a leftist activist group which calls for an “indigenous green new deal” while "uprooting white supremacy and colonial institutions".

Nothing like one of the richest white men in the world funding the uprooting of white supremacy.

Having already destroyed so many American businesses, the Bezos Earth Fund proposes to nuke what’s left from orbit by embracing the push to “accelerate progress among US financial regulators as they address climate as a systemic risk.” That means baking carbon taxes and offsets, and other gimmicks green investors are using to loot the economy into the business model, and forcing all businesses to shoulder the agenda items of the Green New Deal.

Failing to comply with the demands of environmentalists means your business is a “climate risk” while donating to politicians or organizations that oppose the Green New Deal can be defined as “fraudulent misrepresentation”.

The Bezos Earth Fund is funding a push to “mobilize commitments of banks and investors to net zero portfolios”, not to mention insurers. If your business doesn’t comply, good luck getting a loan, insurance, being listed on a stock exchange, or being allowed to operate.

Whether or not the Green New Deal or any climate accords get passed, they will be imposed by mega-yacht billionaires, banks, corporations, and their paid “grassroots activists.”

The Ceres Investor Network on Climate Risk and Sustainability, which Bezos is funding here, also seeks to pressure food producers to reduce their "emissions". What that will mean is higher costs and less food for the rest of us while Bezos can pull into a seaside Miami eatery in two superyachts and order a dozen grilled oysters because he’s so worried about “emissions”.

Are these really the actions of a man who believes the world will end if we drive our cars?

Beyond all the rhetoric, Bezos is moving millions into the same old leftist activist machine.

The Bezos Earth Fund directed $43 million to the Climate and Clean Energy Equity Fund. The CCEEF was created by George Soros' Democracy Alliance. $10 million is going to Green for All, which was created by Van Jones, whose work has been touted by Bezos, and has been funded by, among others, Soros and the Ford Foundation.

Millions more are going to Earthrise Media which operates alongside the Sixteen Thirty Fund, the dark money machine of the Left, the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund, Mothers Out Front, and a variety of leftist groups in favor of the Green New Deal.

And, of course, the World Economic Forum.

"You will own nothing and be happy," a World Economic Forum video envisioned the great reset of the world in 2030.

Jeff Bezos is doing his part to make sure you own nothing while he happily owns everything.

That’s what environmentalism is. Behind the manufactured crisis, that’s all it ever was. You will be forced to give up everything to “save the planet” while the new feudal mega-yacht lords will build bigger mega-yachts and fund the activists demanding you give up whatever is left.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Thursday, May 19, 2022

The Washington Post Was Founded by Confederates. Now It Screams, "Racism".

By On May 19, 2022
The Washington Post recently decided to cancel George Washington, running an op-ed demanding that George Washington University be renamed.

"The university’s contentious colonial moniker must go. Even the university’s name, mascot and motto — 'Hail Thee George Washington'— must be replaced,” The op-ed demanded.

Conveniently the op-ed did not propose to rename the paper it was running in.

But the Washington Post has bigger problems than that. Its founder, Stilson Hutchins, like many Democrats, was a militant supporter of the Confederacy and even named one of his sons after Robert E. Lee. Long before he founded the Post, Hutchins had been editor of the North Iowan where he and other Democrats promised to defeat "Black Republicans".

During the Civil War, Dennis Mahony, Stilson's superior while working on the Dubuque Herald, was arrested over his support for the Confederacy. Stilson and Mahony later went on to found the St. Louis Star.

At the Herald, Stilson had editorialized, “Who wants Iowa covered with indolent blacks? Answer at the polls.”

Hutchins, in the words of a cheerful profile by the Washington Post, left after Reconstruction and then "launched a bold, possibly even reckless plan: to start a Democratic newspaper in the Republican-run capital of the United States."

The name, The Washington Post, came from Hutchins' managing editor, John Cockerill, a former Confederate drummer boy, who had gotten his start in the press working at the Dayton Empire under Clement Vallandigham, the Copperhead Democrat leader who was arrested and tried for treason during the Civil War. (Cockerill would later kill one of his critics in an exchange of gunfire.)

And, as the Washington Post noted, the paper's original "city editor was Frederick Aiken, who had been one of Mary Surratt's defense attorneys in her trial for conspiracy to assassinate Abraham Lincoln."

The Washington Post was founded, named, and run by Confederates and their Democrat allies.

The paper was also predictably racist. One editorial urged that Washington D.C. would be "wealthier, healthier and happier for an immediate exodus of 15,000 or 20,000 of her Negro population." Otherwise there would have to be "a firm, but benevolent movement on the part of the white race as a whole to disabuse the negro of the delusions which have been instilled in him during the last dozen years."

The same paper that has called for the heads, or at least the heads of the statues of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and countless other Founding Fathers and national heroes, has carefully avoided any kind of reckoning. It’s not that the Post’s people don’t know the history, they have just carefully avoided any significant discussion of their social justice rag’s ugly past.

There’s curiously little interest in the origins of one of the country’s two most influential papers.

Stilson, who later bought a former slave plantation, went on to marry a woman half his age who then tried to have him declared insane. Ownership of the Post does come with a history of insanity. Ned McLean, whose own descent into insanity was attributed to his ownership of the Hope Diamond, might have been more accurately attributed to owning the Post.

(McLean has also been blamed for using the Washington Post to help incite some of the violence during the 1919 race riots in Washington D.C.)

That’s bad news for Amazon's Jeff Bezos.

Five years after buying the Washington Post, Bezos broke up his marriage, left his job as Amazon's CEO, and has taken to blaming the exposure of his affair with a guest host from The View on a conspiracy involving the National Enquirer, Trump, and the Saudi monarchy.

At one point even the UN got involved in investigating the provenance of his genitalia photos.

Aside from the racism, the Washington Post seems to drive its owners mad. Literally. But the true insanity is the Post putting "Democracy Dies in Darkness" and then avoiding any discussion of its own dark past. A more accurate motto might be, “History Dies in Darkness.”

America is not systemically racist, but the Washington Post originated as one of the most racist papers in the country. The past is not the present and most people understand that. But the social justice paper insists on attacking the country and its people as a bunch of racists.

And it carefully avoids engaging with its own history.

The Washington Post came to life as a project by Democrat Confederates and Copperheads to avenge their losses in the Civil War and roll back Reconstruction. That doesn’t mean that the paper is doomed to be racist. Systemic racism, like racial essentialism and other assumptions that people individually and collectively are unchanging and unchangeable, is a racist myth.

But the Washington Post insists that everyone else can’t change, but that it somehow has.

All white people are racist, except its owner who has his own mega-yacht.

If the Washington Post really wants George Washington University to change its name, it should change its own. Not because there’s anything wrong with George Washington, but there was a whole lot wrong with The Post’s founders and its present management. The paper began as a racist rag and continues today as a racist rag. The only difference lies in the targets of its hate.

Last year, the Washington Post featured a video urging white people to take the blame for racism by “understanding your whiteness and the ways that white supremacy benefits you” and joining “white accountability groups.”

Despite its origins in actual white supremacy, the paper has yet to join one of its own groups.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

All Wars Are Endless Wars

By On May 19, 2022
Over 70 days into the Ukraine war, no one knows how it’s going to end. But the one thing that we can be sure of is that it’s going to pick up again where it ends this time around.

The war is the latest episode of a nationalist territorial conflict going back centuries. And those don’t go away until the people fighting them do. Progressive theories of history spent the last century predicting that wars were on the way out in a more enlightened age. Then two world wars shattered the civilized world and nearly led to a third even more devastating conflict.

And yet westerners are still prone to believing that war, which has been around for as long as mankind, is one of those old-fashioned barbaric things, like mutton chops, disco, and Joe Biden, that is about to go out of style in the wonderfully enlightened world of tomorrow.

It’s not.

Very few of our conflicts are even new. Most are “endless wars” of tribe, race, religion or national identity that have been around for hundreds or even thousands of years.

The War on Terror is not a recent phenomenon in response to, as leftists and libertarians allege, the oil industry, Mohammed cartoons, colonialism or miniskirts.

It’s just the latest episode in the Islamic conquests that date back over a thousand years.

By the 7th century, the Arab Muslim invaders were fighting what was left of the Eastern Roman Empire. By the 8th century, they defeated Chinese forces during the Battle of Talas when the Turkic mercs joined the Muslim side. The wars have started and stopped since then, but they’ve never actually gone away. And it’s unlikely that they ever will. At least not for centuries more.

The 'Führerprinzip' fallacy assumes that wars are begun by leaders. In Ukraine, it’s tempting to attribute the conflict to Vladimir Putin. And while Putin’s desire for a quick legacy led to the massive overreach and a bloody war, any strong Russian leader would have done the same.

The Russians, like the Chinese and Arab Muslims, want the restoration of an old empire. And they’re not alone. While westerners decided that they wanted to move on to an exciting borderless future defined not by territory, but technology, the rest of the world does not.

Western weakness spurred the resumption of tribal conflicts all over the world. The United Nations, international law, the spread of democracy and other western solutions have not only failed to stem the violence, they have actually encouraged it. The international house of cards is built on the implausible notion that most countries and peoples don’t really want wars.

History, even the most recent history, makes it painfully clear that they do.

What does it mean to have a United Nations in a world where most nations have causes and grudges that they want to fight over? Spreading democracy couldn’t fix Iraq because the one thing most Sunnis and Shiites could agree on is that they wanted to kill each other.

We live in a world of endless wars. And it’s time that we faced that simple truth.

The Ukraine war is neither an ending nor a beginning, it’s a continuation. So is Afghanistan where history is repeating itself again. Look closely at the various global conflicts and you’ll see signs of the same cycle reasserting itself despite international law and our nation building.

That doesn’t mean that we should get involved or that we shouldn’t. What we should do is discard the old “war for democracy” or “war to end all wars” notions from the world wars.

War, like forest fires, tornadoes, human evil, and Barbara Streisand, is not going away.

We are not striving to reach the end of history. Nor should we get involved in wars to assert an imaginary international community or equally imaginary law, or right side of history. Nation building is a waste of time, resources, and energy. We can’t build countries. Only they can build themselves and every time we tried, we discovered we had no control over the outcome.

Japan and Germany, Iraq and Afghanistan, are what they are because of the choices that their people made, and all our money and efforts would not have changed the outcome one iota.

When we do get involved in the affairs of other nations, we should do so intelligently.

Our goals, in that order, should be to protect ourselves, to lend aid to those allies worth supporting, and to help manage global conflicts so that they don’t spill over to us.

We should not waste our strength or get involved in every regional quarrel, but when we do get involved, we should do so effectively and decisively. That’s the opposite of Biden’s actions in Ukraine which are heavy on the posturing and light on effectiveness. In a world forever at war, we must remember that we can never escape it and that we should encounter it carefully.

Americans often feel as if we exist outside history. And to a greater degree, more than most nations, we do. But the rest of the world is very much a part of a history that predates us.

That history is not going away just because we aren’t aware of it or aren’t paying attention to it.

9/11 was only a surprise because we were not paying attention to history. Likewise the invasion of Ukraine and China’s expansionism are not recent developments, but historical trends.

If America is to survive the pressure cooker of history, we must understand history, and we must decide on what terms to meet the rest of the world and how to manage the fallout of its conflicts.

We may have smartphones and all our information may exist in the cloud, we may drive to work in electric cars and get our news from bots, but history can’t be escaped with better gadgets.

The future it turns out is going to be a lot like the past.

We don’t exist outside the world, but neither do we have to be at its mercy. And the decisions we make will determine the conditions of our present and the possibilities of our future.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Wednesday, May 18, 2022

Evil Lives Matter

By On May 18, 2022
In 1978, Deana Bowdoin, an Arizona State University college student, was raped and strangled. It would take thirty years to trace the murder to Clarence Wayne Dixon, a serial rapist whose criminal record began when he attacked a 15-year-old girl with a pipe.

By the time Deana’s murder was traced to him, Dixon was already in prison for kidnapping and raping another ASU college student.

He should have already been locked up during Deanna's murder because he had assaulted a 15-year-old girl with a pipe, telling her, “Nice evening, isn’t it?”, but future Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor deemed him "not guilty by reason of insanity".

Two days before the monster was supposed to go to a psychiatric hospital, he raped and murdered Deanna.

Former Justice O'Connor's shameful opposition to the death penalty should be seen in the context of Deana's murder. While O’Connor made headlines when she falsely suggested that the death penalty is unfair, it was her failure to hold Dixon accountable that was truly unfair.

Over 40 years later, Dixon’s defenders have gone back to claiming that he’s mentally unfit and that executing him is cruel and unusual punishment, but the true cruel and unusual punishment is the one suffered by Deana’s family who had to wait this many decades to see justice.

“Deana was a beautiful person, inside and out. She was only 21 and in her last semester at ASU when she was violently taken from my family. The last forty-four plus years of reliving Deana’s brutal murder as well as enduring the trial and appellate litigation has been nothing short of horrific for our family. As victims, the Arizona Constitution guarantees a prompt and final conclusion of this matter. Our parents wanted nothing more than to ultimately see justice for Deana. Unfortunately, they both passed away before punishment could be imposed," her sister stated.

The true cruel and unusual punishment was inflicted by a justice system on the family members of the victim because it has been unnaturally rigged by leftists to protect criminals over victims.

Deana, had she lived, would be in her late fifties today. The young girl would have started a family, built a career, and made an impact on the world.

Unfortunately she never had that chance.

Clarence Wayne Dixon has gone on living all these decades. He grew old under the care of the state. His apologists claimed that he couldn’t be executed because he had been declared legally blind or found to be suffering from this physical or mental ailment or that. His lawyers insisted that his determined pursuit of a bad legal strategy proved that he was crazy.

The Washington Post ran an op-ed claiming that Republicans don't really care about life because they didn't spare the monster who raped and killed a girl.

Complaining about the leaked draft of the Supreme Court striking down Roe v. Wade, the op-ed insists that "ultimately, it isn’t about valuing human life but about how much each human life is worth. And in Arizona, a convict’s life seems to have very little value."

Evil Lives Matter.

Dixon placed so little value on human life that he took it casually. His defenders are equally casual about murdering babies. But they claim that defending a murderer while rallying for the right to kill babies means that they are the ones who truly value human life.

No, we don’t believe that all human life has value regardless of the individual. That’s a collectivist fallacy. The lives of Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin or Clarence Wayne Dixon, all now fortunately dead, do not equate to the life of a single baby taken at a Planned Parenthood baby parts plant, let alone that of the millions who have perished in this gruesome way.

Believing in the value of life means fighting against those who would take lives.

The Washington Post op-ed complains that “Arizona’s Republican attorney general, Mark Brnovich” has "conservative values” that “don’t line up quite the same way. Brnovich is antiabortion, yes, but since the start of this year, he has been locked on a mission to resume executions — making Dixon and Atwood his first targets."

Frank Jarvis Atwood, a pedophile cokehead, who was out on parole for abducting an 8-year-old boy, kidnapped Vicki Lynne Hoskinson, an 8-year-old girl. He was then seen with blood on him. Despite having the best legal representation that his father’s money could buy, including a former clerk for Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, Atwood’s people claim that he never had a fair shake, and invented a new controversy over the potential use of a gas chamber.

Atwood, who is Greek Orthodox, had a mother who was Jewish by birth, and the media tried to transform him into the victim because he was offered a choice between gas and a lethal injection. The pedophile killer’s legal team also complained that due to his back issues he couldn’t be strapped to a gurney because “every second on that table will be agonizing.”

It’s been thirty-eight years since the murder. Every second of it was agonizing for Vicki’s family.

Meanwhile Frank Atwood has obtained several degrees, including one in comparative religion, gotten married, and written six books. Now the son of a cable company president from Brentwood will once again have his turn to play the victim. We’ll be told, over and over again, that he will have to be taken to the death chamber in a wheelchair.

Outside the prison where Dixon was being executed, protesters gathered waving, “All Life is Precious” signs. All life is precious except the lives of innocent men, women, and children.

“It would offend humanity to execute Mr. Dixon," a filing on behalf of Deana's killer claimed.

On the contrary, it would have offended humanity not to execute him.

To say that life is precious while doing nothing to protect it is how we once again became a nation with skyrocketing murder rates where criminals are no longer locked up.

Deana and Vicki were murdered by monsters who should have been in jail, but weren’t.

Thanks to Sandra Day O’Connor, Dixon was roaming on the loose after a violent assault, and thanks to California’s broken justice system, Atwood was out on parole even after his parents asked for it to be withdrawn. A young woman and a girl are dead who should have been alive.

The same thing is happening all over the country. Most of the killers whose crimes are sending homicide rates through the roof will never face justice. And that is why the killing will go on.

Conservatives believe life is precious and are willing to defend the lives of the innocent against the ravages of evil men. Leftists however believe that only evil lives matter.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.

Monday, May 16, 2022

Who’s Paying Protesters to Harass Justices and Churches?

By On May 16, 2022
Supreme Court justices have faced harassment and intimidation after a pro-abortion group calling itself Ruth Sent Us posted a map to their homes.

Justice Alito and his family, who wrote the draft opinion on abortion that had been leaked by leftists, have had to go into hiding at an undisclosed location.

Had conservative protests outside the homes of Sotomayor and Kagan led one of them to go into hiding, the FBI would already be on the case and the media would be calling it an insurrection and a threat to democracy, but it’s not political terrorism when leftists do it.

So you can be confident that none of the leftists threatening Supreme Court justices will themselves face justice. And if a single one of them is arrested, they will immediately have the best lawyers and a media press campaign claiming that free speech is being silenced.

Just to add bigoted intimidation of houses of worship, Ruth Sent Us also called for protests at Catholic churches. “Stand at or in a local Catholic Church,” it urged on its Twitter account.

While over the past two years, Big Tech companies have suspended or deplatformed conservative groups over the encouragement of political protests, including against lockdowns, Twitter has no problem with leftists encouraging the harassment of houses of worship.

“Do you dare to chant in your local churches?”

Abortion activists dressed like characters from the faltering Hulu TV show The Handmaid's Tale disrupted prayer services while chanting their support for the murder of babies.

Despite the harassment of justices and churches, Ruth Sent Us retains all of its social media accounts. Neither Facebook, TikTok nor Twitter have deplatformed the hate group.

Who is behind Ruth Sent Us?

It certainly isn't Ruth Bader Ginsburg, after whom the group is named, who would have been disgusted by the harassment of her colleagues. Ginsburg had been a good friend of the late Antonin Scalia and had been critical of Roe v. Wade's unsustainable expansiveness. Alito’s leaked draft even quotes her. While Ruth Sent Us falsely claims that Gingsberg believed that, "black lives matter", the former justice was actually harshly critical of anthem protests.

She would have been even less fond of harassing justices in their homes.

Ruth Sent Us is meant to appear grassroots. In reality, it’s interlinked with a much larger network of leftist organizations. The site was registered by Sam Spiegel, the director of digital media at an anti-Trump PAC known as Unseat whose email contact is listed as Vigil for Democracy.

Unseat and Vigil for Democracy also appear to share a post office box in Palo Alto, California.

Vigil for Democracy, another anti-Trump group, had organized previous Supreme Court rallies.

Ruth Sent Us promotes activism through something called Strike for Choice which its Twitter account describes as "one of the national strikes under the Vigil For Democracy umbrella."

Strike for Choice solicits donations to pay protesters, asking potential donors "would you commit to donating $58 [$7.25], $80 [$10] or $120 [$15] to support a person giving up paid work?"

The protest fundraising is being conducted through Open Collective, a leftist financial sponsor, which had previously partnered with the Digital Infrastructure Fund backed by $605,000 from the Ford Foundation, $50,000 from leftist Persian billionaire Pierre Omidyar, and $100,000 from George Soros' Open Society Foundation.

Most early Vigil for Democracy events took place in San Francisco and the group still appears to be centered around the Bay Area. Vigil appears to be obsessed with "desegregating Foothills Park", also the particular fixation of Vara Ramakrishnan, a tech CEO's wife and a member of Raging Grannies who had organized previous protests, and has been described as a Vigil for Democracy “volunteer”. While her husband only made a single political donation to Kamala Harris, Vara is a frequent donor to Democrats including Hillary Clinton and Obama.

Both Obama and Hillary have yet to condemn the attacks on the Supreme Court.

While the Vigil for Democracy people have engaged in frequent protests, Ruth Sent Us is a significant escalation, harassing multiple justices and an entire religious denomination.

Ruth Sent Us are not the only leftists promoting the harassment of churches and justices.

A protest at Justice Alito’s house for example was promoted by Shut Down D.C., a group linked to environmentalists and unions.

It’s unclear exactly who is behind Ruth Sent Us and the network of organizations around it, but that network is able to utilize the tools of left-wing groups and is fundraising to pay protesters.

What is clear is that like so much of the leftist radicalism in this country, the attacks on justices and churches are being organized out of the Bay Area. And the Biden administration has repeatedly refused to condemn the harassment and intimidation by its political backers.

Much as Black Lives Matter was able to stage nationwide riots that destroyed neighborhoods, assault innocent people, and take lives without facing any consequences, Ruth Sent Us and other pro-abortion leftist radicals enjoy immunity from trying to stop a judicial ruling.

Threatening judges in ordinary civil and criminal cases leads to harsh sanctions. Mere witness tampering alone is a serious matter. But here leftists are threatening the highest court in the land in order to force it to change its ruling in a case and they are doing so under the protective political and economic umbrella of the White House, of Big Tech, and of the media.

They’re harassing the highest court in the land because they know that nothing will happen to them. It’s not an “insurrection” when leftists do it.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. 

Thank you for reading.


Blog Archive