Anti-Semitism Archives - Dr. Rich Swier

Ilhan Omar’s Marital Deception and Financial Fraud

October 12, 2026/in Anti-America, anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Courts & Law, Culture War, Deep State, Democrat Socialists, Election Fraud, Featured, Hot Topics, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, News, Shariah Law, Socialist Class Warfare, The Truth, Treason/by Amil Imani

The political career of Rep. Ilhan Omar is defined by a pattern of calculated legal manipulation and systemic financial misconduct.

While her supporters often attempt to frame these issues as personal oversights, the documented evidence reveals a history of deliberate fraud involving her marriages, her tax filings, and the exploitation of campaign resources for personal enrichment.

The most striking instance of Omar’s disregard for U.S. law is her 2009 legal marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi. Despite Omar’s insistence that Elmi is a stranger, a significant body of evidence, including social media records and school documents, identifies Elmi as her biological brother. This marriage was not a union of affection but a strategic sham designed to secure a green card and eventual U.S. citizenship for her sibling.

While legally married to Elmi, Omar continued a domestic life and fathered children with another man, Ahmed Hirsi. This overlapping timeline exposes the 2009 marriage as a fraudulent tool used to circumvent federal immigration statutes. By entering into a legal contract with her own brother, Omar committed both incest and marriage fraud — felonies that under standard enforcement would lead to immediate denaturalization and deportation. Her refusal to release DNA records or birth certificates suggests the reality of this deception.

Omar’s fraudulent activity extends directly into the federal and state tax systems. In 2019, an investigation by the Minnesota Campaign Finance Board (MCFB) forced Omar to admit to filing joint tax returns with Ahmed Hirsi in 2014 and 2015. At the time of these filings, she was still legally married to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi.

This was a calculated act of tax fraud. By filing jointly with a man who was not her legal husband, Omar intentionally misrepresented her household status to the government. Minnesota law is clear: common-law marriage is not recognized. Omar’s “joint” filing was an illegal attempt to gain tax advantages. She was subsequently ordered to pay back thousands in unpaid taxes and faced formal penalties for her dishonesty.

The MCFB investigation also uncovered Omar’s habit of treating donor contributions as a personal slush fund. She was caught using campaign money to pay for personal travel — including trips to Boston and Estonia — and for personal legal services. These are not clerical errors; they are direct violations of campaign finance laws that forbid the use of political donations for a candidate’s lifestyle.

The financial exploitation worsened after she took federal office. Omar funneled nearly $3 million in campaign funds into the pocket of her current husband, Tim Mynett, through his consulting firm, E Street Group. This arrangement allowed Omar to bypass ethical standards, effectively transferring donor money directly into her own household’s wealth.

As of January 2026, Omar is under renewed pressure as federal investigators widen their probe into the $9 billion “Feeding Our Future” fraud scheme in Minnesota. This massive theft of taxpayer funds, centered in the Somali community Omar represents, involved the fabrication of thousands of “ghost children” to steal pandemic meal money.

While Omar claims she had no part in the theft, the facts tell a different story. Multiple individuals convicted in this multi-billion-dollar heist were prominent donors to her campaign. Furthermore, her husband’s various business ventures — ranging from a California winery to obscure venture capital firms — have seen their reported value skyrocket from nearly zero to $30 million in a suspiciously short period. This sudden explosion of wealth, occurring while the surrounding community was being pillaged by fraud, points to a deeper involvement in the corrupt financial networks of her district.

In January 2026, a report by The Gateway Pundit revealed that Omar attempted to slip a one million dollars funding provision into a recent spending bill, which was directly linked to organizations currently under federal investigation for fraud. This move was a brazen attempt to use taxpayer dollars to bail out or further fund the same corrupt networks involved in the “Feeding Our Future” scandal. This legislative maneuver confirms that Omar’s priority is not public service, but the continued financing of the criminal enterprises that support her political machine.

Omar’s current husband, Tim Mynett, is a defendant in a January 2026 lawsuit alleging he defrauded investors of $300,000 through a wine business. This lawsuit highlights a double standard: while Omar frequently uses her faith to secure political support, her household actively profits from the sale of alcohol — a practice strictly forbidden (haram) in the very faith she champions. This hypocrisy further illustrates that for Omar and Mynett, religious and legal rules are merely tools to be discarded when they interfere with profit.

Ilhan Omar’s history is not one of “mistakes,” but of a career built on the deliberate subversion of American law.

From marrying her brother to defraud immigration authorities to filing fraudulent tax returns and siphoning campaign cash into her husband’s bank accounts, her record is a testament to systemic corruption. As federal probes into the $9 billion Minnesota fraud continue to close in, the facade of her political legitimacy is rapidly collapsing.

RELATED ARTICLES:

DHS Raids Ilhan Omar’s Home Amid Criminal Investigation

One Detail in Ilhan Omar’s Raid Response Betrays Her Cowardice

DHS Raids Ilhan Omar’s Home Amid Criminal Investigation

October 12, 2026/in Anti-America, Anti-Semitism, Communism, Courts & Law, Featured, Hot Topics, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Jihad, Shariah Law, The Truth/by The Daily Caller

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s home was raided Monday morning by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as part of an ongoing criminal investigation, the Daily Caller confirmed.

“Today in the Washington, D.C. area, Homeland Security Investigations executed a judicially authorized search warrant secured by the Department of Justice,” a Department of Justice (DOJ) spokesperson told the Caller.

“This enforcement action is part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation,” the spokesperson added.

Federal agents swarmed the congresswoman’s home amid a criminal fraud investigation into Omar’s immigration paperwork, according to Fox News.

The Somali-born congresswoman’s records were filled out by her late father when she was a child, according to two anonymous sources who spoke to Fox News Digital.

WATCH: Homeland Security is at Ilhan Omar’s DC residence this morning. https://t.co/6PVe61WTwg

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) October 12, 2026

President Donald Trump’s administration had previously indicated that it would investigate Omar. Trump and his allies have long accused Omar of committing immigration fraud by marrying her brother, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi.

In March, Vice President JD Vance said the administration “definitely” believes Omar had committed fraud and they were evaluating their options to “go after” her.

Vance later confirmed to the Caller that Omar was under investigation by the DOJ in May.

“It certainly seems like something fishy is there,” Vance told the Caller. “But everyone is entitled to equal justice under the laws.”

“So we’re going to investigate it, we’re going to take a look at it. If we think there’s a crime, we’re going to prosecute that crime, and that’s something that the Department of Justice is looking at right now,” he continued.

AUTHORS

Rebeka Zeljko and Reagan Reese

RELATED ARTICLDS:

One Detail in Ilhan Omar’s Raid Response Betrays Her Cowardice

JD Vance Says White House Plans To ‘Go After’ Ilhan Omar For Alleged Immigration Fraud

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer Presses Ilhan Omar About Her Behavior During Trump’s State Of The Union

The Unknown Donor Axis Behind the Radical Left’s Rise to Power

October 12, 2026/in Anti-America, anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Brainwashed, Culture War, Democrat Socialists, Elections, Hot Topics, Marxism, Marxist, Must Read, News, Policy, Politics, Socialism, The Truth/by The Geller Report

In past elections, big donors to progressives were generally older, wealthy hippies or successful Hollywood players. Now, our analysis of campaign filings shows a crew of virtually unknown donors stepping in to fund the far left. The emerging group skews younger, is often South Asian or Middle Eastern, and works in fields such as technology and medicine. Many had never given to politics before last year, but they are now donating as much as $1 million each to fund progressive candidates and a new “anti-Aipac” super PAC, reports the Wall Street Journal. One of the major financial players in this election jihad is the contemptuously named American Priorities — more accurate would be “American Subversion.”

Key points (based on The Wall Street Journal investigation, October 10, 2026):

A new class of wealthy political donors is financing progressive candidates. Some had little or no recorded political giving before 2025 but are now contributing hundreds of thousands — even millions — of dollars.
An anti-AIPAC super PAC is emerging as a major financial force. American Priorities is directing substantial funding toward progressive candidates critical of Israel and seeking to counter the influence of pro-Israel political spending.
Abdul El-Sayed is a major beneficiary. American Priorities spent more than $500,000 supporting his Michigan Senate campaign.
Five of American Priorities’ 12 largest donors also donated to Zohran Mamdani. The report identifies overlapping financial support for Mamdani and the broader progressive movement.
Two previously unrecorded political donors emerged as million-dollar contributors. Mohammad Waqas gave approximately $1.1 million, while technology investor Omer Hasan contributed approximately $1 million during the 2025–26 cycle.
A corporation with undisclosed funders contributed $470,000. Delaware-based Fig And Olive Action appears among American Priorities’ largest contributors, but its underlying financial backers were not disclosed.
George and Alex Soros remain significant financial players. Their Democracy PAC contributed approximately $7 million to progressive causes and committees analyzed by the Journal.
Saikat Chakrabarti topped the broader progressive donor list at $13.4 million. More than $11 million went to his own congressional campaign committee, which he subsequently converted into a super PAC.
American Priorities spent more than $1 million helping two Democratic Socialists of America-backed candidates win New York congressional primaries. Claire Valdez and Darializa Avila Chevalier benefited from advertisements emphasizing affordability and Mamdani’s endorsement rather than Israel.
The emerging donor network differs from traditional Democratic megadonors. The Journal describes a younger group, frequently working in technology and medicine, alongside established wealthy Democratic contributors.
Progressive organizations are developing new fundraising strategies. Democratic Socialists of America introduced income-based solidarity dues of 1%, while Justice Democrats is seeking resources to compete against better-funded opponents.
The financial support extends beyond the progressive movement itself. Democratic establishment organizations are also spending millions to support progressive nominees, including more than $9 million in television advertising spent or reserved to assist California congressional candidate Randy Villegas.

Bottom line: The Journal documents an expanding financial network connecting newly active wealthy donors, anti-AIPAC political spending, established Democratic megadonors, and progressive candidates. Its findings show growing financial coordination and overlapping interests, but do not establish that these donors operate under a single centralized command.

The Crew of Virtually Unknown Donors Powering the Rise of the New Left

Millions of dollars are flowing to help Democratic socialists and other progressives

By Maggie Severns, Anthony DeBarros and Kara Dapena

Supporters of the progressive left are working to expand their funding as the far left gains momentum.

In Michigan this year, a new super PAC vowing to fight pro-Israel money chipped in more than half a million dollars to help progressive Abdul El-Sayed’s Senate bid. Its funders: a crew of virtually unknown political donors, many of whom had never given to politics before last year but have since donated up to $1 million each.

In New York, billionaire Alex Soros cut checks directly to progressive politicians, including Reps. Pramila Jayapal of Washington and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota. Those donations are part of the millions of dollars that Soros and his father, George, plan to give to Democratic causes this year.

Collage of Abdul El-Sayed, Bob Brooks, and Randy Villegas.
Abdul El-Sayed, Bob Brooks and Randy Villegas have benefited from super PAC spending in their races. Sarah Rice/Getty Images; Matt Rourke/AP; Mario Tama/Getty Images
And in Philadelphia, nearly a million dollars in TV advertising paid for by outside groups is boosting Democratic socialist Chris Rabb, highlighting his endorsement from New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and his willingness to fight for Medicare for All.

The left flank of the Democratic Party raises and spends only a fraction of what many Republicans and the Democratic establishment do on elections. But as the far left gains momentum, supporters are working to expand their funding.

Progressive candidates in the Journal analysis:

Even the Democratic Socialists of America, which is funded exclusively by membership dues and relies largely on volunteers, has been experimenting with raising more money. While introductory dues for DSA members usually start at $10 a month, the organization’s newer option to pay income-based “solidarity dues” set contributions at a much heftier 1% of member’s incomes.

“Give your 1% for the 99%,” the DSA’s website advertises.

Another group that focuses on identifying and helping progressive candidates, Justice Democrats, said its goal is to remain competitive in races where opponents can use funding advantages to sometimes overwhelm progressives with ads.

“We will never have the amount of money that Aipac or crypto have,” said Usamah Andrabi, a spokesman for the group, referring to the pro-Israel American Israel Public Affairs Committee and a cryptocurrency industry that has spent more than $90 million during the midterms. (Aipac spokeswoman Deryn Sousa said the group “is a membership organization of individual Americans, not an industry.”)

Here is how the progressive movement compares with other big-money counterparts.

The Mamdani Factor

Zohran Mamdani’s election as mayor of New York City last fall sparked a new era of far-left politics and a new generation of political donors, many of them critical of the war in the Middle East and frustrated by Aipac spending to support politicians who back Israel.

In past elections big donors to progressives were generally older, wealthy hippies or successful Hollywood players. The emerging group skews younger, is often South Asian or Middle Eastern, and works in fields such as technology and medicine.

Sathvik Kaliyur, CEO of a fundraising firm called NWF Strategies whose clients have included Mamdani and El-Sayed, said his goal is to make it easier for candidates who don’t come from money to run for office.

Many of the biggest checks are going to a super PAC that aims to be an “anti-Aipac” force, called American Priorities.

Continue reading

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

“ROTTEN TO THE CORE”: Mamdani Fights to Free Violent Illegal Who Fled ICE With a Child in the Car

Bomb Threats Made to NYC Jewish Schools

Tens of Thousands March Across European Cities In Support of Jihad and Jew Hatred

France: Muslim Rioters Chant Rap Song Celebrating the Monster Who Executed Jewish Children

Mediocre Runner Becomes a Champion. All He Had to Do Was Become a Woman

Islamization of Iran and 1400 Years of Arab-Islamic Genocide

Trump Mocks Jihadis: ‘We will kill everyone. Praise be to Allah.’

October 12, 2026/in Anti-America, anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Assassination attempt, Brainwashed, Culture War, Elections, Featured, Hot Topics, Immigration, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Jihad, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Terrorism, The Truth, Violence/by Jihad Watch

WATCH: President Trump mocking Muslims who chant Death to America and then praise be to Allah

It’s impossible to know to whom he is referring when he says that “they don’t talk this way anymore,” but one hopes that he is aware that there are many jihadis in the United States, and they certainly do still talk that way. Now: What is he going to do about it?

AUTHOR

Robert Spencer

RELATED ARTICLES:

Question for Navi Pillay: Genocide? What Genocide?

Navi Pillay, If You Can Stand Her

Muslim leader in Japan: ‘We’ll take Japanese women as wives and wipe out pure Japanese people’

Turkey: ‘Long live Ismail Haniyeh. Long live Yahya Sinwar. Long live Mohammed Deif.’

Muslim pharmacy student in East Jerusalem plotted jihad massacre of ‘a lot of Jews’ using poison

Pakistan: Muslims force 15-year-old Christian boy to convert to Islam, tell him to stay away from relatives

Jordanians Demand Bocelli Concert at Petra Be Cancelled

Pakistan: Supreme Court upholds death sentence for Christian falsely accused of blasphemy

POST ON X:

Islamization of Iran and 1400 Years of Arab-Islamic Genocide

October 11, 2026/in anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Culture War, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Jihad, National Security, Policy, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Terrorism, The Truth, Violence/by Amil Imani

When an Iranian dissident proclaims that “the greatest killer of Iranians has been Islam,” the statement is less an exercise in academic historiography than a cry of immediate political exhaustion. Across the diaspora and within the quiet corners of Tehran, Isfahan, and Shiraz, a powerful counternarrative has taken hold. Confronted with the gallows, morality police, and institutional dogmatism of the Islamic Republic, many Iranians have turned history into a weapon of resistance. In this narrative, the seventh-century Arab conquest is not a distant chapter in antiquity, but the original sin of Persian history — an ongoing catastrophe linking the fall of the Sasanian capital of Ctesiphon in 637 A.D. directly to the prison yards of Evin today.

To understand contemporary Iran, one must grasp the potency of this neo-nationalist memory. Yet to understand Iran’s actual past, one must untangle this emotional countermyth from the messy realities of imperial violence, political pragmatism, and cultural assimilation.

The foundational pillar of the anti-clerical narrative is the catastrophic rupture of the Rashidun conquest. The popular memory laments a sophisticated, enlightened Zoroastrian civilization abruptly dismantled by religious fanaticism.

The historical reality was far more mundane and agonizingly political. By 633 A.D., the Sasanian Empire was an exhausted shell. Decades of brutal, total war against the Byzantine Empire had depleted the treasury, shattered the peasant economy through punitive taxation, and broken the imperial army. Internal dynastic fratricide saw nearly a dozen claimants’ cycle through the throne in a span of four years.

When the Arab Muslim armies advanced across the Mesopotamian floodplains, they encountered an empire already unraveling from within. Many regional dehqans (landed nobility) and Nestorian Christian minorities negotiated surrenders and retained their administrative posts rather than sacrifice themselves for a fractured Sasanian court. The subsequent conversion of the Iranian plateau was not a sudden, sword-point event; it took over three centuries of fiscal pressures, social incentives, and localized assimilation before Muslims formed a demographic majority.

The dissident text draws a continuous line of religious terror through later conquerors such as Timur (Tamerlane) and Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar. Here, historiography diverges sharply from theological polemic.

Timur was a Turco-Mongol conqueror of terrifying efficiency who constructed minarets of human skulls across the Middle East. While he invoked Islamic rhetoric to legitimize his campaigns, he massacred Sunni and Shi’i populations with equal ferocity, from Baghdad to Damascus and Isfahan. His violence was the legacy of the Eurasian steppe empire — A.D. terror designed to force rapid capitulation — not a campaign to impose Quranic dogma on Persians.

Similarly, when Agha Mohammad Khan blinded thousands of men in Kerman in 1794, his fury had nothing to do with religious piety. He was a ruthless dynastic warlord extinguishing the rival Zand dynasty to consolidate the Qajar Empire. Folding these bloody campaigns into an unbroken “thread of Islamic terror” strips regional history of its political and dynastic context, reducing complex geopolitics into a single religious motive.

The true paradox of Iranian history lies in what happened after the conquest: Persia did not merely survive; it thoroughly captured its conquerors.

While the languages and cultures of Roman Egypt, the Levant, and North Africa were largely Arabized, Iran retained its linguistic and cultural autonomy. Through the Shu’ubiyya literary movement of the ninth century, Persian scholars asserted their cultural superiority within the caliphate. Under the Abbasids, the machinery of imperial governance — from viziers and tax ledgers to court etiquette — was overwhelmingly staffed by Persians.

Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh revived the Persian language and pre-Islamic mythology, codifying a distinct Iranian civilizational identity. Thinkers like Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Al-Biruni, and Al-Razi operated within an Islamic framework while drawing extensively upon classical Persian, Indian, and Hellenistic traditions. Iranian culture was not an inert victim of a foreign creed; it fundamentally reshaped Islamic civilization into a Perso-Islamic ecumene.

Why, then, does the narrative of absolute religious rupture remain so compelling today?

Because inside the Islamic Republic, history is never academic; it is ideological warfare. For over four decades, the ruling theocracy has attempted to erase or diminish pre-Islamic heritage, framing everything prior to 622 A.D. as Jahiliyyah (an age of pagan ignorance). School curriculums were engineered to prioritize religious martyrdom over national antiquity.

In response, the Iranian public engineered a mirror image of the regime’s dogma. Where the state proclaims Islam brought total enlightenment, dissidents proclaim it brought total destruction. Pre-Islamic symbols — the tomb of Cyrus the Great at Pasargadae, the Faravahar, the fire temples of Yazd — have become subversive counter-symbols of freedom. When young women remove their headscarves to chants of “Zan, Zendegi, Azadi” (Woman, Life, Freedom), they are rejecting an ideology that has weaponized faith to control their bodies, lives, and modern aspirations.

The emotional cry that “Islam is the greatest killer of Iranians” is historically simplistic, but sociologically revelatory. It is the raw voice of a society that has endured decades of ideological enclosure and chosen to look back into the deepest wells of its memory to imagine a future free of clerics. Iran’s greatest triumph has never been ethnic purity or religious isolation, but its stubborn, millennia-old capacity to outlive every ideology that sought to erase it.

Victor Davis Hanson: Iranian Regime Has Only One Way Out

Islamization of Iran

Iran Used ChatGPT to Plant Articles in Media

October 11, 2026/in Anti-Semitism, Commentary, Culture War, Elections, Iranian influence, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Jihad, Misinformation, News, Propaganda, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Socialist Class Warfare, The Truth/by Jihad Watch

Why even bother? The media can do this sort of thing better.

I don’t know why they bothered. The media’s entire output pretty much consists of narratives attacking the Iran War. But I suppose their bosses told them they had to go out and do something because it would be too embarrassing for Iran’s propogandists to admit that there was nothing left for them to do because the New York Times, the Washington Post and MSNOW were doing their jobs for them.

Good effort, guys, but you can really give the ChatGPT a rest. Our media has got this.

Operatives in Iran used OpenAI models and fake personas to help plant news articles critical of the US war against Iran in multiple US media outlets, OpenAI said on Thursday.

About a dozen outlets around the world ran roughly 100 articles by seven fake journalists, OpenAI said in a blog post. The firm said it banned ChatGPT accounts that were prompting the AI tool in Farsi to tweak articles and editorial pitches, and generate social media comments.

Some of the AI-assisted articles had provocative titles, including, “Is America’s Iran Policy Being Privatized? The Jared Kushner Question,” and “The Iran War and the Collapse of Western Moral Credibility.”

Seriously, why even bother? The media can do this sort of thing better.

AUTHOR

Daniel Greenfield

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mamdani Funds Islamic Group to Fund Antisemitism Which Moves the Money Back to Fund Him

Louisiana Muslims Were on Medicaid While Sending Money to Terrorists

9/11 Families and Their Suit Against the Saudis

How the Houthis Recruit Child Soldiers, and How Yemenis Have Turned Against the ‘Palestinians’

Turkey: Muslim screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ disrupt Japanese manga festival, beat participants

Hamas-Linked CAIR’s Quiet Route to Power: Define the Problem, Then Become the Solution

French Rioters and Their Rap Song Praising Muslim Murderers

What’s the REAL Difference Between Islam and Islamism?

Constitution or Sharia: Abdul El-Sayed Owes Voters More Than Lip Service

October 10, 2026/in Anti-America, anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Commentary, Culture War, Democrat Socialists, Elections, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Jihad, Marxism, Marxist, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Socialist Class Warfare, The Truth/by Amil Imani

The Supremacy of Law: Why Constitutional Allegiance Demands More Than a Boilerplate Oath

Western political commentary frequently treats religion as a purely private affair — a matter of personal devotion, moral reflection, and weekend rituals. From that vantage point, applying deep theological scrutiny to a political candidate like Abdul El-Sayed is dismissed as bigotry or a violation of democratic norms. But having grown up within orthodox Islam, studied its classical texts, and ultimately walked away from them, I know that this framing misunderstands the fundamental nature of the legal tradition at stake.

The central tension facing any observant candidate seeking legislative power is not racial, cultural, or superficial. It is fundamentally philosophical: Can an individual who claims fidelity to classical Islamic jurisprudence genuinely uphold the ultimate sovereignty of the United States Constitution?

The core premise of American constitutionalism is popular sovereignty — the radical idea that human beings, through collective deliberation and representation, possess the authority to author, debate, alter, and repeal their own laws. The U.S. Constitution begins with the phrase, “We the People.”

In classical Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), however, sovereignty (hakimiyya) belongs solely to God. Under this doctrine, human beings are not legislators in the true sense; they are executors and interpreters of a pre-existing divine law (Sharia). The moral and civil order is revealed, fixed, and immutable.

When a lawmaker sits in a secular legislature, their fundamental duty is to treat human-authored law as supreme. If a constitutional amendment or statutory provision contradicts traditional jurisprudence, where does an observant believer’s true allegiance lie? For those who believe divine edicts supersede human conventions, placing positive civil law above divine revelation is not merely a political compromise — it borders on theological apostasy. Underlying this legal reality is a simpler historical conclusion: Islam’s origins reflect the earthly ambitions of a single seventh-century tribal leader in the Arabian desert, rather than an unalterable divine decree.

So called scholars often attempt to sanitize Sharia by comparing it to Catholic canon law or Jewish Halakha, arguing it merely dictates prayer schedules, dietary laws, and charitable donations. Anyone who has studied the legal compendiums across the major schools of jurisprudence (madhahib) knows this is an evasion.

Classical Sharia is, by definition, a comprehensive legal and political system. It contains specific, binding rulings on:

Freedom of Conscience: Classical codes mandate severe criminal penalties for apostasy and blasphemy, directly conflicting with the First Amendment.
Equality Under the Law: Traditional jurisprudence establishes clear civil and legal disparities based on gender and religious affiliation, particularly regarding inheritance, testimony, and family law.
The Authority of the State: It envisions a civic order where civil authority is subordinate to religious jurisprudence.

To argue that these components do not exist — or that they are irrelevant to an individual’s worldview — ignores centuries of documented legal tradition. While the so-called modern, progressive Muslims may attempt to reinterpret or bypass these rulings, the underlying theological texts remain authoritative in orthodox institutions. Voters deserve to know whether a candidate treats those classical rulings as archaic historical relics or as binding moral ideals.

Defenders point to the official oath of office as a sufficient safeguard. But oaths are expressions of intent, and intent is shaped by underlying values. In mainstream political discourse, voters routinely scrutinize the foundational worldviews of socialist, libertarian, or conservative candidates to determine how they will exercise power in unforeseen crises. Why should a religious legal philosophy be exempt from the exact same standard?

An oath to the Constitution requires an uncompromising acknowledgment that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, superior to any ancient text, theological pronouncement, or religious authority. It demands an explicit willingness to vote for, enforce, and protect laws that may fundamentally violate orthodox dogma – including full legal protections for ex-Muslims, religious dissidents, and social equality.

Without a transparent, unequivocal repudiation of classical legal supremacy, voters are asked to place blind faith in political packaging.

What makes this dynamic particularly potent is the strategic asymmetry at play: a democratic constitution is used as both an ideological shield and a vehicle for advancement. The First Amendment’s robust guarantees of religious liberty and free exercise provide an impenetrable defense against public inquiry, while the machinery of secular governance offers the platform to institutionalize influence.

In this view, a system fundamentally designed to prevent theological hegemony ends up being utilized to legitimize and advance a worldview whose ultimate jurisprudential premises reject secular supremacy. By operating entirely within the procedural rules of the host republic, an agenda rooted in classical religious law can progress under the guise of civic participation, leveraging the very constitutional safeguards that were intended to preserve a secular state.

Scrutinizing a candidate’s commitment to constitutional supremacy is not discrimination; it is the fundamental responsibility of an informed electorate.

Until candidates with deep ties to orthodox communities openly and publicly affirm that human-made, secular constitutional law permanently supersedes divine jurisprudence on every civic and legal question, voters have every rational reason to withhold their support. The defense of a secular republic requires unflinching vigilance — and it begins by refusing to ignore what the texts actually say.

Daily Signal Article Propagates Common Misunderstandings of Islam

October 9, 2026/in anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Commentary, Culture War, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Jihad, Marxism, Marxist, News, Policy, Shariah Law, Socialism, Socialist Class Warfare, The Truth/by SPIDER & THE FLY The False Allure of Communism

In August, the Daily Signal published an article entitled ‘Sharia Takeover’? What Conservatives Miss in the Debate Over Airport Foot Washing by Tyler O’Neil. The article misapprehends the true nature of Islam and is oblivious to Islamic war doctrine.

‘Islamism’

Islam seeks world domination and imposes a religious duty to wage violent jihad as the means to achieve it. These are standard Islamic doctrines, not flights of fancy tacked on later by ‘fundamentalists’ or ‘extremists’. They come straight from the pages of the Quran. The Quran says 164 times in various ways ‘slay the infidel’. Here are two representative passages:

Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme. Quran 8:40
I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads; strike off the very tips of their fingers. Quran 8:12

Such passages cannot be airbrushed away. Muslims believe the Quran is direct transcription of the word of Allah and, as such, no human being can change them.

As President Erdogan of Turkey put it, “There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”

Thus, the source of the problem is Islam itself. Those who try to separate ‘political Islam’ from ‘religious Islam’ are on a fool’s errand. Moreover, the legions of observers who join the author of the Daily Signal article in referring to “Islamists” (as opposed to ‘peaceful Muslims’) commit fundamental error.

To underscore the point, the threat is not ‘Islamism’ or ‘radical Islam’. The threat is Islam. The author of the Daily Signal article completely misses the mark in writing: “We should condemn any attacks motivated by radical Islam as we condemn attacks on peaceful Muslims who seek to exercise their faith. Preserving that distinction is not weakness—it’s essential to winning the argument against Islamism.” But the argument cannot be against “Islamism”. The argument has to be against Islam itself.

This is the elephant in the room nobody wants to talk about. But until Islam ceases to exist, the rest of humanity is in mortal danger from self-declared enemies who adhere to Islam’s tenets. All who consider themselves faithful observant Muslims are a threat, whether they’ve ever cracked a Quran or not. The Quran is what they profess to believe, giving license to militant actors to wage war on all nonbelievers. There is no other religion that imposes a doctrinal duty to subjugate and kill nonbelievers.

Mohamed Zuhdi Jasser

The article refers favorably to hi-profile figure Zuhdi Jasser, calling him a “Muslim reformer” who has “has long warned against the threat of Islamism, the political approach to Islam that aims at conquest and subjugation.” Jasser, like the author of the article, attempts to distinguish ‘political Islam’ and ‘Islamism’ from ‘real Islam’. The folly of this is apparent from the inarguable case presented above. Moreover, Jasser cannot square the circle and ‘reform Islam’. Islam cannot be reformed. There can be no Reformation in Islam as there was in Christianity. As noted above, the Quran is the direct word of Allah and cannot be changed or interpreted away. The reformers are painted into a corner and there is no escape. If they try to change the word of Allah, they would become apostates and would be subject to the penalty Islam imposes for apostasy – death.

Accommodation

In discussing the airport foot washing issue, the author writes: “Conservatives who are serious about combatting the threat of Islamism need to be very careful not to undermine our case by attacking reasonable accommodations for peaceful Muslims.”

The author is naïve about Islamic war doctrine. In the Explanatory Memorandum, the Muslim Brotherhood laid out their plan for America – in short, civilizational jihad. The Memorandum was discovered by the FBI in 1991 and used as evidence in the largest terrorism financing trial to-date. The airport foot washing issue fits neatly into three of the Memorandum’s strategic imperatives: Demand accommodations, Claim victimization, and Occupy and expand domination of physical space. [Center for Security Policy, Sharia: The Threat to America – An Exercise in Competitive Analysis, Report of Team B II at pp. 125-126.

The Daily Signal author opines: “I’d hesitate to describe the foot-washing stations as an example of Islamic conquest.” Only a person ignorant of Islamic war doctrine and the techniques of civilizational jihad could make such a blithe assertion.

Query

How much should we accommodate people who want to subjugate and kill us? How many special privileges does a pushy, aggressive, in-your-face doctrine of total conquest deserve? Especially when you consider that foot washing stations are neither constitutionally nor statutorily required. Moreover, foot washing before prayer is not mandatory in Islam while on a journey. Carry a pocket stone or put on some wudu socks, and you’re good to go.

Thus, demands that airports provide foot washing stations for Muslim are beyond the bounds of Islamic scripture and devoid of legal basis and, therefore, constitute what has been called ‘conquest by fixture’.

An overstatement? Consider this:

The airport in question — DFW — already has two ablution stations at the Terminal D interfaith chapel near Gate D40. And now Muslims demand more stations inside Terminal D restrooms? If that’s not pure naked aggression, what is it?

Media Starts to Doubt Dems’ Invincibility as November Creeps Closer

October 9, 2026/in America 250, anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Communism, Democrat Socialists, Election Integrity, Elections, Faith, Fake News, Family, Freedom, Hot Topics, Marxism, Marxist, Must Read, News, Policy, Politics, Propaganda, Shariah Law, Social Issues, Socialism, Socialist Class Warfare, The Truth/by Family Research Council

After months of flooding the zone with glum predictions for Republicans, there’s been a quiet but meaningful shift in major media headlines. Left-leaning outlets desperate to make the GOP’s demise a self-fulfilling prophecy seem to be subtly hedging their bets against another polling embarrassment. In the last handful of days, even the big dogs — The New York Times, Washington Post, and Newsweek — are conceding that maybe the election forecasts aren’t as lopsided as they’ve been leading voters to believe.

Suddenly, readers are clicking on stories that paint a very different picture of the apocalyptic landscape for Republicans they’d come to expect. Articles like “Democratic Optimism in Six Senate Races May Be a Mirage,” “3 Bright Spots for the G.O.P.,” and “How Much Can Republicans Outrun Trump’s Approval?” are popping up in the same pages that have urged Americans to don galoshes for the Blue Tsunami. And while there certainly are very troubling signs for Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) party, one lesson everyone should have learned by now is that polls are an incredibly flawed measure of public opinion.

In the modern age, Republicans have consistently outperformed the industry’s numbers in presidential and midterm elections. Pollsters have frantically tried to solve this puzzle, especially after a string of national humiliations. After a lot of head-scratching, two theories for this unpredictability revolve around the GOP. “First, Republicans are becoming more distrustful of institutions and society, and that may be extending to how they feel about pollsters. Second, suburban Republican college graduates are more likely to fear professional sanction for their views and are therefore self-censoring more, including in surveys,” FiveThirtyEight’s Emily Ekins suggests. Most experts estimate that conservatives underpoll somewhere between 3-5% — a massive swing for anyone trying to prophecy close races.

Over the last handful of days, the media seems to be making an intentional effort to temper their excitement, noting that as optimistic as Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) may be, “history offers a warning to Democrats, as polls in recent elections underestimated Republicans in key states. Control of the Senate could come down to just a handful of races where polls show razor-thin margins.” In places like Alaska, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Ohio, and Texas, Newsweek warns, Democrats appear to have a polling edge. “But Republicans have outperformed polling averages in many of those same states over the past few elections. Polling errors are not necessarily repeated from cycle to cycle. But a similar pro-Republican polling error this cycle would not bode well for Democrats’ chances of flipping the Senate.”

Frankly, it’s “impossible to know for sure” what the polling error could look like this year, Syracuse Political Science Professor Grant Davis Reeher acknowledged. “There are some pretty big known unknowns in this election, which could throw off polls,” he said. “A primary one is turnout. Polls must make educated guesses about who is most likely to vote. It’s a little trickier in midterms.”

National Review’s Jim Geraghty, who hasn’t exactly been a glass-is-half-full prognosticator, offered what he called “the cheeriest midterm take for Republicans you’re going to find,” urging readers to second-guess the excitement surrounding Democrats in cherry-red Kansas, South Carolina, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Florida. Despite the media’s insistence that GOP candidates are in trouble, the polling doesn’t necessarily bear that out. “There’s good reason to not believe the hype; we’ve seen this sort of narrative before.”

He ticks off the numbers for each key race, along with historical trends, dismantling the idea that conservatives are in trouble. “The lesson of this is not that all the polls are always wrong, or that every prediction of an upset Democratic win is always wrong,” Geraghty cautions. “But there’s an extremely familiar narrative of ‘this Democrat really has a shot in a deep red state!’ that rarely pans out; when it does, it’s usually because of a spectacularly flawed Republican candidate.” Americans should be wary of a blue wave, he writes, if only because “certain left-of-center media voices always tell them there will be a blue wave every November.”

An unlikely source echoes NR’s guardedness: The New York Times. Despite what pundits say, “there is also quite a bit of good news for Republicans,” Ruth Igielnik wrote late last month. For starters, “Republican Senate candidates are running ahead of the party. … Each of [them] is outrunning President Trump’s popularity in their states, sometimes by double digits. … And in each of the races, Republican candidates are winning some voters who otherwise say they want Democrats to control the Senate. Taken together, these are signs that in these competitive, Democratic-leaning states, Republicans have nominated strong candidates who appeal beyond their base.”

Then, of course, there’s the Left’s ugly infighting. “As Democrats are divided,” the Times points out, “Republicans are united. … We asked Democrats across the country if they felt the party was united or divided. About half said the party was united, and half said divided. Those numbers are nearly identical to a survey we ran in 2016. Republicans, on the other hand, are feeling very unified. In our most recent national survey, 70 percent of Republicans said they felt the party was united. That is a dramatic departure from 10 years ago. In 2016, more than 80 percent of Republicans said they thought the party was divided.”

Over at The Washington Post, Scott Clement reiterates that a “poll of two key House districts shows good signs for Democrats, but no tsunami.”

As for the bluster that even Hispanics are abandoning the GOP, Rasmussen Reports soundly beats back that narrative. In results released Monday, Hispanic voters favor Republicans by a 50 to 42% margin over Democrats. “The poll also indicates a tightening battle for control of Congress, as the Democrats’ lead over Republicans decreased for the second week in a row, according to the company. Overall, voters said if the election was held today 47 percent of likely voters would vote for the Democrat candidate, while 44 percent would vote for the Republican. Four percent of voters said another party’s candidate and just 4 percent were undecided.” In other words, Republicans have slashed the Democrats’ lead in half since just mid-September, “particularly with independent voters.”

But as encouraging as those signs are, leadership is clear-eyed about the hill they have to climb this November. “Now listen, this is going to be a very close election,” Speaker Johnson underscored Tuesday. His Senate counterpart, Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), has been cautiously optimistic about his side of the Capitol. “I think we can keep the majority,” he told Politico this week. “I think all of these races are margin of error, at least the ones that we have to win. And historically, at least if you look at polls, we tend to outperform them.”

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) made that same point in a conversation with Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on “This Week on Capitol Hill.” When Cook Political Report, a widely respected organization, moved more seats to the toss-up or Democratic-leaning column, the House’s second-in-command wasn’t worried. In his mind, there’s more to the story. “You know, the polling really is interesting when you dig into it. You’re seeing an undersampling of Republicans, and we’re digging into some of these. Let’s be clear too. There are a lot of close races, not just Republican races.” He pointed to a few states like New Hampshire where GOP candidates are making a dent in Democratic areas too. “There [are] about 35 seats across the country that are truly swing districts,” Scalise observed. “Twenty of them are held by Republicans that are close right now, but 15 are held by Democrats that are also close, that we have a real chance to flip. And so, turnout is going to be a big factor. Who really does show up?”

The GOP has another secret weapon this election — in large part thanks to President Trump and Speaker Johnson — and that’s campaign cash. As Perkins highlighted, conservatives “have a strong edge on the fundraising to get their message through in these final days.” Scalise nodded. “We really do. You know, it’s rare that we outraise Democrats in a lot of these seats. We have now. And again, I think people are seeing what’s at stake, and they’re donating money.”

The media, he thinks, “[is] counting on Republicans, especially traditional conservative voters, to just stay home. And I don’t think that’s going to happen, because I think more and more people are seeing this sharp contrast [between the two parties].” With the rise of the Democratic Socialists, Scalise warns, “This isn’t like two candidates [who] are similar. This is common sense versus crazy. And some of these candidates … [don’t just want] to defund the police — they want to disarm the police. They actually advocate for taking guns away from police officers. You were a police officer. Could you imagine approaching a criminal who’s got a gun and saying, ‘Hey, let’s have a conversation and try to talk this out?’ He shoots you, and it’s over. This is insanity. And that’s beyond crazy. But if people stay home … [these radicals win]. And that’s why people can’t stay home.”

At the end of the day, Scalise insisted, Democrats are trotting out polls “to make it look like they’re doing better than they are, because they want to depress conservative voters. Because if conservative voters stay home, guess what? Socialists will actually win. They can’t win if you show up and vote on November 3rd.”

That’s right, Perkins stressed. “The only poll that really counts is Election Day when people turn out and vote.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Demographics-Are-Destiny’ Deep-Dive Points to 2030 GOP Electoral Realignment

Watch: Minnesota Police Chief Blasts Local Somali Gangs Then Reveals Genuinely Humiliating Truth to Democrats

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

78 Former U.S. Military Leaders Release Public Statement Condemning Dishonest Use of Genocide Label for Gaza

October 9, 2026/in Anti-Semitism, Culture War, Hot Topics, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, National Security, News, Policy, Propaganda, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Socialism, Terrorism, The Truth, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by The Geller Report

The blood libeling of the Jewish people follows the Nazi playbook.

78 former US Military leaders release a public statement Condemning the genocide lie in Gaza and the number of signatories will, no doubt, continue to grow. The challenge, of course, is that the lie has a head of steam. Nevertheless the statement is precise, including the warning it gives on the reckless use of genocide language: We reject claims that Israel committed genocide in Gaza…. The allegations that Israel committed this crime do not meet the established definition and standards of genocide, are unsupported by established facts, nor do they stand up to common sense scrutiny…. All the evidence, in fact, points to the contrary conclusion…. Israel has not committed genocide but rather set a high bar for how to conduct urban warfare against an enemy who will stop at nothing, including the death of its own civilians. We call on those concerned with this issue to carefully assess the facts related to the Gaza campaign, insist on faithful application of the Genocide Convention, and reject factually and legally dubious accusations against Israel. Failure to do so incentivizes future adversaries to deliberately endanger civilians and then exploit civilian suffering to portray lawful operations as genocide, weaken public support, and divide our alliances. The precedent established today regarding Israel will shape the conditions under which American forces fight tomorrow. Protecting civilians and preserving the ability of our nation to defend itself requires us to defend the truth when the laws of war are being distorted to make false charges of genocide.

Open Letter From 75+ Military Professionals Rejecting Genocide Allegation Against Israel

For Immediate Release
October 7, 2026

Washington, D.C. — As retired senior military leaders and legal experts, on this, the third anniversary of Hamas’s October 7, 2023 brutal attack on Israel, we reject claims that Israel committed genocide in Gaza.

Genocide is a grave and exceptional violation of international law, defined and prohibited by the Genocide Convention of 1948 and enumerated as a crime in the Statute of the International Criminal Court and in the U.S. federal criminal code. The allegations that Israel committed this crime do not meet the established definition and standards of genocide, are unsupported by established facts, nor do they stand up to common sense scrutiny.

A finding of genocide requires evidence of acts that are intended to destroy a protected national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part. Israel has neither intended to, nor destroyed, Palestinians as a group in Gaza. All the evidence, in fact, points to the contrary conclusion: that, after suffering a barbaric, indiscriminate massacre by Hamas terrorists on October 7, 2023, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), acting in justified self-defense, went to extreme lengths to protect civilians in Gaza, including from Hamas.

Israel’s accusers allege genocide mostly because of the supposed number of civilians killed in Gaza. Such claims are rife with flaws. Genocide is not a quantitative crime; there is no number of civilian casualties that constitutes genocide. Nor are the claimed casualty numbers from Gaza credible. Issued by Hamas themselves and, at the very least, not distinguishing between civilians and combatants, they cannot be relied upon.

Further, established legal precedent makes clear that civilian deaths occurring during combat, however tragic, are insufficient, by themselves, to support a finding of genocidal intent. That is because of the unfortunate realities of war and the laws that govern it, both of which Israel’s accusers appear woefully ignorant.

Many of the signatories to this letter have commanded United States armed forces in combat against enemies who regularly hide behind civilians and put those civilians intentionally in harm’s way. Fighting under those complexities is especially difficult. We understand that the loss of civilian life in Gaza is tragic. But we also know that such tragic outcomes do not necessarily violate the law of armed conflict. There is no perfect attack; there are only those in which commanders use all available information to make hard decisions and their best judgement to comply with legal obligations and protect civilians. And that is exactly what we have witnessed from the IDF in Gaza.

Assessments of Israeli combat operations, undertaken by some of the signatories to this letter, describe a military taking an unprecedented combination of precautions to avoid civilian casualties; not one following orders to destroy Palestinians as a group. The IDF has provided civilians with numerous advance warnings—leaflets, phone calls, text messages, radio and TV broadcasts, and social media notices—evacuation instructions, protected corridors, and tactical pauses to help move them out of harm’s way, even when those precautionary measures ceded tactical advantage to enemy forces. IDF soldiers have even put themselves in harm’s way to protect Palestinians seeking to flee the fighting from attack by Hamas. Stringent legal review of targets is a standard part of IDF procedures. Repeatedly, Israel has called off strikes because of the presence of civilians.

Israel has also gone out of its way to provide aid and assistance to civilians in Gaza. More than 3.5 million tons of food, 48,000 tons of medical supplies, 5,000 tons of baby food, and up to 15,000 cubic meters per day of water desalinated by Israel have been sent into Gaza. Over half a million Gazan children were vaccinated during the war and some 5,000 Gazans evacuated for medical treatment abroad. These are not the actions of a genocidal state but of a professional military ethically and legally committed to the protection of civilian life.

This pattern of law-abiding IDF conduct in Gaza also contradicts accusers’ claims that some statements from Israeli political officials, seemingly encouraging unlawful harm to civilians, are evidence of genocidal intent. Such inflammatory statements are disgraceful. Yet, while it deserves unequivocal condemnation, rhetoric from politicians uninvolved in military decision-making is in no way reflective of actual IDF operations.

Israel has not committed genocide but rather set a high bar for how to conduct urban warfare against an enemy who will stop at nothing, including the death of its own civilians.

We call on those concerned with this issue to carefully assess the facts related to the Gaza campaign, insist on faithful application of the Genocide Convention, and reject factually and legally dubious accusations against Israel. Failure to do so incentivizes future adversaries to deliberately endanger civilians and then exploit civilian suffering to portray lawful operations as genocide, weaken public support, and divide our alliances.

The precedent established today regarding Israel will shape the conditions under which American forces fight tomorrow. Protecting civilians and preserving the ability of our nation to defend itself requires us to defend the truth when the laws of war are being distorted to make false charges of genocide.

Letter Signees include:

Gen James F. Amos, USMC (ret.), 35th Commandant of the Marine Corps
GEN Frank J. Grass, USA (ret.), JINSA Generals and Admirals Program Participant
Gen W.L. ”Spider” Nyland, USMC (ret.), Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps
Gen Philip M. Breedlove, USAF (ret.), Supreme Allied Commander Europe, Commander US European Command
Gen Kevin P. Chilton, USAF (ret.), Commander, U.S. Strategic Command
Gen C.T. “Tony” Robertson, Jr., USAF (ret.), Commander, U.S. Transportation Command, and Commander, Air Mobility Command
GEN James D. Thurman, USA (ret.), Commander, United Nations Command, ROK-United States Combined Forces Command, and United States Forces Korea
Gen Charles Wald, USAF (ret.), Deputy Commander of United States European Command (EUCOM)
LTG John M. Bednarek, USA (ret.), Senior Defense Official, Iraq; Chief, Office of Security Cooperation, Baghdad
Gen William Begert, USAF (ret.), Commander, Pacific Air Forces, and Air Component Commander for the Commander, U.S. Pacific Command
ADM Bruce Clingan, USN (ret.), Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe; U.S. Naval Forces Africa; Allied Joint Force Command, Naples
Gen Donald G. Cook, USAF (ret.), Commander, Air Education and Training Command
ADM Mark Fitzgerald, USN (ret.), Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe; U.S. Naval Forces Africa; Allied Joint Force Command, Naples
Gen Mike Hostage, USAF (ret.), Commander, Air Combat Command
Lt Gen Steven L. Basham, USAF (ret.), Deputy Commander, U.S. European Command
VADM John Bird, USN (ret.), Commander, U.S. 7th Fleet
Lt Gen Rod Bishop, USAF (ret.), Commander, 3rd Air Force
LTG H. Steven Blum, USA (ret.), Deputy Commander, U.S. Northern Command
LtGen Thomas Conant, USMC (ret.), Deputy Commander, United States Pacific Command
VADM Michael J. Connor, USN (ret.), Commander, United States Submarine Forces
Lt Gen David Deptula, USAF (ret.), Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, Headquarters Air Force Lt Gen Eric Fiel, USAF (ret.), Commander, Air Force Special Operations Command
VADM Jeffrey Fowler, USN (ret.), 60th Superintendent, U.S. Naval Academy
VADM Mark I. Fox, USN (ret.), Deputy Commander, United States Central Command
LTG David Fridovich, USA (ret.), Deputy Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command-USSOCOM
LtGen Kenneth Glueck, Jr., USMC (ret.), Deputy Commandant, Combat Development and Integration; Commanding General, Marine Corps Combat Development Command
Lt Gen Michael Gould, USAF (ret.), Superintendent, United States Air Force Academy
LtGen Mike Groen, USMC (ret.), Director, Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC)
Lt Gen Joseph Guastella, USAF (ret.), Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Headquarters U.S. Air Force
LtGen Earl Hailston, USMC (ret.), Commander, U.S. Marine Corps Forces Pacific/Commander, U.S. Marine Corps Forces Central Command
LtGen Karsten Heckl, USMC (ret.), Deputy Commandant, Combat Development and Integration; Commanding General, Marine Corps Combat Development Command
LtGen John Jansen, USMC (ret.), Deputy Commandant for Programs and Resources
LTG James Jarrard, USA (ret.), Deputy Commanding General of United States Army Pacific
VADM Dennis Jones, USN (ret.), Deputy Commander in Chief, US Strategic Command
LTG Raymond Mason, USA (ret.), Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, G4 Army Staff
Lt Gen Charles May, USAF (ret.), Assistant Vice Chief of Staff
LtGen Fred McCorkle, USMC (ret.), Deputy Commandant Marine Corps Aviation
Lt Gen Thomas G. McInerney, USAF (ret.), Assistant Vice Chief of Staff, Headquarters U.S. Air Force
VADM John Miller, USN (ret.), Commander, US Naval Forces, US Central Command
LtGen Rich Mills, USMC (ret.), Commander, Marine Forces Reserve and Commander Marine Forces North
Lt Gen Charles Moore, USAF (ret.), Deputy Commander, U.S. Cyber Command
Lt Gen C.D. Moore II, USAF (ret.), Commander, Air Force Life Cycle Management Center
VADM Ross A. Myers, USN (ret.), Commander, Tenth Fleet/Fleet Cyber/Navy Space, and former Deputy Commander, USCYBERCOM LTG Raymond Palumbo, USA (ret.), Director for Defense Intelligence
Lt Gen Chris Nowland, USAF (ret.), Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Headquarters U.S. Air Force
VADM Carol Pottenger, USN (ret.), NATO Allied Command Transformation DCOS Capability Development
VADM Joe Rixey, USN (ret.), Director of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency
VADM Herman A. Shelanski, USN (ret.), Naval Inspector General VADM Sandra Stosz, USCG (ret.), Deputy Commandant for Mission Support
LTG Guy Swan, USA (ret.), Commanding General, U.S. Army North/5th Army
Lt Gen Thomas J. Trask, USAF (ret.), Vice Commander, United States Special Operations Command
LtGen Mark Wise, USMC (ret.), Deputy Commandant for Aviation, USMC
RADM Fred L. Ames, USCG (ret.), Assistant Commandant for Human Resources
MajGen Joseph T. Anderson, USMC (ret.), CG 1st Marine Aircraft Wing
MG Joe Arbuckle, USA (ret.), Commander, Operations Support Command
RADM Paul Becker, USN (ret.), Director for Intelligence, Joint Staff (J2)
Maj Gen Jack J. Catton, Jr., USAF (ret.), Director of Requirements, Headquarters Air Combat Command
MajGen Mark Clark, USMC (ret.), Commanding General Marine Special Operations Command (MARSOC)
MajGen Jon Gallinetti, USMC (ret.), Deputy Commander, Marine Corps Forces Command
RADM Brett Heimbigner, USN (ret.), Director Joint ISR Operations Center
MajGen Bob Hollingsworth, USMC (ret.), Vice Commander, Marine Forces Pacific
Maj Gen James P. Hunt, USAF (ret.), Deputy Commanding General, Multi-National Corps, Iraq
Maj Gen Kenneth Israel, USAF (ret.), Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Airborne Reconnaissance and Director of the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office
RADM Steven Kantrowitz, USN (ret.), Deputy Commander, Naval Legal Service Command
RADM Edward Masso, USNR (ret.), Commander Navy Personnel Command/Deputy Chief of Naval Personnel
RADM William F. Merlin, USCG (ret.), Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District
MG William Moore, USA (ret.), Director for Operations, Headquarters
Maj Gen Bentley B. Rayburn, USAF (ret.), Commander, USAF Doctrine Center
MajGen Dave Richwine, USMC (ret.), Chief Information Officer and Director of Intelligence, Headquarters, US Marine Corps
Maj Gen Lawrence Stutzriem, USAF (ret.), Director, Plans, Policy, and Strategy, North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command
MajGen Larry Taylor, USMCR (ret.), Commanding General, 4th Marine Aircraft Wing
MG Paul Vallely, USA (ret.), Deputy Commanding General US Army Pacific
RDML Terry McKnight, USN (ret.), Commander Task Force 151 – Anti-Piracy Task Force/Commander Expeditionary Group Two
RDML Mark Milliken, USN (ret.), Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy International Programs Office
BGen Michael Mulqueen, USMC (ret.), The United States Military Entrance Processing Command
Brig Gen Christopher Walker, USAF (ret.), Assistant Adjutant General and Commander of the West Virginia Air National Guard
BG Mitchell M. Zais, Ph.D., USA (ret.), Former Acting U.S. Secretary of Education
COL Marc Warren, USA (ret.), Former Special Assistant for Military Law and Operations to The Judge Advocate General, U.S. Army
MAJ John Spencer, USA (ret.), Executive Director, Urban Warfare Institute

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Fauci Diary Reveals New Horrors, Wanted Trump Impeached Over Border Wall, Praised China, Fudged COVID Death Numbers, Misled Public About Ebola Vaccine, Lost Secret Confidential Files in Hack

Europe Chose National Suicide—America’s Midterms Will Decide Whether We Follow

ISLAMIC TERROR IN MINNESOTA: Muslim Plotted Mass Casualty Event on Mall of America, “For the Sake of Allah Only”

Iran Plans to Win the War by Helping Democrats Win

October 9, 2026/in Anti-America, anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Assassination, Elections, Featured, Hot Topics, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Socialism, Socialist Class Warfare, Terrorism, The Truth, Violence/by Jihad Watch

Is it time for a crackdown on the treason party?

After years of being told that taking out Iran’s nuclear weapons would lead to WWIII, the Islamic terrorist state turned out to be a paper tiger whose military assets of rockets and drones just proved to be a larger-scale version of its terror proxies in Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen.

Faced with certain defeat in an actual military conflict, Iran turned to the tried-and-true tactics of Somali pirates and its Houthi proxies in Yemen by taking a regional waterway hostage.

Iran’s endgame became obvious when its IRGC terror bosses released a letter to American voters praising “the No Kings rallies that swept across the U.S. last year”, blasting President Trump and urging Americans to vote to “change the makeup of the government” to end the war.

The old joke about the Russians was that their military strategy was to get invaded and wait for winter. The Islamic terrorist strategy is to get invaded and wait for leftists to win elections.

Iran hasn’t just been waiting. In 2020, Iranian hackers tried to hack into election databases and sent out false flag emails to voters in Florida. In 2024, they stole J.D. Vance’s voter file and peddled it to media outlets. Iranian fake news sites bashed Republicans and promoted the Kamala campaign. That’s not even counting active measures like a Trump assassination plot.

Interfering with traffic in the Strait of Hormuz was never going to bring the American economy to its knees, the way that our economic pressure campaign on Iran crushed its economy, and the terrorist regime wouldn’t have bothered if it expected the Democrats to hold the line. The letter to voters, however, reveals that the Iranian strategy is to wait for the Democrats to bail them out.

And there is virtually no discussion of this by the same establishment media and experts who made Russian election interference into the biggest topic in politics between 2016 and 2020, and rolled out mass censorship and government investigations of the opposition over the matter.

The Russians did nothing nearly as blatant as the Iranians have been doing. And, unlike Iran, we were not at war with Russia. Yet the Democrats are not even being asked to disavow the Iranian election interference being conducted on their behalf. There has been no public scrutiny of the Iran Lobby, one of whose prominent members is NIAC, whose PAC, NIAC Action, endorses and fundraises for Democrats, even as the party and its media attack AIPAC.

(Past Iran Lobby endorsees include Rep. Ro Khanna, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, Rep. Ilhan Omar and Rep. Pramila Jayapal: all of whom are Democrats and against the war. Imagine the scrutiny applied to a Russian PAC that funded Republican candidates opposed to the war in Ukraine.)

While Russian propaganda was a fringe on the right, liberal establishment media echoes the most blatant Iranian propaganda, including the IRGC election interference letter.

TIME, for example, broadly recapitulated the letter (and linked to the original), including key pull quotes urging Americans to “wrest control back from corrupt politicians” in a story that offered many criticisms of President Trump, but none of a regime that murdered tens of thousands of its own people. How is this not a case of the media promoting foreign election interference from an enemy state on behalf of its own political party?

The lack of scrutiny of Iran’s election interference is the best evidence of Democrat complicity.

Democrats have opened their party up to election interference from an enemy nation responsible for killing Americans and taking them hostage for nearly 50 years. They have taken money from Iran’s lobby. And the Democrat midterm campaign is based on profiting from the damage that Iran is inflicting on our economy in order to help the party win the midterms.

That reeks of treason in a time of war. And no one has even asked the party to address it.

Worsening the American economy, raising oil prices and adding costs to a whole range of products in the global marketplace were meant to depress President Trump’s approval ratings and increase the chances of a Democrat sweep in the midterms. That’s not a military strategy:, it’s a midterm strategy, and that’s become the hallmark of Muslim terrorist operations.

From Afghanistan to Iraq to Lebanon to Gaza, Muslim terrorist forces have retreated and disrupted, applying just enough pressure to make wars politically unpopular while waiting for an opposition to come to power without committing to military conflicts they were bound to lose. Rather than seeking an immediate battlefield victory, the great error of Hamas on Oct 7, terrorists take people and their economies hostage in order to impose regime change on their foes.

The goal in America, Israel and around the world is to force out center-right political parties that believe in military force and active counterterrorism as a solution and bring to power center-left parties that are antagonistic to the military and police, depend on Muslim votes and are heavily infiltrated by Marxist and other radical movements sympathetic to the Islamic terrorists.

The plan has been working quite well since 9/11. The question is how do we counter it?

One answer, proposed by the Democrats and European left-of-center parties in 2016, called for fighting ‘information warfare’ and maintaining ‘information integrity’ on a national and global scale. Such measures have been the hallmark of totalitarian regimes, and they were used in exactly that way against opposition parties at the height of Russiagate, but perhaps we have no choice but to hold the parties and movements responsible for that moral panic to their own standards now that they are the ones benefiting from enemy election interference.

That would mean prosecuting the outlets receiving hacked Republican materials from Iranian and Qatari operatives and pressuring social media companies to algorithmically restrict the distribution of Iranian disinformation by individuals and media outlets: including the ‘Letter to Americans’ and false claims about American soldiers and Iranian civilian casualties. Nonprofit groups tied to the Soros empire whose key figures had developed ties to Iran would face investigations. So would the politicians who have benefited from Iranian donations.

Democrats and the media can protest these moves, but they gave up the moral authority to do so when they embraced these measures in response to a report secretly financed by the Clinton campaign that falsely accused Trump of being a Russian asset that was then used to launch investigations of Trump and his people, and to censor conservatives across social media.

Russiagate was a lie, but Irangate is all too real. And even if Russiagate had been real, there was no threat to the United States that justified wartime measures such as the abrogation of the First Amendment or government investigations of the political opposition. But we are at war now. And the enemy is basing its wartime strategy on helping Democrats win.

To win a war against Islamic terrorists, it may be time to crack down on treason at home.

AUTHOR

Daniel Greenfield

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Jewish fifth columnists

How Mamdani Observed the Third Anniversary of October 7

Gov. Newsom Signs Bill by Taliban Proponent to Teach Islam in Schools

Four Afghan Rapists of English Teenager Sentenced

US Publisher Puts Out Iranian Author’s Book Claiming Jewish Punctuation is Genocide

On Oct. 7, Columbia University names cafeteria’s pasta sauce ‘October 7th Blush sauce’

Saudi Arabia’s Sharia Court Sentences Sri Lankan Hindu to Death on Blasphemy Charges

Another Muslim Migrant Rapist, Another Italian Victim

UK Muslim Minister Admits Most Muslim Migrants are Rapists

Morocco’s prime minister draws criticism for saying ‘We are Muslims, not Islamists’

ISLAMIC TERROR IN MINNESOTA: Muslim Plotted Mass Casualty Event on Mall of America, “For the Sake of Allah Only”

October 8, 2026/in anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Assassination attempt, Culture War, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Jihad, Must Read, News, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Terrorism, The Truth, Violence/by The Geller Report

Islam again but you can’t say that. The jihadis can say it, but its victims can’t.

Truth is the new hate speech.

FBI Director Kash Patel: An ISIS-inspired terrorist allegedly wanted to slaughter 30–60 innocent Americans at the Mall of America. He got an AK-style rifle and 200 rounds. He also got the FBI. ARRESTED before he could hurt a single American.

Stop jihad immigration.

Robert Spencer: Before too long, if Minnesota continues on its present path, the jihad against Jews and other non-Muslims will become a matter of state action, not of freelance jihadis. As the left continues to vote for multiculturalism and diversity, it is unwittingly signing the death warrant of a society based on tolerance and mutual respect.

Townhall’s Cameron Arcand: Sheikhdoon Abdullahi Mohamud was allegedly planning to conduct a shooting “later this month” at the Mall of America “in order to commit a federal crime of terrorism, including attempting to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization.” … Both the suspect and his parents are American citizens who were originally Somali nationals, as his mother became a citizen in 2010 and his father in 2017, according to Fox News – and Townhall was able to independently confirm through law enforcement sources. “This is just another example of a large rise in Islamic extremism, which is disrupting our country’s values and way of life. This kind of religious extremism and terrorism will NEVER be accepted in the United States of America,” House Majority Whip Tom Emmer posted to X.

FBI stops Mall of America terror attack — tracked Somali suspect for 21 months

Man eyed Minnesota’s Mall of America for attack, pledging allegiance to ISIS, federal prosecutors say

By Stephen Swanson, Frankie McLister, Ashley Grams, WCCO Staff / CBS Minnesota:

An 18-year-old man accused of telling an FBI informant he planned to carry out an attack later this month at Mall of America was arrested at gunpoint Tuesday in Richfield, Minnesota, during an arranged meeting to buy an assault rifle, according to a federal criminal complaint filed Wednesday.

Minnesota U.S. Attorney Daniel Rosen and FBI Minneapolis Special Agent in Charge Christopher Dotson discussed the case involving Sheikhdoon Abdullahi Mohamud, a Twin Cities resident and U.S. citizen, in a news conference Wednesday afternoon, where Rosen praised the FBI for its “diligence” in thwarting the attack.

“They were able to detect a threat and disrupt it before the defendant carried out his intention to kill, in his words, maybe 30 to 60 people,” Rosen said.

In the complaint, authorities say a “confidential human source” exchanged “hundreds of bi-directional messages through multiple social media and encrypted messaging applications” with Mohamud from December 2024 until Tuesday. In those exchanges, Mohamud allegedly “expressed his desire to travel to Somalia” to join al-Shabaab and “fight on its behalf and/or commit a mass casualty attack” in Minnesota.

“The messages this defendant allegedly sent to others were chilling. They document the idolization of ideologically motivated violence, a callous disregard to the sanctity of human life, a blind hatred of people of other faiths and a cold commitment to carrying out his vision of violence in our community,” Dotson said. “Mohamud allegedly sought martyrdom in carrying out his plans to murder innocent civilians.”

The complaint says the FBI contacted Mohamud’s parents in May 2025, but they weren’t cooperative.

“The FBI attempted to speak with his parents having seen that this young man was becoming radicalized, and those attempts were rebuffed by the parents,” Rosen said. “I just would say to parents all over Minnesota and, for that matter all over America, if you get the indication, especially if you hear from federal law enforcement, that your son or daughter is being radicalized to the point where federal law enforcement wants to come and give you that warning, heed those warnings.”

In July, Mohamud told an informant he didn’t have enough money to go to Somalia, according to the complaint. He allegedly said he would attack in the United States instead, and that if he did, he wasn’t doing it “for any worldly matter” but “for the sake of Allah only.”

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

POST ON X:

From the River to the Sea?

October 8, 2026/in Anti-Semitism, Brainwashed, Commentary, Culture War, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Jihad, Policy, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Terrorism, The Truth, Violence/by Jerry Newcombe, D. Min.

Hatred of the Jews is nothing new.

Hatred of the Jews by American political candidates for major positions is new.

For example, ABC4 News of Washington, D.C. reported last week: “Chants of ‘From the river to the sea’ were heard at recent Cornell University Young Democratic Socialists of America events featuring Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and left-wing Twitch streamer Hasan Piker, as new polling shows most registered voters view the Democratic Socialists of America unfavorably.”

Let’s be clear: “From the River to the Sea” means that Israel does not have the right to exist as a Jewish nation. The River is the Jordan River, and the Sea is the Mediterranean. What is between those two bodies of water? Israel.

Every politician of whatever party should be asked: Does Israel have the right to exist (as Israel)?

Why can’t there be lasting peace in the Middle East? Israel, a tiny nation-state, no bigger than New Jersey, is surrounded by hostile neighbors that don’t want it to continue to exist.

Israel is constantly having to deal with enemies from without and from within. The Judeo-Christian principle of “just war” applies to them—that is, that they have the right to defend themselves from those who would try to destroy them.

Furthermore, we see common cause between Jews and Christians in that both are often the victims of Jihadi attacks. Both Christians and Jews are called “people of the book” in the Qur’an, and sometimes the instructions are for Muslims to fight these.

The Qur’an says: “O believers! Take neither Jews nor Christians as guardians—they are guardians of each other. Whoever does so will be counted as one of them. Surely Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.” (Surah 5:51).

What is amazing about the Jew-hatred of today is how much of it seems to have come alive in the wake of the October 7, 2023 attacks against Israelis, killing some 1200 Jews, on their own soil.

In many American universities, including Columbia, Harvard, UCLA, George Washington University, we’ve seen pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli protests.

Sometimes Jewish politicians almost seem ambivalent about speaking up for the only Jewish state in the world, Israel. We should never forget that this land was re-created in 1948 after the Nazi Holocaust when 6 million Jews (along with 6-11 million Gentiles) were systematically killed in Nazi Germany in order to speed up Darwinian evolution by creating “the Master Race.” Jews need not apply.

The United States was the first nation to recognize Israel as a new (old) state in 1948.

The Trumanlibrary.gov writes: “U.S. President Harry Truman was the first world leader to officially recognize Israel as a legitimate Jewish state on May 14, 1948, only eleven minutes after its creation. His decision came after much discussion and advice from the White House staff who had differing viewpoints. Some advisors felt that creating a Jewish state was the only proper response to the holocaust and would benefit American interests.”

And the website adds: “The new country was to be located across the various holy locations in which many events of the Old Testament occurred and, according to the Bible, was promised to the Jewish people by God.”

I just saw an amazing quote from former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir: “We Jews have a secret weapon in our struggle with the Arabs; we have no place to go.” (Hat tip to Charlie Gerow.)

Bill Maher, liberal comedian and commentator, surprises me sometimes. I was on his panel four times when it was on ABC-TV. I don’t always agree with him, but his recent comments on Israel make sense.

Maher noted, “Nowhere has this moral confusion become more obvious than a place called Gaza, a little strip of land that was not part of the original Israel, but which they won in a war launched against them, but then gave back—gave back—as a peace gesture. Do they tell you that part on TikTok, kids?”

He goes on to observe, “And the people who run Gaza, Hamas—who you celebrate as a liberation movement, but are really a terrorist, mafia gang, just like the one terrorizes Haiti—only ever used it to stage attacks on Israel. I think Macklemore [a contemporary pro-Palestinian, American rapper] spoke for all clueless celebrities, when he said, ‘I know enough to know this is a genocide.’ Actually, you don’t know BOOP [applause]. It’s not a genocide. It’s a counter-attack in a war. A war that’s been waged on Israel since 1948, based on the ridiculous premise that Jews don’t belong in the one place on earth, they are indigenous and indisputably their ancestral homeland.”

In short, “From the River to the Sea” would spell the death of Israel. Thankfully, America’s founders, like George Washington, saw our nation as a haven for freedom—including for persecuted Jews—and felt that enlightened nations would follow suit.

Europe Chose National Suicide—America’s Midterms Will Decide Whether We Follow

October 8, 2026/in America 250, anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Communism, Criminal Illegal Aliens, Culture War, Democrat Socialists, Elections, Hot Topics, Islam, Islamo-Nazi, Jihad, Marxism, Marxist, Must Read, News, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Social Issues, Socialism, Terrorism, The Truth, Treason, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Amil Imani

Western Europe chose national suicide through bureaucratic paralysis and open borders. The American republic now stands on the exact precipice of that civilizational collapse.

Across Britain and France, central governments abandoned the most basic duty of the nation-state: the defense of sovereign borders. Decades of unchecked entry, lax law enforcement, and ideological cowardice fractured their historic urban centers. Public services buckle. Radical factions defy common law. Street violence surges while state bureaucrats police the speech of citizens rather than the crimes of perpetrators.

American voters face this identical crossroads. The midterm ballot contains one decisive question: Will the United States defend its heritage of constitutional law and borders, or will it follow Europe into irreversible decline?

Europe offers a real-time post-mortem of a civilization that surrendered its will to govern.

In London and Paris, politicians traded national identity for open borders and cultural balkanization. They dismantled border walls, weakened deportation mechanisms, and embraced globalist mandates over domestic stability. The results speak with brutal clarity:

Fractured societies where distinct enclaves reject common civic duties and domestic legal systems.
Heavy administrative censorship that prosecutes citizens for online dissent while violent offenders walk free under weak sentencing laws.
Staggering tax burdens, where welfare states collapse under the weight of populations they refuse to assimilate or control.
Crippled energy sectors and sluggish economic markets that leave ordinary families destitute in cold winters.

Beyond economic strain, an even more fundamental transformation looms over Western Europe: the steady surrender of its civilizational identity. In historic cities across Britain and France, decades of unmanaged immigration combined with official appeasement have created rapidly expanding enclaves where national laws take a back seat to parallel religious courts and fundamentalist norms. Rather than demanding complete civic integration, European authorities systematically yield public spaces, legal traditions, and cultural heritage to aggressive demographic shifts and Islamist political pressure. What began as an unmonitored border crisis has evolved into a quiet abdication of Western sovereignty, serving as an urgent warning of what happens when a republic loses the nerve to defend its own civilization.

When a government forfeits control of its borders, it forfeits its sovereignty. Once sovereignty dies, the rule of law collapses with it.

The progressive leadership in Washington pursues the precise blueprint that hollowed out Europe.

Federal authorities systematically weakened border infrastructure, halted deportations, and tolerated chaotic processing at the southern frontier. Progressive city administrations dismantle bail laws, strip police departments of operational authority, and permit lawlessness in public squares. Federal agencies expand their reach into private speech, parental rights, and energy production.

This agenda produces weakness. It invites international cartels to dictate border crossings. It crushes American wages beneath an influx of unvetted labor. It weakens domestic manufacturing through punitive green mandates while foreign adversaries expand their industrial dominance.

Undecided voters must recognize the pattern. This crisis stems from deliberate policy decisions. Change the leadership, and you reverse the decay.

A Republican legislative majority provides the sole institutional fortress capable of halting this descent. The conservative platform restores the foundational mechanics of American strength.

First, real border enforcement. A conservative Congress mandates the physical closure of unauthorized transit corridors, fully funds the border wall, expands border patrol ranks, and restores strict deportation standards. It penalizes sanctuary jurisdictions that harbor criminal offenders and shields American workers from unvetted labor competition.

Second, the restoration of the rule of law. Conservative majorities restore judicial accountability, support law enforcement officers with federal resources, and eliminate ideological mandates inside federal agencies. When crime receives swift, decisive punishment, public order returns.

Third, aggressive economic liberation. America possesses abundant oil, natural gas, and industrial genius. Conservative governance slashes the regulatory mandates that paralyze domestic energy production. It defends low corporate and individual tax rates, drives energy independence, and restores competitive American industry.

Fourth, civic assimilation and constitutional freedom. True nations demand shared loyalty to the Constitution, mastery of civic fundamentals, and reverence for equal justice under law. Conservative leadership rejects ideological division in schools, restores classic civic education, and defends fundamental rights — chief among them free speech and gun ownership.

Doubt kills republics. Many voters hesitate, weary of partisan rhetoric and skeptical of promises.

Look past the personalities and focus on the cold reality of the alternative. The progressive path leads directly to the European outcome: permanent economic stagnation, shattered borders, civil friction, and a bloated state that strips citizens of their historic liberties. Europe lacks the constitutional safeguards to reverse its course. America still possesses them.

This midterm election offers no luxury for indifference. Abstention yields power to the architects of decline. A vote for Republican leadership establishes a decisive break against administrative overreach, protects American borders, and preserves national sovereignty for future generations.

Vote red. Guard the border. Defend the republic.

RELATED ARTICLES:

BREAKING: Mamdani Marks Oct. 7 Tragedy With ‘Genocide’ Accusation Against Israel

Mamdani Touts the ‘Warmth of Collectivism,’ Draws Ire From Israel for Canceling Antisemitism EOs

EXCLUSIVE: CAIR, Students for Justice in Palestine Under Investigation for Supporting Hamas After Oct. 7

October 8, 2026/in Anti-America, anti-Christian, Anti-Semitism, Brainwashed, Chinese influence, Communism, Courts & Law, Culture War, Democrat Socialists, Hot Topics, Islam, Jihad, Marxism, Marxist, Must Read, National Security, News, Policy, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Shariah Law, Terrorism, The Truth, Treason, Violence/by The Daily Signal

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita launched an investigation into the Council on American-Islamic Relations and Students for Justice in Palestine Wednesday, demanding documents regarding the groups’ statements following the Hamas Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks on Israel.

Rokita sent civil investigative demand letters, ordering CAIR and Students for Justice in Palestine to hand over internal communications related to public statements they issued condemning Israel after the Oct. 7 attacks and any connections they may have with foreign terrorist organizations.

“Through unedited body-camera and security-camera footage from that horrible day, I have seen Hamas murdering unarmed civilians, including children, in their homes and in the street, and while visiting Israel I have seen the aftermath firsthand,” Rokita told the Daily Signal in a statement on the investigations Wednesday.

“October 7th is Israel’s 9/11, and just as most of the world stood with us on that day and afterward, the majority of my fellow Hoosiers stand with Israel and against the bigoted barbarity directed at Jews that still exists,” the attorney general added. “As attorney general, I am investigating organizations that may have given aid and support to Hamas in the wake of the October 7 attack.”

“I will follow the evidence and take all action I can to expose bigots and make clear that terrorist supporters are not welcome in the great Hoosier State,” Rokita concluded.

Under Indiana Code Section 4-6-17-1, the attorney general may demand documents when he has reasonable cause to believe an entity may be an “affiliate of a foreign terrorist organization.”

The CAIR demand focuses on remarks that the council’s executive director, Nihad Awad, delivered at a Nov. 23, 2023, press conference.

“The people of Gaza decided to break the siege, the walls of the concentration camp, on October 7th,” Awad reportedly said. “And yes, I was happy to see people breaking the siege and throwing down the shackles of their own land.” He stated that “the people of Gaza have the right to self-defense,” and that “Israel as an occupying power does not have that right to self-defense.”

Awad later claimed that his remarks had been spliced together to create a false meaning. “What I actually said while discussing international law: Ukrainians, Palestinians and other occupied people have the right to defend themselves and escape occupation by just and legal means, but targeting civilians is never an acceptable means of doing so,” he said.

“The average Palestinians who briefly walked out of Gaza and set foot on their ethnically cleansed land in a symbolic act of defiance against the blockade and stopped there without engaging in violence were within their rights under international law; the extremists who went on to attack civilians in southern Israel were not,” he added. Awad explicitly condemned the Hamas slaughters of Israelis on Oct. 7, and said that in his initial remarks he condemned hate and violence against Jews committed “because of their faith or their life or their religious practices.”

Rokita’s demand orders CAIR to produce “all versions and drafts” of the remarks, all preparatory material, press-response communications, and documents reflecting any internal action taken after the public reaction. The demand asks CAIR to identify if it has any communications or has carried out business with an organization the U.S. government designates as a foreign terrorist group, and to produce any such communications. It also asks for documentation on any connections between CAIR and Students for Justice in Palestine.

The Students for Justice in Palestine demand seeks the identities of those responsible for statements calling for students to “seize the university” and describing their objective as “the dismantlement of the Zionist entity and the liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea.” The statements also anticipated “an era of escalating crisis in the belly of the beast.”

“Hundred of thousands of students have worked tirelessly to uphold the Palestinian liberation struggle and challenge the US empire from within,” the “Letter from the Editors” added in the January 2024 edition of “The Written Resistance.”

Rokita’s demand orders Students for Justice in Palestine to describe its relationship with Samidoun and the Palestinian Alternative Revolutionary Path Movement, known as Masar Badil, and to hand over documents related to the organizations. It also demands that Students for Justice in Palestine produce documents related to any foreign funding it may receive.

The Indiana investigation comes after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott designated CAIR, which bills itself as the largest Muslim civil rights organization in the country, a “foreign terrorist organization” and a “transnational criminal organization.” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and his Cabinet designated CAIR and its Florida chapter “domestic terrorist organizations.”

CAIR has challenged both states’ actions in federal court, arguing that state officials have no constitutional basis to brand an American civil rights organization a terrorist group. A federal judge preliminarily blocked DeSantis’ original executive order in March, but CAIR has filed a new challenge to Florida’s designation under a subsequently enacted state law.

Representatives for CAIR and SJP did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Signal.

AUTHOR

Tyler O’Neil

Tyler O’Neil is senior investigative reporter at the Daily Signal and the author of two books, “Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center” and “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government.” Follow on X Tyler2ONeil.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Bill to Strip DSA of Party Rights Picks Up Steam in DC

Victor Davis Hanson: Iranian Regime Has Only One Way Out

Mamdani’s Antisemitism Plan Should Alarm America