U.S. State Department Funds Leftist Group Behind Chaotic Protests in Israel Against Netanyahu

A disturbing revelation exposes that “the State Department has granted tens of thousands of dollars to a left-wing group,” the Movement for Quality Government (MQG), which is “behind protests in Israel against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.” The Washington Examiner reports:

During the years 2020, 2021, and 2022, MQG pocketed roughly $10,000 to $15,000 each from the State Department, according to grant records.

The Washington Free Beacon reported that documents showed up a total of $38,000 since 2020. While the State Department confirmed the funding, it justified the spending on the grounds that the group is “a nonpartisan organization.” As the Free Beacon notes: “its work opposing Netanyahu raises questions about how the group was able to obtain U.S. funding.” It is highly unlikely that the State Department was unaware of what it was funding. In a 2018 report by Israel Hayom, the Movement for Quality Government (MQG), saw a “mass exodus” within the group as members accused the organization of turning “radical left,” operating under a “façade of righteousness,” “calling for a coup,” and attacking the right. Yet despite this alarming report, the group was (and is) regarded as a more “respectable” Leftist option to the radical anti-Netanyahu Leftist protesters that came out in droves in early January, waving Palestinian flags and chanting “anti-occupation slogans.” Compared to that group, the MQG indeed appeared more respectable, and thus it attracted Netanyahu antagonists who were ready to dole out funding from abroad. According to a JNS report, the MQG saw mainstream types turning out to its rally, including leaders:

Gantz made an appearance, as did fellow National Unity party lawmaker Gadi Eisenkot. Former politician and member of Gantz’s Blue and White faction Moshe Ya’alon also attended. However, Matan Kahana, one of the more right-wing members of Gantz’s party, did not, saying he didn’t want to be seen standing next to Palestinian flags.

In mid-February, the picture painted of the MQG in a JNS report by Caroline Glick didn’t look a benign as the State Department would have Americans believe the group to be:

Just as the State Department provides financial support for MQG’s subversion of Israel’s Jewish character, the Biden administration supports MQG’s campaign to prevent the Netanyahu government and the Knesset from passing the judicial and legal reform packages they ran on in November’s election.

Meanwhile, attesting to the collective convictions and motivations of the Biden administration, the IRS is allowing Islamic terrorists who seek Israel’s obliteration to fundraise through  “Leftist nonprofit” organizations, while also providing support for jihad terrorists, as it continues to misuse taxpayer funds to meddle in Israeli politics. Its meddling serves to exacerbate chaos in the country and stymie every effort of the Netanyahu government, but the Biden administration couldn’t possibly have known that, could they?

Americans are fed news about Israel from mostly Leftist news headlines that create the impression that the majority of Israelis oppose the Netanyahu government as far-Right, and even “extremist.” The Israeli government announced its intent ahead of elections to curtail the power of the judiciary, which Israelis knew would also bring changes to the balance of powers between the different branches of government. So while Leftists proclaimed in advance an “election dread,” Netanyahu won the elections, signifying to any onlooker that there is more than meets the eye regarding what the media is reporting.

Read what Newsweek published about the battle over judicial reform in Israel HERE.

Now it remains to be seen whether the Biden administration will be held accountable for funneling hard-earned American taxpayer cash to support chaotic nationwide protests against Netanyahu. Nothing will likely come of it other than serving as an eye-opener.

State Department funds left-wing group behind protests against Israeli prime minister

by Gabe Kaminsky, Washington Free Beacon, March 6, 2023:

The State Department has granted tens of thousands of dollars to a left-wing group behind protests in Israel against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, records show.

The Movement for Quality Government, a nonprofit organization, has been organizing protests against Netanyahu, chairman of the right-wing Likud party, according to multiple reports. That same entity has received over $38,000 from the State Department since 2020, the Washington Free Beacon reported on Monday.

“The State Department has provided small grants to the Movement for Quality Government, including a grant signed in 2020 during the previous administration and continued under the Biden administration that focused on teaching civic education and supporting good governance,” an agency spokesperson told the outlet. “The last tranche of funding was awarded in September 2022. The money was meant to be used for democracy training programs in the Israeli school system.”

Netanyahu, 73, was elected to a sixth term in December 2022. He held office between 1996 and 1999, and also from 2009 to 2022, making him the longest-tenured prime minister in Israel’s history.

MQG, which claims to be “nonpartisan,” has operated since 1990. The entity has stoked anti-Netanyahu protests that have been slammed in Israel and the United States, including a March gathering outside of a Tel Aviv, Israel, hair salon where Sara Netanyahu, the prime minister’s 64-year-old wife, was getting her hair done, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

During the years 2020, 2021, and 2022, MQG pocketed roughly $10,000 to $15,000 each from the State Department, according to grant records. The department was listed in records as the organization’s only foreign donor.

“Although relatively small (52,000 shekels — about $15,000 at the time) ostensibly for teaching Israeli high school students about democracy, the MQG is a very visible political NGO,” Gerald Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor, an Israeli watchdog group, told the Washington Examiner. “They frequently use the Israeli High Court’s open-door policy to gain publicity for their partisan political campaigns, including seeking to undermine the legitimacy of Netanyahu as prime minister.”

The grant revelation comes amid the Biden administration coming under fire for having alleged anti-Israel bias. Members of Congress, such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), have raised concerns over the Justice Department investigating Israel’s accidental shooting of a Palestinian American journalist for Al Jazeera named Shireen Abu Akleh — who was hit by a stray bullet amid Israeli forces and Palestinian terrorists clashing in May 2022…..


RELATED ARTICLE: Terror Attack on Dizengoff Street in Tel Aviv, Israel

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

How Long Before Biden Starts WW III?

Biden and his socialist administration are proven liars – this article rightfully shows how he goes back on his word and asks how long before he (and his neocon, warmongering Republican allies) start WWIII?

On March 11, 2022, Biden said that sending in planes and tanks manned with American servicemen and women would start World War III.

“But, look,” he said, “the idea—the idea that we’re going to send in offensive equipment and have planes and tanks and trains going in with American pilots and American crews, just understand—and don’t kid yourself, no matter what you all say—that’s called ‘World War III.’ Okay?”

He specifically stated that the U.S. would be fighting a proxy war with Russia, but would not directly engage. “We will not fight a war against Russia and Ukraine. Direct confrontation between NATO and Russia is World War Three. Something we must strive to prevent.”

The administration said the US would not be sending tanks, yet now we are. Biden said we would not be sending F-16s, though now preparations to train Ukrainian pilots in how to fly them is decidedly underway.

Biden said at the start of the conflict that U.S. forces would not be fighting in Ukraine. “Our forces are not and will not be engaged in a conflict with Russia in Ukraine,” Biden said unequivocally.

Military personnel are on the ground in Ukraine, showing Zelenskyy’s forces how to operate tanks and providing coordinates for Patriot Missiles that Ukraine is using to take out Russian targets.

Zelensky has already attacked Americans who don’t want to give more to Ukraine. At every step of the way—from $200 billion in funds and weapons to gaining access to the most high-tech military equipment the U.S. has to offer—Zelensky has gotten his way.

No one wants to hear it, least of all Joe Biden, but as the war escalates in Ukraine, powered by US and NATO weapons, the US will be faced with the decision of whether or not to send our citizens to fight in yet another foreign war.

How long before Biden reverses course on his promise to not send U.S. troops to Ukraine, and instead opts to start, as he said it would, World War III?

How long before Biden breaks his promise to keep U.S. troops out of Ukraine?

by: Libby Emmons

Biden said he would not send American F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine. He said it in January, and he said it again in February. Now, a report out from NBC shows that Ukrainian pilots are in the US to learn how to fly these high-tech military planes.

Biden previously promised that US Abrams tanks would not be sent to Ukraine, and that has been reveresed. And on February 24, 2022, Biden told the American people that “Our forces are not going to fight in Ukraine.”

He backed down on his promise to not send tanks, actions by the military are indicating that he’s going to do an about-face on the promise to not send F-16s. How soon before the promise to not waste American lives in a foreign border war is broken as well?

On January 30, Biden spoke off the cuff to reporters outside the White House. When he was asked if the US would send the fighter planes that Zelensky was demanding, Biden said “No.” When asked the same question in February, Biden said Zelensky “doesn’t need F-16s now,” going on to say “I am ruling it out for now.”

Fast forward to 10 days later and it turns out that Ukrainian pilots are being trained in how to use the planes they “don’t need.” NBC sourced unnamed congressional officials and a senior US official when reporting that “The Ukrainians’ skills are being evaluated on simulators at a U.S. military base in Tucson, Arizona, the officials said, and they may soon be joined by more of their fellow pilots.”

In January, a US official told reporters that Abrams tanks would not be sent o Ukraine, but by January 25, Biden announced that 31 Abrams tanks would be sent to Ukraine. “Today,” Biden began, “I’m announcing that the United States will be sending thirty-one Abrams tanks to Ukraine, the equivalent of one Ukrainian battalion.”

He said at the time that this was “not an offensive threat to Russia,” but that the move to arm Ukraine with the world’s most powerful military equipment was “about freedom, freedom for Ukraine, freedom everywhere.”

Read more.

©Royal A. Brown III. All rights reserved.

SPLC Attorney Charged with Domestic Terrorism for Rioting with Antifa

An attorney with the far-left smear organization Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has been charged with domestic terrorism after allegedly rioting with Antifa in Atlanta.

Over the weekend, far-left agitators allegedly threw Molotov cocktails and launched fireworks at an Atlanta police training facility that has been under construction. Among the 23 people arrested for what police called a “coordinated attack” is Thomas Jurgens, 28, a staff attorney at the SPLC. Following the arrest, Jurgens’ Linkedin page was deleted. Per the New York Post:

Of the 23 people slapped with domestic terrorism charges over the violent protest, Jurgens and only one other man, Jack Beaman, hail from the state of Georgia. Police said the majority of those arrested are from other parts of the US — as well as France and Canada.

The SPLC didn’t immediately respond to The Post’s request for comment in the wake of Jurgens’ arrest. In total, 35 “violent agitators” were nabbed after they attacked the future site of the $90 million police training facility, cops said.

It wasn’t immediately clear if the remainder of those arrested will also be hit with domestic terrorism charges.

During the demonstration over the weekend, protesters allegedly threw Molotov cocktails, fireworks, rocks, and bricks at police officers. Atlanta Police Chief Schierbaum later described it as a “coordinated attack” and that multiple pieces of construction equipment were set on fire.

“This was a very violent attack, very violent attack,” Schierbaum said. “This wasn’t about a public safety training center. This was about anarchy… and we are addressing that quickly.”

Some left-wing agitators even tried blinding police officers by shining green lasers into their eyes.

Republican Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp condemned the violence, calling it an act of “domestic terrorism.”

“As I’ve said before, domestic terrorism will NOT be tolerated in this state,” Kemp said. “We will not rest until those who use violence and intimidation for an extremist end are brought to full justice.”

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, wrote in the Washington Post that the center’s use of “hate” labels destroys public discourse.

“The wickedness of the SPLC’s blacklist lies in the fact that it conflates groups that really do preach hatred, such as the Ku Klux Klan and Nation of Islam, with ones that simply do not share the SPLC’s political preferences,” he wrote. “The obvious goal is to marginalize the organizations in this second category by bullying reporters into avoiding them, scaring away writers and researchers from working for them, and limiting invitations for them to discuss their work.”

Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)

56 Known Connections

60 Conservative Groups Mull Lawsuits Against SPLC

In an April 2019 article, PJ Media reported that more than 60 organizations that SPLC had falsely labeled as “hate groups” were considering the possibility of suing SPLC for defamation. The article cited remarks that various noteworthy individuals had recently made about SPLC and its deceitful use of the “hate group” smear as a fundraising tactic. One particularly significant remark came from former SPLC employee Bob Moser, who described SPLC’s annual “hate-group list” as “a masterstroke of [Morris] Dees’ marketing talents” which leads countless “mainstream outlets [to] write about the ‘rising tide of hate’ discovered by the SPLC’s researchers,” and leads reporters to “frequently refer to the list when they write about the groups…”

To learn more about the SPLC, click here.


Southern Poverty Law Center Stands Behind Lawyer Charged with Domestic Terrorism

Insider: Zucker Forbade CNN Reporters From Investigating COVID Lab Leak Theory

DeSantis Mocks Newsom: ‘You’ve Got a Lot of Problems Out Here’

Moore: Walgreens is ‘Bigoted and Misogynistic’ For Not Selling Abortion Pill

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

IRS Allows Islamic Terrorists to Fundraise Through Leftist Nonprofit

Rabbi Eitan Shnerb was hiking to a spring with his son Dvir and his daughter Rina when the bomb went off. For a moment, as he described it in the hospital, everything went black. Then, badly wounded, he saw that the two teenagers were bleeding. Rabbi Shnerb was a trained paramedic. He saw that Rina, his 17-year-old daughter, had absorbed most of the blast. He kissed her on the forehead. And then he turned his Tzizit, the biblical garment that Orthodox Jewish men wear, into a tourniquet for his 19-year-old son to stop the bleeding.

 Dvir told his father that he couldn’t breathe and passed out. His daughter was already dead.

“I wanted to believe it was just a dream,” Rabbi Shnerb said from his hospital bed. “I have experienced several bombs in my life and been saved, thank God, but this one got us,..I immediately called to Rina, shouting ‘Rina, Rina,’ I looked down and saw that she was not alive.”

Rabbi Shnerb had stopped a terrorist attack earlier this year by two armed attackers. This time he had not seen the explosion coming.

The terrorist group behind the 2019 terrorist attack was the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. And the IRS is accused of allowing it to fundraise through a leftist nonprofit group.

One name that keeps coming up in the Freedom Center’s investigations of nonprofits is the Alliance for Global Justice. AFGJ was spun off from the Nicaragua Network which had been set up to support the Sandinista Marxist terror regime. It went on to operate the Venezuela Solidarity Campaign in support of the narcosocialist Maduro regime in that country.

While the IRS has harassed pro-Israel groups and interrogated them about their views, it has apparently never found the time to ask the AFGJ about its support for enemy nations. It currently features a commemoration of Chavez’s legacy in support of a regime whose bosses are wanted criminals for their role in a cartel smuggling cocaine into the United States.

AFGJ’s backers include George Soros, Tides, the Ben and Jerry’s Foundation, and other wealthy leftists, and it has used its status as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit to offer fiscal sponsorship to some of the worst of the worst close to home. The 130 groups it sponsors include several Black Lives Matter chapters, the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition in support of a cop killer, pro-illegal alien groups, as well as several brail funds whose mission is freeing rioters and criminals.

Some of these groups might not be able to obtain nonprofit status on their own, but benefit from the fiscal sponsorship of the Alliance for Global Justice.which allows them to accept tax-deductible contributions. When Refuse Fascism, a group linked by some to Antifa and which has defended Antifa violence, solicits donations, it does so using the Action Network, a platform utilized by both Antifa and the DNC, and directs tax-deductible donations through AFGJ.

The same is true of the Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network which asks supporters to direct checks to AFGJ. Samidoun does not bother to disguise what it is. It describes terrorists as “resistance fighters” and “martyrs”, and urges support for the “resistance”. The cheerleading for terrorists is accompanied by a call, “Make your US tax-deductible donation today, and donate safely and securely from around the world.”

The AFGJ states that, “Fiscal sponsorship services are offered to grassroots non-profits that agree with the AFGJ vision and mission statements.” Does that include terrorists?

After the murder of Rina Shnerb, Israel arrested members of a PFLP terror network embedded inside nonprofit groups. Israel designated Samidoun as a subsidiary of the PFLP terrorist organization. Multiple PFLP figures have been accused of serving leadership roles in Samidoun including its executive director, former vice chair, and multiple coordinators.

PayPal, MasterCard, Visa and other financial services have cut off access to Samidoun and the latest also cut off AFGJ. Currently, AFGJ and its various sponsorees warn donors that they can only take paper checks.

“AfGJ cannot accept credit donations—and neither can the 140 organizations that rely on AfGJ to provide them with fiscal sponsorship,” the leftist group cautions.

While AFGJ is running low on online sites willing to process donations to them, the IRS has yet to take any action. The Zachor Legal Institute, a pro-Israel group fighting BDS, filed an IRS complaint and directed a letter to the DOJ noting that the “PFLP has built a financial system supported by an infrastructure of the Seven PFLP Proxies who raise money on various humanitarian pretexts” while “directing money to the PFLP.”

And yet the odds of the IRS taking action are slim. Even though the PFLP was designated as one of the terrorist groups listed by President George W. Bush after September 11, it was less difficult for Zachor and conservative media to persuade financial services companies to stop processing donations for AFGJ than to get the IRS to enforce tax code regulations and the law.

AFGJ informed the IRS that its mission is to “achieve social change and economic justice”. In reality it has helped unleash violence at home and abroad. The beneficiaries include BLM’s Louisville Community Bail Fund which bailed out Quintez Brown, a Black Lives Matter activist, who walked into the campaign office of a Louisville political candidate and opened fire.

While payment processors have cut off the Alliance for Global Justice, the IRS has yet to act. After over two decades, the IRS has shown no interest in taking action even as the AFGJ continues to act as a fiscal sponsor for groups that would not qualify for nonprofit status. The fiscal sponsorship loophole continues to be abused to fund everything including terrorism.

The Freedom Center’s pamphletInternal Radical Service by David Horowitz and John Perazzo, has exposed how the IRS routinely allows leftist nonprofits to violate tax codes and the law. The fiscal sponsorship loophole is widely used by radical leftists to make illegal activity tax deductible. Tax code regulations state that “exempt purposes may generally be equated with the public good, and violations of law are the antithesis of the public good”. They warn that, “violation of constitutionally valid laws is inconsistent with exemption under IRC 501(c)(3)” and that “planned activities that violate laws are not in furtherance of a charitable purpose”.

Terrorism is one of the most blatant possible examples of behavior at odds with the public good.

While the IRS is warning waiters to report their tips, it allows terrorists to benefit from tax deductible money. Payment processors have shown that they have a higher level of compliance with the law than the IRS. When the IRS refuses to enforce the law while demanding that everyone abide by it, that is a culture of lawlessness and, in this case, it’s costing lives.



IAEA top dog says attack on Iran’s nuclear program would be illegal, Netanyahu fires back

Is the Islamic Republic of Iran really only days away from making a nuclear bomb?

UK: Kids at Islamic Republic of Iran Primary School in London pledge to join apocalyptic conflict against infidels

Turkey: Pop star faces three years in prison for criticizing Islamic schools

Order David Horowitz’s and John Perazzo’s new booklet: “Internal Radical Service: Abuse Of Taxpayer Dollars To Advance Leftwing Causes Illegally And Unconstitutionally”: CLICK HERE.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Arizona County Sees 377% Surge in Human Smuggling, 610% Hike in Fentanyl Under Biden

The situation along the southwest border has deteriorated so badly under President Joe Biden that in the last two years an Arizona county about an hour drive from Mexico has seen a breathtaking 377% increase in human smuggling and trafficking incidents and a shocking 610% rise in fentanyl pills seized by local law enforcement officers. Closer to the southern border a small Arizona town a stone’s throw from Los Algodones, Mexico saw three times its population cross into its municipality illegally last year, overwhelming the city’s only hospital.

The Pinal County Sheriff and the president of Yuma Regional Medical Center offered the chilling information this week during a congressional hearing focusing on immigration since Biden took office. Held by the House Homeland Security Committee, the session occurred just days after the nation heard alarming testimony form Border Patrol sector chiefs during a separate conference held by the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability. In that hearing Rio Grande Valley Chief Gloria Chavez revealed cartels use drones to track federal agents and that in her Texas sector alone more than 10,000 drone incursions and 25,000 drone sightings occurred in a year. “The adversaries have 17 times the number of drones, twice the amount of flight hours and unlimited funding to grow their operations,” Chavez told federal lawmakers. Tucson sector Chief John Modlin said the border crisis has gone from “what I would describe as unprecedented to a point where I don’t have the correct adjective.” Last year his Arizona sector seized about 700 pounds of fentanyl, which is well over three million pills.

American border towns have been devastated by the illegal immigration crisis and the problem is spilling over into distant regions that typically do not see the kind of activity associated with border crimes. The president of Yuma Regional Medical Center, Dr. Robert Trenschel, said before the congressional hearing this week that his facility is overwhelmed. “Yuma is only a population of 100,000 people, and we’ve had 300,000 people cross the border in a year, and we’re the only hospital they go to,” Trenschel said. “So they come to us and that’s impacted our hospital significantly and disproportionately.” The hospital chief testified that many migrants come with significant diseases that require costly treatments like dialysis, cardiac catheterization and surgery. “Many are very sick,” he said. “They have long term complications of chronic disease that have not been cared for. Some end up in the ICU for 60 days or more. One of the largest cohorts we have seen are maternity patients who present with little or no prenatal care. These higher risk pregnancies and births result in higher complication rates and longer hospital stays. Due to a lack of pre-natal care, many of these babies require a stay in our Neonatal Intensive Care Unit—some for a month or more at a time.” Of course, American taxpayers are picking up the tab for the costly medical care.

Further from the Mexican border in central Arizona’s Pinal County, the area’s top law enforcement official says a high percentage of the drugs and human smuggling plaguing the U.S. pass through his jurisdiction enroute to Phoenix and the rest of the country. The elected sheriff, Mark Lamb, testified that over the last two years human smuggling/trafficking incidents in his county have increased 377% and vehicle pursuits related to human smuggling are up 461%. “If it’s not humans being trafficked, it’s drugs,” Lamb said. “The number of fentanyl pills my deputies have seized along this same route since 2020 is up 610%.” The veteran cop also told lawmakers that most of the migrants his agency encounters, those who got away from the Border Patrol, are being trafficked by the cartels. “They are adult military aged men wearing camouflage clothes, carpet shoes, carrying backpacks and often times drugs,” Lamb said. “They have eluded Border Patrol by walking through the desert for several days and have no intentions of giving up. Many of them have been deported before, have criminal records or work directly for the cartels. Their goal is to enter our country undetected and illegally.”

During the lengthy hearing the sheriff also expressed frustration at media and Biden administration claims that there is not a crisis at the southern border and the lie that the area is secure. “Clearly, our statistics tell a different story,” Lamb said. “And that story is that the border is not secure.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Netanyahu: ‘I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons’

It’s a rule of thumb: appeasing bullies makes them stronger. Yet the world has insisted upon such appeasement from Israel for decades in the face of the Palestinian jihad against the Jewish state. Now that Israel has a government that is standing up and saying enough, the blame will increasingly fall on Netanyahu rather than where it should be falling.

Iran has now enriched uranium to nearly 90%, and has been for a considerable period been funding the Palestinian jihad against Israel.

Israel’s Window to Strike Iran Narrows as Putin Enters Equation

by Ethan Bronner, Bloomberg, March 2, 2023:

Iran is seeking sophisticated new air-defense systems from Russia that Israeli officials believe will narrow the window for a potential strike on Tehran’s nuclear program, according to people familiar with the matter.

The prospect of Iran getting the systems, the S-400s, would accelerate a decision on a possible attack, people in Israel and the US with knowledge of the discussions said.

Russia hasn’t said publicly if it will supply the weapons, but Moscow and Tehran have drawn closer since Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.

It would take less than two years for the S-400s to be operational.

“The longer you wait, the harder that becomes,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said of a strike on Iran at a security conference in Tel Aviv last week. “We’ve waited very long. I can tell you that I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.”

Such open threats — daily occurrences now in Israel — are a complex mix of intent and messaging aimed at Tehran and Washington although Israel bombed nuclear sites in Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2007. An open military conflict with Iran could trigger an unparalleled regional conflagration affecting global oil supplies…..



China Plans to Expand Its Defense Budget by 7.2%

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

ISRAEL: Muslims Fire at Passing Cars, Murder American Citizen

Nides noted that “sadly, a US citizen was killed in one of the terror attacks in the West Bank tonight.”

Yet he continues to devote the lion’s share of his time to aiding the supporters and enablers of the jihad terrorists who killed Elan Ganeles.

Elan Ganeles identified as U.S. citizen murdered in terror attack near Jericho

by Tzvi Joffre, Jerusalem Post, February 27, 2023:

A US-Israeli dual national was killed in a shooting attack near the Beit HaArava Junction on Highway 90 in the Jordan Valley on Monday afternoon.

Elan Ganeles was identified as the US citizen who was killed in a shooting attack near the Beit HaArava Junction on Highway 90 in the Jordan Valley on Monday afternoon.

Ganeles, from West Hartford, Connecticut, recently graduated from Columbia University. Ganeles’ funeral will take place in Israel and his family will return to Connecticut to sit Shiva, according to an announcement by the Young Israel of West Hartford….

Video from the scene at Beit HaArava showed the terrorists driving up to the junction and firing at passing cars. A passing car was damaged although no injuries were caused. The terrorists then proceeded to the Mul Nevo area where they shot an Israeli, critically injuring him.

The victim, 26 years old Ganales, was transferred to Hadassah Medical Center at Har Zofim in critical condition as paramedics conducted resuscitation efforts. He was pronounced dead at the hospital. On Monday night, US Ambassador to Israel Tom Nides confirmed that “sadly, a US citizen was killed in one of the terror attacks in the West Bank tonight.”

The terrorists proceeded to drive to the area of the Monastery of Saint George in Wadi Qelt, burned their vehicle and switched to a different vehicle before driving away from the area.

The roads leading to Jericho were closed as Israeli forces searched for the terrorists.

Israel Police chief Kobi Shabtai spoke with M. an officer at the Maale Adumim police station who clashed with the terrorists who carried out the attack.

“I arrived on shift and while I was getting ready, we received a message about hearing gunshots in Beit Arava. We went out there right away and while doing so we realized that there are three scenes,” said M. “At a certain point we detected smoke and got closer and found a car on fire with yellow license plates and we realized that it was the vehicle of the terrorists. One of the terrorists aimed a firearm at us and we immediately fired at the terrorists.”

The Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist movement welcomed the attack on Monday evening, saying “Resistance operations are continuing, and the enemy will pay the price for all its crimes.”

“The occupation and its fascist government bear full responsibility, and whoever lights the fire and sponsors terrorism must bear the consequences of its terrorism and aggression,” said the movement. “The Islamic Jihad movement warns the occupation against persisting in aggression and unleashing the hands of settlers, which will lead to more resistance operations that may reach the Zionist depth. Settlement wherever it is found, it is a legitimate target for the resistance.”…



UK: Sunak vows to deport all illegal immigrants

UK: Student who accidentally damaged Qur’an is suspended, student who threatened to kill him gets ‘words of advice’

India: Muslim leader claims the country will be under Islamic rule within twenty years

Nigeria: Muslims murder at least fifteen people in raids on two Christian villages

UK Home Secretary: ‘Blind spot in the system has allowed certain Islamist groups to operate under our radar’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Au Contraire

“It would be so nice if something would make sense for a change” – Alice in Wonderland

“Fama, malum qua non aliud velocius ullum. [There is no evil faster than rumor]” —Virgil, Roman poet (70 BCE-19 BCE), in “Aeneid“.

“Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it, so that when men come to be undeceived, it is too late…” — Jonathan Swift, Tory writer, The Examiner, November 9, 1710.

 A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth puts on its boots—Attributed to Winston Churchill, among others.

One of the most depressing and galling aspects of the political arena in Israel is that nearly all the accusations hurled at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his supporters are frequently not only utterly untrue, but are far more valid for his detractors than they are for their intended targets. Indeed, more often than not, they reflect the behavior of the anti-Netanyahu critics far more than they do that of Bibi himself—or the so-called “Bibi-ists”

What value the truth?

Thus, for example, one of the “urban legends” that is so widely spread that it has acquired an aura of truth is that it was Netanyahu, who reneged on his 2020 pledge to hand over the premiership to “alternative prime minister”, Benny Gantz. While it might be an open question as to whether he would, in fact, have honored his pledge, it was Gantz and his Blue & White faction that rendered it moot. For, in December 2020, well before he was supposed to assume the role of Prime Minister (in October 2021), Gantz and his Blue & White faction joined forces with the opposition parties and supported a proposal to disband the Knesset, thus perversely precipitating precisely the situation they accused Netanyahu of plotting!!!

Indeed, as Netanyahu stated immediately prior to the dispersal of the Knesset: “I did not want elections and we voted repeatedly against them…We are against elections, [but] that is the decision of Blue &White. They are forcing elections on us.”

But what value do the truth and the facts have in the toxic, no-holds-barred assault on the Israeli “Right” and the man who leads it?

Lapid: The most obnoxious of all?

Another manifestation of the mendacious maligning of Netanyahu—and by association, the badly besmirched Bibi-philes—is the claim that he, and his uncouth supporters, regularly denigrate political rivals in abusive language designed to demean and delegitimize them.

However, in reality, it is Netanyahu’s adversaries who frequently use foul and caustic terms to demean and debase him and his supporters.  Indeed, it is difficult to think of any elected politician who has been vilified as Netanyahu has been—so intensely, so fiercely, so vulgarly.

Arguably, the most obnoxious of all has been Yair Lapid, who on a prime-time discussion panel, days prior to the 2020 elections, explicitly referred to his political opponents as “sh*ts“. In the same interview—echoing Hilary Clinton’s epithet of “deplorables”—Lapid went on to label his rivals as “repulsive“.

Of course, one can imagine the furor a remark even remotely resembling such a coarse slur would have aroused if made by Netanyahu or any of his political associates.

This however was not the only example of Lapid’s crude characterization of his political rivals. Indeed, at the occasion of Naftali Bennett’s resignation as prime minister, Lapid seized the occasion to designate his opponents as “the forces of darkness“—in a speech allegedly intended to promote “unity” and “love”!!!

Reminiscent of Nazi terminology

Not to be outdone by Lapid, was radical Left wing, Yair Golan, a former IDF general, who once implied that processes reminiscent of those that led to the Nazi regime in Germany, also afflict Israeli society today. Golan, in a tone itself reminiscent of Nazi overtones, referred to the Jewish settlers in Judea-Samaria as “sub-humans” and “a corrupted [i.e. deformed] version of the Jewish people.”

Then of course, there was the brutish Avigdor Liberman, who with his customary delicacy and decorum, called to load Netanyahu—together with the Ultra-Orthodox—on a wheelbarrow and haul them off to the nearest garbage dump.

Liberman’s party colleague, MK Yulia Malinovsky, on the Knesset podium, waxed both decidedly offensive and downright racist, in an egregious attempt to dismiss Netanyahu supporters as mindless minions, incapable of any independent thought.  In a crude, coarse, and contemptuous characterization of supporters of Israel’s longest-serving prime minister as primitive pawns, hailing from the Maghreb, she railed “On the second floor here [in the Knesset] there sits a dictator, and you are his servants. Why did you bother to come here from Morocco? To exchange one king for another?”

Brandishing phallic symbols

Last May, vehement anti-Netanyahu radio-host, Natan Zahavi, expressed the wish that the Right-leaning Channel 14 would burn down—together with everybody associated with it.

Just a few months later, unchastened by the suspension that his appalling comment brought on, Zahavi was at it once again.  With a barb that would make the most hateful anti-Semite proud, he labeled Haredi Jews dreckes i.e. “filth” and the Yiddish equivalent of “sh*ts” (see Lapid above), recommending that the Haredi Jews hang themselves by their tefillin.

The courteous chivalry of the Bibi-phobic mob protesting in favor of perpetuating judicial tyranny (under the guise of defending democracy) was most recently on display in Tel Aviv, when they laid siege to Sara Netanyahu who, heaven forfend, had the temerity to have her hair done. This act of brazen hooliganism was accompanied by vulgar verbal abuse hurled at her. This, however,  was not the first time that Sara Netanyahu was the target of vicious invective from anti-Netanyahu demonstrators. Indeed, during his previous term as prime minister, Netanyahu’s official residence was besieged by hostile protesters whose support for law and order and enlightened values expressed itself in threats of sexual violence against his wife, underscored by the brandishing of giant inflatable phallic symbols.  Classy!

Why is the Left apoplectic?

All of this begs the question of what it is that has brought out the almost bestial rancor in the Left, which the recent reform initiative by the current coalition to end over two decades of judicial tyranny has elicited.  The professed motivation for the protests—protection of democratic governance and concern for the future of the nation—have a distinctly hollow ring to them.  After all, as many have pointed out before (for example, see here & here), their demands that a minority, who just lost a recent parliamentary election, should compel the majority, who won the said elections, to abandon policies it pledged to implement, is not only inconsistent with the tenets of democratic rule—but diametrically contrary to them.

Likewise, their professed concern for the fate of the nation cannot be reconciled with the threats to undermine its economy and security by divesting from Israel or refraining from military service.  After all, making Israel more vulnerable serves only to endanger that which they allegedly cherish.

Significantly, their concern for democracy was not voiced when, in contradiction to election promises, the Rabin government, under the Oslo Accords, allowed armed militias, with seamless connection to terror organizations, to deploy well within mortar range of the nation’s parliament and government ministries—which resulted in thousands of Israelis being murdered or maimed. Nor was any such concern for the fate of democracy and the future of the country invoked, when, in 2005 in stark contradiction to election pledges, the Sharon government abandoned the Gaza Strip, laid waste to over a score of flourishing settlements, expelled thousands of industrious taxpaying citizens and disinterred Jewish graves of infants and the elderly alike—allowing the murderous terror organization, Hamas, to transform Gaza from a security nuisance to a security nightmare.

Therein lies the rub…

How then are we to account for the incandescent opposition to measures that even those, who now oppose them, once embraced? After all, the alleged “excess power” that the reform supposedly generates for the ruling executive would accrue to current opponents of these reforms if they/their representatives win a future election.  They would thus be able to balance out/correct any “abuses” made by their predecessors. Indeed, the reforms are “sector neutral” and are not designed to favor—or disadvantage—any a-priori partisan group (Left or Right) in the Israeli polity.

So, to paraphrase Shakespeare’s Hamlet, therein lies the rub…

For there is little to no chance that the current opposition will ever regain power and certainly not without coopting the dominantly Arab anti-Zionist parties.

Indeed, until the judicial reforms appeared on the horizon, the Left of Center faction did not need to win widespread electoral support, as long as the left-leaning judiciary was empowered to help implement their political credo.  But, if this tyrannical overreach is to be curtailed, the last vestige of their power will be largely eroded—a prospect they view with a mixture of horror and disbelief.

That is the source of the white-hot fury with which they react to the judicial reforms currently proposed.

©Dr. Martin Sherman. All rights reserved.

American Fighting for Ukraine Defects to Russia, Blows Whistle on Nazism, War Crimes

An American Army veteran who spent a year fighting in Ukraine’s Foreign Legion has defected to Russia, bringing with him tangible evidence and first-hand accounts of widespread Ukrainian Nazism and war crimes.

American Fighting for Ukraine Defects to Russia, Blows Whistle on Nazism, War Crimes

John McIntyre joined Ukraine’s Foreign Legion, before learning they were Nazi war criminals and defecting to Russia.

By Frankie Stockes, National File, March 1, 2023:

An American Army veteran who spent a year fighting in Ukraine’s Foreign Legion has defected to Russia, bringing with him tangible evidence and first-hand accounts of widespread Ukrainian Nazism and war crimes. He also says that Americans are on the ground in Ukraine, communicating directly with CIA handlers as they help coordinate attacks on Russian troops.

John McIntyre, an American southerner and US Army veteran who joined others from around the world in soliciting his services to the Ukrainian Foreign Legion has defected to Russia and described the war crimes and open Nazism he witnessed in NATO-backed Ukraine during an exclusive sit-down interview with RT in Moscow.

“When I came [to Ukraine],” McIntyre told RT, “I was really surprised. Everybody had tattoos and Nazi symbolism.”

When he was asked by the Ukrainians why he was fighting in the war as a foreigner, he told them that he was there to stand up against Russian “Nazis” and “fascists,” only to be told that “the Russians aren’t the Nazis, we are the Nazis,” by his Ukrainian comrades and other neo-fascists who poured into the fight from all over Europe.

McIntyre told RT that he personally knew foreign fighters who had committed war crimes by executing Russian prisoners and that others had committed hideous acts of torture, something he says the Ukrainians and their foreign comrades like to laugh and joke about.

“A lot of captured Russian soldiers, they’ll take and cut their genitalia with a knife and everything and cut their stomachs open, slit their throats, cut their heads off and stuff like that. Really horrible stuff,” said McIntyre.

And it isn’t just Russian soldiers who have fallen victim to Ukrainian war crimes. Civilians, McIntyre said, have been targeted by the Ukrainians in pro-Russian separatist regions like the Donbas, and civilian homes and community centers, like schools, are routinely used as shields.

While McIntyre told RT that he was acting as a “spy” against the Ukrainians the entire time he was there, it’s unclear if this is actually true, or if he became disillusioned with the Ukrainian cause after witnessing their conduct first-hand. Nevertheless, the tale of his escape to Russia is harrowing. To escape, McIntyre contacted his family and received $300, before boarding a flight from Odessa to Istanbul, and later to Moscow, fearing for his life the entire time.

McIntyre described to RT how the Ukrainians deal with spies and whistleblowers, saying that they receive a “bullet to the back of the head,” and that it’s quite a regular occurrence, as multiple fighters have simply “disappeared” after being suspected of reporting war criminals.

“And we’re supporting these guys?” McIntyre said of American and NATO involvement in the war. “And these are supposed to be our allies? And we’re supposed to put them in NATO with us? And they can’t even follow the Geneva Convention?”

Far from only supporting the Ukrainians with massive shipments of weapons and cash, McIntyre told RT that the United States has men on the ground in Ukraine, maintaining direct communications with their handlers from the CIA and other American agencies notorious for meddling in global conflict zones and unstable nations.

Keep reading.


RELATED VIDEO: Vindman Documents Leaked Profiteering off Ukrainian War.


Alexander Vindman Secretly Pitching Ukrainian Military for Millions in Defense Contracts

New Documents Show Traitor Alexander Vindman Has a Plan to Make Big Bucks Off Ukraine War

After Going to War Under False Pretenses in Iraq, High-Level Officials of the Biden Regime Want War With Russia

Meta-Facebook Welcomes Ukraine’s Nazi Azov Regiment Back on Platform 

In 2019, 40 Democrats Called Ukraine’s Nazi Azov Battalion a Terrorist Org. Now They Send It Billions

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

It’s Time to Bury the Two-State Delusion Once and for All

It remains an article of faith among western progressives that a Palestinian state will bring about Mideast peace; and some pundits wasted little time citing the recent murders of seven Israelis as proof (and by implication mitigating the culpability of the terrorists who killed them). But the two-state paradigm is based on the false assumptions that (a) indigenous Palestinian-Arabs occupied the Jewish homeland for thousands of years before their displacement by Israel, (b) the conflict is driven by this displacement, and (c) the wider Arab world considers the Palestinian issue existential and fundamental to Arab identity. These were not assumptions informing the 1920 San Remo Accords, the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine in 1922, or the geopolitical sea change that followed the Six-Day War, but only became political orthodoxy after the ill-conceived Oslo Accords in 1993.

The conceit of Oslo was its foundation on revisionist principles that repudiated Jewish history and implicitly demanded that Israel accept the veracity of the Palestinian narrative, which essentially required her to deny her own historical antecedents and legitimacy. It also tacitly validated the theory of “linkage,” a progressive sacred cow holding that (a) Israel’s existence causes instability throughout the Mideast, and (b) peace with the wider Arab world is unachievable absent the creation of a Palestinian state. Though the Oslo fantasy was embraced by several successive administrations in Washington, coercing Israel’s existential denial could never assure conflict resolution.

Then along came President Trump and the Abraham Accords, which exposed the two-state paradigm as the chimeric farce it always was. The Accords demonstrated inter alia Israel’s ability to conclude economic and normalization agreements with Arab nations without the need to accept a hostile border state that would threaten her existence.

The Biden administration, however, has a regressive foreign policy view with little regard for the Abraham Accords, and instead favors a two-state fantasy that rewards Palestinian extremism. And this policy is being prosecuted by wonks and diplomats who support BDS, disparage Israel, and tolerate political antisemitism. Through it all, moreover, President Biden refuses to acknowledge the antisemitism permeating the progressive wing of his party and influencing its Mideast policy, as illustrated by his silence when Democratic “Squad” members last year introduced a House of Representatives resolution to recognize “the catastrophe” of Israel’s creation.

Biden’s failure is unconscionable considering the dramatic increase in antisemitism at a time when, according to US law enforcement statistics, prejudice and hate-crimes against all other identified minorities in the US have declined.

Antisemitism has many forms of expression, some not redressable through dialogue or engagement. Those for whom “anti-Zionism” is merely Jew-hatred posing as political speech will always find outlets for their bigotry. Moreover, many liberal Jews believe in two-statism as an article of faith or have embraced the progressive agenda and its antipathy for Israel. But those whose anti-Israel biases arise from ignorance can be educated if we understand history and advocate from a position of confidence.

Therefore, it is essential to be unapologetic in addressing the false premises underlying the progressive view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to distinguish historical fact from revisionist fiction.

The False Premise of the Two-State Delusion

False assumptions about Palestinian historicity obscure the true nature of the conflict, which is not really a dispute between Israelis and Palestinians over real estate, but an existential battle to delegitimize Israel by erasing Jewish history. The establishment of an independent state of Palestine (which never existed) will not facilitate peace because the Palestinian goal is not harmonious coexistence, but the destruction of Israel—whether by Hamas’s genocidal strategy or the PA’s phased approach.

A more rational resolution from a legal, historical, and demographic perspective would be for Israel to annex or declare sovereignty in some or all of Judea, Samaria, and other areas that were part of the ancient Jewish commonwealth. This makes sense considering that (a) Jewish kingdoms and commonwealths were the only sovereign nations ever to exist between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea, (b) only the Jews have an uninterrupted connection to the land going back thousands of years, and (c) Jews represent the overwhelming majority population when Israel and the territories are considered together.

Although the liberal establishment dismisses any discussion of sovereignty or annexation as extremist, neither concept is particularly radical. Indeed, the San Remo Accords and Mandate for Palestine originally contemplated Jewish settlement throughout the traditional homeland, well before the term “Palestinian” entered common usage after 1967 as a propaganda tool for delegitimizing the Jewish State.

After Transjordan was created on most of the Mandate lands under British control (pursuant to the Transjordan Memorandum of 1922), the goal for the remainder was unrestricted Jewish habitation west of the Jordan River. This objective was recognized long before the dialogue was hijacked by revisionist mythology and the canard that Judea and Samaria were ancestral Arab territories. Historical revisionism cannot change the facts that Palestinian nationalism is a modern political construct or that Judea and Samaria were never under sovereign Arab rule.

Those who chastise discussion of Israeli sovereignty or annexation ignore the role of Arab-Muslim rejectionism in perpetuating a state of war against Israel for decades. Indeed, the Arab League declared at its 1967 summit in Khartoum that there would be “no recognition, no negotiations and no peace.” Nevertheless, the legacy media today portrays Mahmoud Abbas’s PA as moderate (despite a constitution that delegitimizes Israel) and Hamas as a benign political party (though its charter screams for jihad and genocide).

Western progressives ignore Palestinian incitement while falsely accusing Israel of apartheid; and they reward Palestinian provocations but label Israel obstructionist, despite her history of unilateral and unrequited compromises. Indeed, western governments and NGOs falsely accuse Israel of oppression, although she allowed Palestinian autonomy in Judea and Samaria, permitted the arming of PA security forces, and fueled an economy that provides the highest standard of living in the Arab world.

And then there’s Hamas, which shoots missiles into Israel from Gaza, engages in terrorism, and precipitated several hot wars after Israel’s disengagement in 2005. Despite all, however, Israel continues to ensure Gaza’s infrastructure needs. No other nation would service the utility needs of an active belligerent; and yet, Israel would be pilloried if she were to cease doing so.

Whereas Israel affords Arab citizens the same political rights, economic opportunities, and freedom of movement as Israeli Jews, she is falsely accused of apartheid. And while Hamas has since the disengagement maintained a de facto terrorist state that consistently threatens Israeli security and serves as Iran’s regional proxy, Israel remains the target of criticism from progressive politicians and journalists who somehow portray Gaza as occupied.

To her own strategic detriment, Israel also takes great pains to minimize civilian casualties and damage when taking military action—often dropping warning leaflets or sending mass texts before engaging—only to be wrongfully accused of targeting noncombatants.

In contrast, the PA is never reprimanded for rejecting Israel’s legitimacy, denying Jewish history, engaging in antisemitic incitement, or enabling terrorism against Jewish men, women and children. Instead, its revisionist claims are endorsed uncritically—although a nation called Palestine never existed and there was no demand for Palestinian statehood when Egypt controlled Gaza and Jordan occupied Judea and Samaria from 1948 to 1967. If the Palestinians were truly indigenous and displaced, it seems counterintuitive that they would not demand statehood when the territories to which they claim entitlement were occupied by the Arab nations that seized them in 1948.

If these inequities show anything, it’s that those who favor the two-state agenda (including the Biden administration) have no regard for Israel’s existential concerns or sovereignty. They are instead preoccupied with elevating revisionist propaganda over more than three-thousand years of documented Jewish history.

Absent any hard historical basis for a Palestinian state, such advocacy can only be explained by ignorance, animus, or the sacrifice of Jewish history on the altar of identity politics. Delegitimization of Israel has become a vital plank of the progressive political agenda, and tolerance for antisemitism has infected the Democratic Party—which today provides safe haven for BDS advocates and antisemitic conspiracy theorists.

Given the disregard for Jewish sovereignty that lies at the heart of the two-state paradigm, it seems clear that Israel is at a crossroads. She can either entertain a process weighted against her national interests or proactively craft her own resolution. And if Biden’s administration continues to reward Palestinian intransigence with renewed funding and talk of a Palestinian consulate in Jerusalem, Israel should act on the latter impulse. That is, she should formally reclaim Judea and Samaria as ancestral Jewish lands and shake off any vestiges of the ambivalence that was engendered by Oslo, and which only encouraged terrorism and compromised Israeli security.

And Israel may be closer to considering such policies as an ironic result of her recent electoral dysfunction. Specifically, it seems the tumult of five elections in four years motivated Israel’s conservative center to consolidate, align with the political right, and form the most potentially stable government in years. So, the time may be right for Israel to ignore Biden’s policy regression, seize the day, and chart her own destiny.

Annexation or Sovereignty in Judea and Samaria Makes Historical Sense

Historically, Israel has claims to Judea and Samaria because they were part of the ancient Jewish Commonwealth. Jews lived there from biblical times through successive conquests, the Ottoman occupation, and British Mandatory period until 1948, when they were attacked and expelled by invading Arab forces from east of the Jordan River.

These lands were conquered by Transjordan (thereafter Jordan) and renamed the “West Bank,” in the same way the Romans renamed the Kingdom of Judea “Syria Palaestina” to associate it with the extinct Philistines and obscure the Jews’ national connection to their homeland (the word Jew, after all, derives from Judea). However, Jordan’s conquest in 1948 was illegal and could not be legitimized after the fact; and the only nations that recognized its occupation were Great Britain and Pakistan.

Despite Jordan’s attempt to erase Jewish history from Judea and Samaria, their provenance is evidenced by the sacred landmarks they contain, including Joseph’s Tomb in Nablus, the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hevron, and Ramat Rachel near Bethlehem. Their pedigree is also reflected by the plethora of Arabic placenames derived from Hebrew, which evidence Jewish habitation from Biblical times. These include towns like Batir (or Beitar, the seat of Bar Kochba’s rebellion against Rome); Beit-Hur (or Beit Horon, where the Maccabees defeated the Assyrian Greeks); Beitin (or Beit El, where the Prophet Shmuel held court and the Ark of the Covenant was kept before the First Temple); and Tequa (the site of ancient Tekoa, where the Prophet Amos was born and prophesied).

Aided and abetted by the left, the Arab-Muslim world rationalized its usurpation of Jewish land by falsely claiming the Jews were foreign interlopers and their “settlements” colonial enterprises. The falsity of these claims, however, is exposed by an archeological record that reinforces Jewish history, not revisionist myth. The Judenrein status of Judea and Samaria after 1948 did not reflect their true provenance, but rather the aftermath of Arab efforts to annihilate Israel. In truth, only the Jews had a continuous presence since antiquity – until they were displaced by Arab aggression and immigration from elsewhere in the Mideast.

Israel has Superior Legal Claims to Judea and Samaria

In addition to the Jews’ historical connection to Judea and Samaria, Israel’s claim to these lands is consistent with international precedents recognized by the San Remo Convention in 1920. Regarding lands liberated from Ottoman rule during the First World War, San Remo resolved as follows:

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory, to be selected by the said Powers.

 The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 8, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. —San Remo Convention Resolution, Paragraph (b).

Underlying San Remo’s affirmation of the Balfour Declaration was the recognition that the Jews were (a) defined by descent as well as religion, (b) indigenous to their homeland, and (c) possessed of the inalienable right to political and national self-expression.

The San Remo program was ratified in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine in 1922, the preamble of which included the following passages:

Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and …

…Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country

Consistent with this language, Article 2 of the Mandate clearly articulated the British obligation to effectuate these goals in accordance with the San Remo Resolution, stating:

The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion. —League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, Article 2.

Regarding the intended geographical scope of Jewish habitation, the Mandate specifically provided:

The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in cooperation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes. —League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, Article 6.

The Mandate did not contemplate a Jewish state with indefensible borders (as do those who demand that Israel accept the 1949 armistice lines as permanent boundaries). Rather, by recognizing the Jewish right of “close settlement,” the Mandate envisioned Jewish habitation in some or all of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza (all of which were part of the ancient Jewish Commonwealth). The Mandate specifically recognized the Jews’ connection to their entire homeland, which historically included these territories.

Clearly, there was international consensus that Jews were entitled to their national home. But Jewish rights under the Palestine Mandate were not recognized in a vacuum, and Arab self-determination was addressed by the establishment of the French Mandate in Lebanon and Syria and the British Mandate in Mesopotamia (Iraq) and Transjordan. However, there was no separate mandate for “Palestinians” because they had no independent national existence, as evidenced by the absence of a Palestinian historical record or any of the cultural or societal institutions considered the hallmarks of nationhood.

Indeed, Palestinian nationality is a modern invention, as Yasser Arafat acknowledged in his authorized biography, wherein he stated: “The Palestinian people have no national identity. I, Yasser Arafat, man of destiny, will give them that identity through conflict with Israel.”

Or, in the words of Zahir Muhse’in, who in a 1977 interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw, stated:

The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel. For our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of Palestinian people, since Arab national interest demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism.

In contrast, both San Remo and the Mandate for Palestine evidenced a universal recognition of the Jews’ national existence and connection to their homeland, consistent with the scriptural, historical, archeological, and literary records.

This recognition of Jewish national rights was ratified by the United States on June 30, 1922, when both Houses of Congress issued a joint resolution unanimously endorsing the Mandate and the goal of reestablishing the Jewish national home. The Congressional resolution stated in relevant part:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the United States of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christian and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected. —Joint Congressional Resolution No. 360, the Lodge-Fish Resolution.

Despite the Jews’ willingness to accept an area comprising substantially less than their ancient homeland, the Arab world refused to accept any expression of Jewish sovereignty and scorned all proposals providing for a modern Jewish state. The 1947 UN Partition Plan was rejected by every Arab and Muslim nation because it provided for Jewish autonomy. Significantly, there was no mention of Palestinian claims (which had not yet been invented). In fact, the Arabs themselves rejected the term “Palestine” to describe lands under mandatory control because, as stated by Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi to the Peel Commission in 1937:

There is no such country [as Palestine]. ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.” This was the prevailing Arab view at the time.

In light of the resounding Arab rejection of the 1947 partition plan, it cannot be relied on as legal precedent to validate Palestinian claims to Judea and Samaria, or for that matter to Jerusalem or Gaza. Moreover, Israel’s right of ownership cannot be impugned simply because she came into modern possession of these lands during wartime.

In weighing the lawfulness of wartime land acquisitions, it is important to distinguish belligerent nations from their targets. The laws of war have long recognized that a country which seizes territory while defending itself against unprovoked attack can claim ownership of lands captured from the aggressor nation. There is no dispute that Arab nations started wars in 1948, 1967 and 1973, with the expressed goal of exterminating Israel and her people.

There is likewise no dispute that attacking Israel violated Article 2, Section 4 of the U.N. Charter, which provides: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” Consequently, Israel was acting within her legal rights when she captured Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem, Golan, Sinai, and Gaza during the Six-Day War.

Just as relevant is the fact that Judea and Samaria were never constituent parts of any other sovereign nation after the Roman conquest. Rather, after the Jewish-Roman wars, they were unincorporated territories that passed from one empire to the next until 1948 – when they were occupied by Jordan in derogation of international law.

Israel can claim lawful ownership today because she was acting defensively in 1967 when she ousted Jordan, an aggressor nation that had acquired these lands by illegal conquest in the first place. Although detractors often cite the Law of Belligerent Occupation and Fourth Geneva Convention to accuse Israel of unlawful occupation, these standards apply only to sovereign territories seized by belligerent conquerors. They do not apply to Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem because, among other things, they were not sovereign when Jordan seized them illegally or when Israel subsequently liberated them.

Under prevailing legal standards, moreover, Jordan’s illegitimate occupation could not give rise to lawful ownership. Thus, when Jordan transferred its putative land rights to the Palestinians at the beginning of Oslo, it had no lawful title to convey. The Palestinians therefore cannot rely on derivative Jordanian rights to claim legal interest superior to Israel’s. Nor can they assert superior chronological claims given the more than 3,000-year history of indigenous Jewish presence that long predated the Roman, Arab, and Ottoman conquests and occupations.

When Jordan first seized Judea, Samaria, and the Old City, it expelled the Jewish inhabitants and appropriated or destroyed their synagogues, shrines and holy sites. Until Jordan’s illegal annexation, Jews had lived in Jerusalem, Hevron, the Etzion region, and throughout Judea and Samaria since ancient times. Because Jordan’s land grab violated international law, Israel’s capture of Judea and Samaria in 1967 constituted liberation from foreign occupation, and Israeli settlements thereafter manifested repatriation to Jewish land.

Despite subsequent UN attempts to render Israel’s actions unlawful by passing ridiculously unbalanced resolutions (claiming inter alia the Temple never stood in Jerusalem and designating historic Jewish sites as “Palestinian” landmarks), Israel has legitimate grounds to retain Judea and Samaria under long-established legal principles. Palestinians cannot claim the same precedents or superior, superseding interests.

Security Council Resolution 242 never Required Israel to Surrender Judea and Samaria

Prior to Oslo, UN Security Council Resolution 242 was often invoked (erroneously) to demand Israeli withdrawal and acceptance of borders based on the 1949 armistice lines, but it actually required nothing of the kind. And analysis of both the black letter of Resolution 242 and its underpinnings is instructive in understanding Israel’s legal rights today.

Resolution 242 recognized that Israel was attacked by Jordan, Egypt and Syria in 1967 and called for the negotiation of a “just and lasting peace” based on “secure and recognized borders.” Implicit in this language was the recognition that Israel’s capture of territory from Egypt, Jordan, and Syria (including Judea, Samaria, Golan, Gaza and Sinai) was not illegal under international law. If it were, the resolution simply would have demanded that Israel return the captured lands to her attackers. That is, there would be nothing to negotiate and no imperative for deviating from the 1949 armistice boundaries dubbed the “Green Line.” Significantly, Resolution 242 never characterized the Green Line as permanent.

Furthermore, Resolution 242 did not require Israel to withdraw from “all” of “the” territories captured from Jordan, Egypt and Syria. As explained by the late Eugene Rostow, the former U.S. Undersecretary of State who participated in the drafting of Resolution 242, the exclusion of the adjective “all” and definite article “the” was intentional and indicative of the essential meaning.

Resolution 242, which as undersecretary of state for political affairs between 1966 and 1969 I helped produce, calls on the parties to make peace and allows Israel to administer the territories it occupied in 1967 until ‘a just and lasting peace in the Middle East’ is achieved. When such a peace is made, Israel is required to withdraw its armed forces ‘from territories’ it occupied during the Six-Day War – not from ‘the’ territories nor from ‘all’ the territories, but from some of the territories, which included the Sinai Desert, the West Bank, the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.
[ …]
Five-and-a-half months of vehement public diplomacy in 1967 made it perfectly clear what the missing definite article in Resolution 242 means. Ingeniously drafted resolutions calling for withdrawals from ‘all’ the territories were defeated in the Security Council and the General Assembly. Speaker after speaker made it explicit that Israel was not to be forced back to the ‘fragile’ and ‘vulnerable’ Armistice Demarcation Lines [‘Green Line’], but should retire once peace was made to what Resolution 242 called ‘secure and recognized’ boundaries …— “The Future of Palestine,” Rostow, Eugene V., Institute for National Strategic Studies, November 1993.

Significantly, the black letter of Resolution 242 applied only to incorporated states, not amorphous groups like “Palestinians,” who did not collectively constitute a sovereign actor involved in the conflict. And while the Resolution mentioned “refugees,” the term referred to Jews and Arabs who lost their homes during the war in 1948, not a Palestinian national entity that did not exist. The Palestinians as a group had no corporate national existence; and to the extent Jordan conveyed to the Palestinians its interest in Judea and Samaria as part of the Oslo process, Jordan’s title was invalid because it seized the territories illegally.

Demographic Reality Favors Sovereignty or Annexation

Slightly more than 60% of Judea and Samaria rests within “Area C,” which now has a Jewish population of more than one-half million and is currently under Israeli control. (The Oslo Accords established three administrative divisions, designated as Areas A, B and C.) Moreover, nearly 350,000 Jews live in East Jerusalem and the surrounding neighborhoods beyond the Green Line. So, despite dire warnings of an “Arab demographic time bomb,” Jews do not comprise an insignificant minority in the “disputed territories” and are not likely to be dispossessed. There is little doubt that these territories were historically Jewish or that the Arab population expanded through immigration from the late nineteenth century through the British Mandatory period.

At the present time, the total population of Israel proper is estimated at approximately 9,663,680, of which the significant majority—7,080,000 or more—are Jews. Moreover, more than half a million Jews live in Judea and Samaria, and Jerusalem has a two-thirds Jewish majority. Given these numbers (and that Israeli Jews have higher overall birthrates than the Arabs), the demographic threat appears to be more hype than fact, particularly as it relies on conjecture and dubious census statistics that in the past have overstated the Palestinian population by as much as half.

In addition, the Arab population in Israel, the territories, and Gaza, is not historically uniform. The European powers never understood the cultural complexities of Mideast society during the mandatory era, when they arbitrarily drew boundaries for Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Lebanon to include ethnic and religious groups that had been enemies for generations and remained so thereafter. And today, that same mentality drives the attempt to enforce a dysfunctional dynamic on Israel by demanding validation of a national narrative that repudiates her own cultural and historical antecedents.
Considering the irreconcilable intricacies of Mideast culture and dubious motivations of other nations in attempting to force the creation of a Palestinian state, Israel would be better served by annexing or declaring sovereignty in those territories that are integral to her security and continuity as a Jewish state. Or perhaps supporting the “Jordan is Palestine” option. That is the only reality that will insure her continued national and cultural survival.

Issues to be determined would include whether to provide Arab inhabitants of the territories the opportunity for citizenship, grant them permanent resident status, or compensate them to move elsewhere. However, considering that the original intent of San Remo and the Mandate was to restore the Jews to their ancestral homeland – and that an Arab state in Jordan was created on three-quarters of the territory under the British Mandate – Israel may well have no obligation to extend citizenship benefits, particularly to those who reject her existence as a Jewish state.

Regardless of strategy, Israel has superior legal and historical claims to Judea and Samaria and no obligation to divide Jerusalem – which was never anything but a Jewish capital. How she chooses to express those claims are matters to be determined by her alone. The international community cannot be relied on given its past denials of Israel’s historical rights and interests, and its obsession with creating yet another Arab state at the expense of those very rights and interests.

Though Israel’s rights do not depend on external approval, she might garner more support by aggressively promoting her historical integrity. And corroboration of her legitimacy is clearly reflected by the historical, scriptural, archeological, and literary records. Though for some, the denial of Israel’s legitimacy is antisemitic, for others it may simply stem from ignorance. But even the ignorant have an intellectual obligation to reevaluate their core beliefs when confronted with facts undermining their predicate assumptions. If they ignore facts that present inconvenient truths, their ignorance becomes willful and may well cross the line to antisemitism.

And Jews shouldn’t be shy about saying so.

©Matthew Hausman, J.D. All rights reserved.

Yellen: U.S. Taxpayers Have ‘Duty’ to Defend Ukraine’s Border From Invasion

In a New York Times op-ed published on Monday while she visited the nation, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen claimed American taxpayers have a “moral duty” to defend Ukraine’s eastern border from invasion by giving aid to the nation.

Yellen said the American support “is motivated, first and foremost, by a moral duty to come to the aid of a people under attack.” So far, American lawmakers have so far earmarked more than $110 billion of moral duty from taxpayers to defend the border against a Russian invasion.

“Our work is not over. In fact, it is more vital than ever that we continue supporting the Ukrainians,” she continued. “Ukraine’s military resistance depends on a government that can function effectively, as well as a stable economy that can help finance defense efforts over the long term. By fortifying the ‘home front,’ our economic assistance is helping make possible Ukraine’s stalwart frontline defense against Russia.”

Yellen boasted that sanctions have “systematically degraded Russia’s military-industrial complex and reduced revenues that the Kremlin is relying on to fund its war. As demonstrated by our new actions last week, we will not rest until the war is over.”

Not a word was mentioned about the Biden administration defending America’s own borders from an ongoing invasion of millions of unvetted migrants, drug cartels, and society-crippling fentanyl.

Janet Yellen

9 Known Connections

During her Senate confirmation hearing, Yellen discussed her views regarding climate change, a phenomenon which she described as an “existential threat” to the economy. “Both the impact of climate change itself and policies to address it could have major impacts, creating stranded assets, generating large changes in asset prices, credit risks and so forth that could affect the financial system,” she said. “These are very real risks.” The notion that America should strive to replace its reliance on fossil fuels with a reliance on renewable energy sources instead has been a recurring theme in Yellen’s public statements over the years.

To learn more about Janet Yellen, click here.

RELATED ARTICLE: Britons join neo-Nazi militia in Ukraine


EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Illegal Migrant Encounters at Southern Border Hit 1,000,000 Mark for FY 2023, Outpacing Prior Year

This regime continues to smash records in their war against Americans.

Migrant encounters at southern border hit 1,000,000 mark for FY 2023, outpacing prior year: sources

That 1,000,000 number is greater than the same time last fiscal year

By: Fox News, February 27, 2023:

Migrant encounters at the southern border have already surpassed the one million mark for Fiscal Year 2023, multiple Customs and Border Protection (CBP) sources tell Fox News, marking an unprecedented pace for encounters.

As of Friday, the total migrant encounters at the border were at 1,008,217 for the fiscal year, which began in October. Of those, 87.8% were single adults. Just 328,454 were expelled under Title 42 — the pandemic-era protocol that allows border agents to rapidly expel border crossers.

There were more than 1.7 million encounters overall in FY 2021 and over 2.3 million in FY 2022. The first months of FY 2023 have outpaced those of the prior fiscal year. This time last year, numbers for FY22 through March 1 were 839,819 — well under the 1 million mark.

Meanwhile, there have been 354,522 known “gotaways” — illegal immigrants who have evaded Border Patrol agents but have been detected on another form of surveillance. In FY 2022, there were nearly 600,000 gotaways.

Despite the high number of encounters, the Biden administration has pointed to a sharp drop in numbers from the historic high of 251,000 in December to over 156,000 in January. While that figure is the highest on record for the month of January, officials still linked the drop to a number of measures rolled out by the administration last month — including a humanitarian parole program that allows 30,000 migrants from four nationalities into the U.S. each month.

Keep reading.


EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

West Point Said Applicants Needed The COVID Vaccine Weeks After Mandate Ended

  • West Point affirmed that prospective candidates should be vaccinated against COVID-19, weeks after the mandate was officially revoked, according to multiple statements obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
  • After the DCNF reached out, West Point reversed course, saying it no longer required the vaccine for new cadets. 
  • “There is no telling how many potential cadets this arbitrary mandate has dissuaded from serving our nation,” Republican Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana told the DCNF.

The U.S. Military Academy at West Point affirmed a COVID-19 vaccination requirement for incoming cadets weeks after the Secretary of Defense did away with the military vaccine mandate, according to a spokesperson and separate communications viewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

West Point had revoked travel restrictions for unvaccinated members as of Jan. 31, according to an official Army order obtained by the DCNF and an academy spokesperson, and as of Friday the Army formally repealed all internal COVID-19 vaccine requirements in line with Department of Defense (DOD) orders from earlier in January. Yet even in late February, after the application deadline had passed, the academy’s admissions office confirmed a vaccination requirement for incoming new cadets, according to West Point communications viewed by the DCNF and a spokesperson.

“There is no telling how many potential cadets this arbitrary mandate has dissuaded from serving our nation,” Republican Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana told the DCNF.

West Point’s application deadline for high school seniors occurs in early February, according to the website.

Congress’s defense bill for 2023 included a provision ordering Austin to rescind the COVID-19 mandate. According to the bill, DOD had one month starting when President Joe Biden signed the bill into law on Dec. 23 to issue new guidance.

The Army preemptively paused discharges for unvaccinated troops while the secretary developed a new policy.

But, the West Point admissions office in late February told an inquirer that West Point’s current guidance is that the incoming class of cadets must be vaccinated in a statement obtained by the DCNF. The statement noted that, due to recent changes to DOD COVID-19 policy, the requirement could change before the next incoming class reports to the academy in June.

Further, when the DCNF reached out on Feb. 22, a spokesperson in the academy’s public affairs office said “the policy is that individuals seeking accession into the Army must be fully vaccinated against COVID-19.”

The spokesperson cited Department of Defense’s Army Directive 2022-02, which initiated the discharge process for soldiers who refuse the COVID-19 vaccine in contravention of Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s August 2021 department-wide mandate. The policy affirmed the vaccine requirement for both current and prospective recruits, including those seeking to join the military academy.

West Point “will follow current policy for initiating administrative separation and disenrollment proceedings for cadets and cadet candidates pursuant to reference 1e [USMA organizational guidelines], as appropriate. The basis for separation will be ‘Misconduct,’” the directive reads.

Army Directive 2022-02 cites the August 2021 order to define “fully vaccinated” status. Austin revoked that memo on Jan. 10.

The academy spokesperson acknowledged the fluid situation and suggested things could change soon.

On Feb. 23, just over 24 hours after the previous email, the public affairs office followed up with the DCNF, stating that “the U.S. Military Academy no longer requires a COVID-19 vaccination for candidates applying to West Point” and citing Army Directive 2022-02 again.

The Public Affairs Office explained it had not been made aware of the revision and that the earliest communication available was identified the day prior.

Then, the Army released an official policy Friday evening allowing unvaccinated individuals to seek admission to the academy.

“I hereby rescind all Department of the Army policies specifically associated with the implementation of the COVID-19 vaccination mandate” to include that the vaccine is “no longer required for accessions or pre-commissioning programs,” Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth wrote in the memo.

West Point did not respond to multiple follow-up queries from the DCNF earlier on Feb. 24.

“At a time when recruitment numbers are already dangerously low, our service academies should not be discriminating against applicants,” Banks told the DCNF. “The lack of transparency and unclear guidelines surrounding this mandate is just the latest example of bureaucracy at its worst!”

Although all branches of the armed services struggled with recruiting, the Army suffered the worst deficit relative to its goals, coming 15,000 recruits short of the 60,000 target.

West Point was barring unvaccinated cadets from traveling off-base in official capacity in January even though they were no longer in danger of being discharged, the DCNF previously reported.

A DOD revision to COVID-19 related force protection guidance on Jan. 31 ending monitoring cadets based on vaccination status and rescinding travel guidance, a West Point spokesperson previously confirmed to the DCNF.

Paragraph 3.D.15. of the Army’s Feb. 2 order, a change to the service branch’s existing COVID-19 guidance, removed restrictions on unvaccinated soldiers and cadets. “Effective immediately, not fully vaccinated individuals may conduct any official travel that is appropriate under the joint travel regulations and not otherwise prohibited by army regulation or the force health protection guidance revision,” it states.




RELATED ARTICLE: The Pentagon Mandated COVID Vaccines, But Then Ignored Concerns About Adverse Reactions, Whistleblowers Say

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

ON UKRAINE: ‘Few Americans seem to understand what’s happening. No one in American politics or media will tell the truth.’

“Few Americans seem to understand what’s happening. No one in American politics or media will tell the truth. Since the first hours of the invasion, Americans have been fed a steady diet of absurd lies.” — Tucker Carlson

TUCKER CARLSON: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was the endpoint of a much longer story

Tucker claims the DNC’s lies about Russian hacking paralyzed the Trump administration and expanded the national security state

By: Fox News, February 26, 2023:

The war in Ukraine began a year ago today, on February 24, 2022, when the Russian military rolled across the eastern border of their country. But in many ways, the Russian invasion of Ukraine was the endpoint of a much longer story. The propaganda campaign designed to convince Americans to take sides in this conflict — a conflict that has nothing, strictly speaking, to do with them or with America — that effort began many years earlier.

We’d peg it to July 22, 2016. That’s the day that WikiLeaks published thousands of emails from the servers of the Democratic National Committee in Washington. Those emails proved that party officials had rigged the Democratic process, the primary process, in favor of Hillary Clinton, and against the insurgent populist candidate that year, Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Within days, the chair of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, resigned in disgrace. The WikiLeaks scandal broke on the same day that Hillary Clinton chose her running mate, Senator Tim Kaine, and it overshadowed the nominating convention that followed.

But, more significantly, the WikiLeaks scandal threatened to split the Democratic Party into pieces. More than 13 million Bernie Sanders voters, many of them young people, learned that the process they had always believed in, was in fact a sham. They had been cheated.

Democratic leaders had to act quickly in the face of this, to deflect blame from themselves onto someone else. The DNC’s servers, they claimed, had been hacked by the Russian military. The goal was to hurt Hillary Clinton, whom the Russians feared for her strength and wisdom, and to help Donald Trump, whom they controlled. Russia hacked the servers, in order to hack the election. That was their story. The Washington Post ran with it the first day, as if it were true.

But there was never any evidence that it was true. Almost seven years later, there is still no evidence. The DNC’s story about its servers is a lie. But, as a political strategy, that lie worked flawlessly. Russia made the perfect villain. It was a White, Christian country with a traditional social structure. It was everything the Democratic Party already opposed. The foreign policy apparatus in Washington was happy to hate Russia again. After 40 years of Cold War, hating Russia was muscle memory.

So, soon the leaders of both parties in Washington signed on to the Russia collusion hoax. It had the twin benefits of paralyzing the Trump administration, which it did, and justifying the expansion of the national security state. As the years passed and the rhetoric intensified, hysteria set in. After awhile, anyone with a heterodox opinion — from right-wingers to avowed-socialists — could be accused of working secretly for Vladimir Putin. Many were accused, and some were destroyed by it. It was a textbook witch-hunt, far more effective than McCarthyism.

And unlike McCarthyism, it never ended. Russia remained America’s greatest enemy, even as China emerged as America’s greatest threat. Over time, the lie that Democrats told to hide their crimes in the 2016 primaries, came to dominate America’s foreign policy, and then to imperil America itself. For generations, statesmen and diplomats worked to prevent other great powers from aligning as a block against the U.S. The idea was pretty straightforward: You might be able to beat one strong country, but if a couple of strong countries ever got together, you would lose. This is why Richard Nixon went to China: to make sure the Chinese government didn’t align with Brezhnev, with the Russians.

Donald Trump understood this very clearly: “Russia will never be our closest ally,” he said. “But if Russia ever becomes China’s ally, we’re in deep trouble.” The combination of natural resources, military and economic power — and sheer population — would make the Russian-Chinese alliance the most powerful force in the world. The United States would soon be dethroned, we’d be taking orders. As Trump put it, there is no reason to make Russia our enemy and there are many reasons not to.

It was a sound case, but official Washington ignored him. Their response, shouted in unison: “Shut up Putin stooge.” And then they set about trying to provoke a war with Russia. Now they have succeeded.

But the war we are fighting in Ukraine is not against Russia alone, but also against Russia’s newest ally, the People’s Republic of China. What Donald Trump predicted has happened, and in the worst way. If the war in Ukraine continues, we will lose no matter how it ends. The world order is being reshuffled as we watch, and by the time it’s over, the U.S. will no longer be at the top of the deck. That is very obvious to the rest of the world.

But what’s fascinating is how few Americans seem to understand what’s happening or its consequences. But how would they know? No one in American politics or media will tell them the truth. Since the first hours after the invasion, Americans have been fed a steady diet of increasingly absurd lies about Ukraine. Google and Facebook have joined with the Biden administration to censor any factual information that contradicts the official storyline. It’s dystopian.

Joe Biden’s first remarks about the war gave no hint we’d be sending advanced weapons systems and American military advisors to Ukraine, then supporting the entire Ukrainian government and its pension system with hundreds of billions of U.S. tax dollars. No, Joe Biden mentioned only sanctions, which are free. Sanctions he suggested would be enough. Here he is, a year ago today:

PRESIDENT BIDEN 2022: The Russian military has begun a brutal assault on the people of Ukraine without provocation, without justification, without necessity… This aggression cannot go unanswered. If it did, the consequences for America would be much worse. America stands up to bullies. We stand up for freedom… Putin is the aggressor. Putin chose this war, and now he and his country will bear the consequences. Today, I’m authorizing additional strong sanctions.

Strong sanctions. That’ll do it. Now, the goal at that point, a year ago today, you may remember this, was to push Russian forces back into their own country to reverse the invasion. And that seemed reasonable to most people. It did not seem like the beginning of a third world war, but it was exactly that. And by December, Lindsey Graham was confident enough to say so out loud. Here he is.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: How does this war end? When Russia breaks and they take Putin out. Anything short of that, the war is going to continue to ask the Ukrainians to give Russia part of their country after all this death and destruction is not going to happen. To signal a cease fire, Russia will take the opportunity to rearm and come at them again. So we’re in it to win it and the only way you’re going to win it is to break the Russian military and have somebody in Russia take Putin out.

So we’re going to, says Lindsey Graham confidently, continue pouring billions into Ukraine until they, “take Putin out.”

Does Putin know this? Well, we have no idea. We’re not allowed to see Russian media in this country. That’s too much information for Americans to handle. But if Putin does know that we plan to kill him, wouldn’t he fight back with nuclear weapons? Why wouldn’t he fight back with nuclear weapons? No one in the United States seems to be allowed to wonder that, much less have a conversation about it out loud.

Instead, we’re treated to more lectures about democracy. Ukraine is a democracy, we’re told. That’s why we’re on the side of Ukraine. The problem is that is a lie. Ukraine is not a democracy. Ukraine is a corrupt one-party state. Ukraine has none of the freedoms that define democratic governance: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion. Ukraine is the least free place in all of Europe and probably for that reason, it is Joe Biden’s favorite place.

So for those who understand what is actually happening and what Ukraine is actually like, it is very frustrating to watch Biden say this again and again. It is galling to be lectured about democracy by a man who took power in an election so sketchy that many Americans don’t believe it was even real.

Joe Biden has never had the majority of Americans’ support for a single day of the Ukraine war. In fact, Joe Biden is far less popular in the United States than Vladimir Putin is in Russia. That is not an endorsement of Putin. It’s just true. And it says everything about Joe Biden’s tenuous legitimacy. Democracy? Please. We’re adults. Stop lying to us.

So what happens next in this war? Well, according to our elderly Treasury secretary Janet Yellen, the war in Ukraine will go on forever, and so will our support for Zelenskyy.

SECRETARY YELLEN: Let me make clear, the United States and the allies, our support for Ukraine will be lasting and is unconditional.

Unconditional support for Ukraine. Unconditional support for a nation most Americans know nothing about and couldn’t find on a map. Unconditional support – that’s a profound statement. Outside of your immediate family how many people would you pledge unconditional support to? How many countries would you pledge unconditional support to? This is insane when you think about it.

But the people in charge of this disaster aren’t thinking the way that most Americans do. The Atlantic magazine commemorated the anniversary of the war by commissioning a piece today by Tom Nichols. Nichols is a thoroughly silly foreign policy establishment parasite, who apparently is taken seriously by other ne’er-do-wells and dumb people in Washington. But the piece is fascinating. In it, he inadvertently reveals the point of this war in the clearest possible terms: “Now we are faced with the long grind of defeating Moscow’s armies and eventually rebuilding a better world.”

Oh, defeating Moscow’s armies and building a better world. Perfect, thank you, Tom Nichols. Adding those items to this week’s to-do list.

Unspecified in the piece is exactly how we plan to do this, how we plan to defeat Russia and its ally, China, and then build utopia. The piece is notably light on details.

Now you’d feel a little better hearing all this if Tom Nichols and others like him in Washington had a track record that suggested they could do any of this, a track record of competence and success. They don’t. Nichols himself seems to spend most of his life arguing with other people on Twitter. He’s never achieved anything at all that we’re aware of, but then virtually none of them have achieved anything. Biden’s chief Ukraine strategist, Victoria Nuland – you would not hire her to plan spring break. She couldn’t do it. She doesn’t have the skills

Now, these very same people, these demonstrably incompetent people, say they plan to rebuild a better world. All right, that seems ambitious. How about starting with Baltimore before moving on to total global transformation? Shouldn’t we fix the biggest city in Maryland first?

Under the leadership of people like Tom Nichols and Victoria Nuland, neoliberal geniuses with grand plans, Baltimore has devolved into third world chaos. But then so has Iraq, so has Libya and so has every other place these people have decided to, “rebuild.”

It should spur a moment of silence and self-reflection in the U.S. State Department that the moment Western diplomats and NGOs left the country, Afghanistan got safer. There are far fewer killings in Kabul now than there were 18 months ago. Pedestrians in Kabul can walk to dinner at night without being murdered. Now, that fact doesn’t tell the whole story of Afghanistan, of course, but we shouldn’t ignore that fact. It means something.

If you spend billions trying to make a place better, and it gets worse, you have an obligation to think about why. Maybe you’re doing it wrong. Maybe you’re not as powerful and clever as you thought you were. Maybe there’s a problem with your formula.

But none of this ever occurs to people like Tom Nichols and Victoria Nuland and for that matter, Joe Biden. The more discredited they are, the more self-confident they become. They see every failure as evidence that their talents are more desperately needed than ever. What is this? Well, it’s called hubris.



Britons join neo-Nazi militia in Ukraine

After Going to War Under False Pretenses in Iraq, High-Level Officials of the Biden Regime Want War With Russia

WAR IN UKRAINE: The Economic Impact of Energy and Food One Year After Russia’s Invasion

The American People Have Never Been So Ignored


EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Katie Hobbs, the Governor of Arizona, Allegedly Accepted Bribes From the Sinaloa Drug Cartel

It’s now being reported AZ Governor Katie Hobbs as well as several Maricopa County Supervisors may have accepted bribes from the Sinaloa cartel in the form of phony mortgages or deeds of trust.

Testimony at the Arizona Senate & House Oversite hearings from Arizona House Special Session Jacqueline Breger, investigator under Attorney John Thaler, alleges Katie Hobbs, Runbeck election services, and a number of government officials were named for receiving Sinaloa cartel bribes.

Now what?

WATCH: Forensic Investigator John Thaler Joins Brannon Howse Following EXPLOSIVE Claims That Sinaloa Cartel Uses Bribes, Money Laundering To Control Maricopa County Elections

TPG: The Sinaloa Cartels and the treasonous Americans who work with them are destroying our country by flooding Arizona with dangerous drugs and crime.

The Gateway Pundit reported that Tempe Police seized over 30 million lethal doses of fentanyl. In 2022, the DEA nationwide seized over 50.6 million deadly fentanyl-laced fake prescription pills and over 10,000 pounds of fentanyl powder, half of which came from Arizona. “I want to be crystal clear. The drugs that are flooding Arizona every single day are sourced primarily by one evil entity, the Sinaloa Drug Cartel,” said Phoenix DEA Special Agent in Charge Cheri Oz.

The Arizona Senate and House Elections Committees held a joint special meeting on Thursday and heard an explosive presentation by Breger, which, if true, exposed information regarding massive corruption and collusion between American politicians, appointed government officials, and the Sinaloa Cartels.

Breger identifies herself as a longtime Arizona resident and a forensic investigator with the Harris/Thaler Law Corporation, investigating multi-state racketeering and corruption. She states that she holds a master’s degree in marketing and honors degrees in Finance, Financial Accounting, Business, statistics, economics, and business strategy.

She told the legislators on Thursday that attorney John Thaler investigated money laundering and racketeering in Maricopa County and reviewed over 120,000 documents which include “fake notarizations, fake deeds of trust, fraudulent buyers and or sellers of the real property transactions, as well as other companies used in real estate transactions, such as real estate brokers, mortgage companies Title and Escrow companies, real estate inspection companies, service companies.”

Breger made serious accusations against named individuals in government positions and others involved in the alleged scheme. This includes two citizens of Mesa named Dawna Rae Chavez and her daughter, Brittany Rae Chavez, who are both described by Breger as “principal preparers of the documents necessary to affect the racketeering enterprise.”


EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.