Florida Is Ground Zero In Fight Against Sanctuary Cities

Banning sanctuary cities has a very real chance of passing in Florida this year — and that’s creating an emotion-driven battle with Democrats and the open-borders lobby.

The sanctuary bill sponsored by Sarasota Republican Sen. Joe Gruters — who is also Chairman of the Republican Party of Florida — has become the most contentious issue of the year in the seemingly always-contentious Florida Legislature.

While such legislation has not gone anywhere in past sessions, it is fast-tracked this year with the Republican leadership structure all onboard. Gov. Ron DeSantis, whose popularity has swelled since his narrow election in November, is a major supporter of President Trump’s immigration and border security policies while former Gov. Rick Scott’s support on the issue was somewhat tepid.

So legislators in the GOP-controlled Legislature are pushing legislation that would clearly define what constitutes sanctuary policies — one of the problems plaguing the issue — and would prohibit any state or local governments from adopting such policies, formally or informally.

Of course the importance of Florida in national elections as the largest swing state in the nation is well-known. But it can also be a bellwether state as far as what is acceptable to the broader American electorate. With its huge population of immigrated Midwesterners, Southerners and Northeasterners, no state is more representative of America than Florida.

If a strong sanctuary city ban can be passed in Florida, then it may have the politically broad support that it seems to have in the polls. And that makes it a winner in 2020 for Republicans.

All of which is bringing out the long knives of the Democrat Left.

First came the press conferences with the most sympathetic representatives opposing a ban on sanctuary cities — young adults who were brought illegally as young children and are now allowed to stay here legally through DACA…but their parents are not. These people tell the stories of how hard it was growing up and not being able to travel freely or do some of the other things that legal American children could do because their families were not supposed to be here — although they are allowed to do all those things now. (Speakers included Florida State University students, so not suffering too badly.) Gratitude is not usually much a part of these dog-and-pony shows.

Second, the slime machine known as the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is slowly but steadily being discredited even in parts of the media, is still used by too many gullible or biased reporters as a legitimate source. And so the SPLC launched an attack on the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Gruters, by trying to tie him to what they describe as a hate group — the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR.

Here’s how Zac Anderson, the political reporter for the Sarasota Herald-Tribune put it, acting as a gullible tool for the SPLC as he has in the past against Republicans:

“Several people associated with the Federation for American Immigration Reform — an organization branded by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a “hate group” — provided input to Sarasota state Sen. Joe Gruters and his staff as they worked to advance so-called “sanctuary city” immigration enforcement legislation.

An email obtained by the Herald-Tribune shows that David Jaroslav, the state and local legislative manager for FAIR, worked with Floridians for Immigration Enforcement to offer advice for Gruters’ staff on how to the defend the sanctuary bill against critics. Jaroslav emailed comments to Floridians for Immigration Enforcement President Kenneth Morrow Jr., who passed the comments on to Gruters’ staff.”

Notice the tenuousness of the connections. A person or people connected to FAIR (not a hate group) sent Gruter’s staff emails on how to defend against critics. But here’s the headline: “Members of alleged hate group linked to Sarasota legislator’s immigration bill.” Well that sounds a whole lot worse than was actually backed up in the article, which itself is a sham because it rests on the SPLC’s increasingly discredited hate list.

Of course, the branding of FAIR as a hate group when their policies are not hateful and their web site is very specifically opposed to any form of discrimination, is absurd. The SPLC takes two or three comments of the founder from 25-40 years ago, without context, and labels the group hateful to this day — exactly like they would never do with the far more extensive hateful and blatantly racist writings of, say, the founder of Planned Parenthood.

There continues to be this symbiotic relationship between the SPLC and willing dupes in the media. The SPLC has used both the Trump presidency to promote the misinformation that hate crimes are on the rise, and also success in media coverage hammering conservatives, as leverage for record amounts of fundraising — doubling funding since 2015. This, even while Politico, the Atlantic and others are increasingly questioning the SPLC’s legitimacy.

The bill’s definition of sanctuary cities is important. The primary reason there are officially no sanctuary cities or counties in Florida is because there is no agreed upon definition of what constitutes a sanctuary policy. But there are some communities who do not particularly cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials when the agency issues an immigration detainer asking police to hold someone who is suspected of being in the country illegally, along with other cooperative issues.

Expect more dirt and media complicity in the fight for the rule of law, and of order, in Florida — reflecting the rest of the country. And the front line of that fight is sanctuary cities.

RELATED ARTICLE: Poll: 67% Of Likely Voters Say Illegal Immigration Is A Serious Problem, Most Believe Democrats Don’t Want To Stop It 

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission.

An Overwhelmed Immigration System Endangers America: 9/11 Commission warned “Border security is national security.”

The 9/11 Commission staff authored an official report, 9/11 and Terrorist Travel, that focused specifically on the ability of the 9/11 terrorists to travel around the world, enter the United States and embed themselves here as they went about their preparations to carry out a deadly attack.

The preface of this report begins with the following paragraph:

It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.

On March 29, 2019 Real Clear Politics posted three videos concerning the immigration crisis. To begin with, they posted a video of President Trump explaining his plan to completely shut down the U.S./Mexican border if Mexico continues to permit “migrant caravans” of aliens from Central America to travel through Mexico with the ultimate goal of entering the United States even though they have no visas to be lawfully admitted.

The second video was a segment of a CNN interview with Robert Perez, the Deputy Commissioner of the U.S. Border Patrol, posted under the title, “CBP Deputy Commissioner: ‘We Are Beyond The Breaking Point’ At Southern Border.”  During the brief video clip Perez made an important point, and one I could not agree with more: not only is the Border Patrol being overwhelmed along the dangerous U.S./Mexican border, but the entire immigration system is being overwhelmed to the breaking point.

Finally, Real Clear Politics posted a video of the former Secretary of Homeland Security under the clear and unambiguous title, “Obama DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson: “We Are Truly In A Crisis” On Southern Border.”

Along with the video of Johnson’s statement was a brief synopsis that included this quote:

On Tuesday, there were 4,000 apprehensions. I know that a thousand overwhelms the system. I cannot begin to imagine what 4,000 a day looks like, so we are truly in a crisis.

My mom wisely taught me that “one-sided relationships are not relationships.”

President Trump correctly noted that Mexico has a huge trade advantage with the United States in which they and their companies reap far greater rewards and, to add injury to insult, the Mexican government is facilitating the human tsunami of aliens from Central America, enabling them to transit easily through the entire length of Mexico in organized caravans that deposit them directly on America’s doorstep.

There are many reasons why this is happening and that was the topic of my article, “Caravan Of ‘Migrants’ – A Crisis Decades In The Making“; however, first and foremost it must be understood that the United States does not have four border states but fifty border states. (Any state that lies along our norther and southern borders is a border state, as are those states that have access to America’s 95,000 miles of coastline, as are those that have international airports.)

Aliens who enter the United States without inspection don’t remain near the border for long. Unlike our astronauts who traveled to the moon to plant a flag, grab some lunar rocks and, after a brief visit, return to earth, illegal aliens quickly head to towns and cities across the United States, most often to “Sanctuary Cities.”

President Trump noted that the United States lacks the ability to detain these aliens and so “catch & release” now plagues the overwhelmed immigration system. “Catch & release” is not limited to the borders of the United States but undermines efforts to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the U.S. as well.

In fact, many factors hobble interior enforcement, beginning, first and foremost, with an abject lack of ICE agents who number about 6,000 and not only investigate and enforce violations of immigration laws but also investigate violations of a wide array of other laws that have absolutely nothing to do with immigration law violations.

It has been said that you get only one opportunity to make a first impression. People who seek to to enter the United States first encounter our immigration laws. Sanctuary cities and statements of political “leaders” who vilify immigration law enforcement officers, and those members of Congress who promise to pass “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” to legalize unknown millions of aliens from around the world broadcast the unmistakable message that violations of our laws are not only tolerated but will be rewarded! That creates one hell of a first impression!

The utter lack of interior enforcement of the immigration laws further emboldens aliens from around the world to enter the U.S. by any means, knowing that they will likely get away with violating our laws.

Aliens who engage in marriage fraud and identity theft will likely acquire the benefits they seek having easily gamed the immigration system, making a mockery of the entire system.

Thus alien law violators are not only undeterred by our laws but are encouraged to join those caravans parading up through Mexico or to find some other way to get here.

Nearly half of all illegal aliens don’t enter the United States without inspection but enter through ports of entry and then disappear. This creates yet another nightmare scenario.

On March 25, 2019 the Conservative Review published a truly disconcerting article, “Over 50,000 illegal aliens from terror-prone countries remain despite final deportation orders” which noted that an additional 60,000 such aliens are currently appealing their cases.

After the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 there was no shortage of politicians who eagerly stood before the television cameras and demanded to know why no one connected the dots before the attacks.

After a string of congressional hearings and after additional terror attacks conducted by alien terrorists in the United States, the dots have been thoroughly connected. Yet even as more people fall victim to heroin and other narcotics overdoses and more innocent victims are killed by transnational gangs, neither political party supports the construction of a barrier along our porous borders or the hiring of more ICE agents.

Today’s summation will be provided by remembering Sir Winston Churchill’s remarks delivered before the House of Commons on May 2, 1935, when he voiced his frustration and consternation about missed opportunities and failures to learn from history, as the storm clouds of war were gathering on the horizon:

When the situation was manageable it was neglected, and now that it is thoroughly out of hand we apply too late the remedies which then might have effected a cure. There is nothing new in the story. It is as old as the sibylline books. It falls into that long, dismal catalogue of the fruitlessness of experience and the confirmed unteachability of mankind. Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong–these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission.

Trump’s Presidential Decree on the Golan — A Moral and Practical Imperative

In issuing his recent presidential decree, recognizing Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights, President Donald followed the commendable policy pattern he has set…of not following the policy patterns set by his predecessors.

Recognizing reality

Much like his decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, Trump’s decision was, on the face of it, little more than recognition of longstanding realities. After all, the disputed Golan Heights have been under Israeli control for far longer than they have ever been under the control of Syria. Indeed, much more than double!

But, in fact, the decision was more than that. It was—as we shall see—a moral and practical imperative.

Readers will recall that Israel took control of the Golan Heights, which tower above virtually the whole of the North of the country, in the 1967 Six-Day War, when a combined force of several Arab armies—including Egypt, Syria and Jordan—attempted to obliterate the Jewish State. Until then, the Syrians had used their topographical superiority to regularly harass rural Israeli communities in the low lying regions around the shores of the Sea of Galilee, frequently inflicting casualties among farmers and damage to agricultural and infrastructure installations.

After bitter fighting, the 1967 Israeli victory put an end to the Syrian attacks. It also ended Damascus’s 21 year control of the Golan, which it had held since Syrian independence (1946)—and which, for the ensuing 52 years, has been under Israeli rule.

Avoiding an error of epic proportions

Disturbingly, despite the critical strategic value of the Golan, successive Israel leaders, including Benjamin Netanyahu, have fallen prey to the allure of the perilous “land-for-peace” formula and been tempted to enter into negotiations over its return to Syria.

Fortunately, it was only obdurate Syrian rejectionism that prevented Israel from committing a strategic error of epic proportions.

Indeed, just how grievous a mistake that would have been was revealed with the outbreak of the Syria civil war in 2011.

It was then that all illusions at to true nature of the Assad regime were dispelled and its utter dependence on Iran was exposed. Up until then, many thought of Syrian president, Bashar Assad, a western educated doctor, as moderate reformer, who could be a genuine partner in forging a viable peace with Israel—in exchange for it relinquishing the Golan Heights to him.

The civil war laid bare not only the unspeakable brutality of Assad and his regime, but also the no lesser viciousness of the forces opposing him, which included affiliates of both Al- Qaeda and of ISIS.

Thus, had Israel relinquished the Golan to Assad prior to 2011, it would have faced grim prospects—no matter who won. If, on the one hand, Assad and his Iranian masters prevailed (as they seem to have done) Israel would have had to contend not only with the specter of regular Syrian military forces being deployed in this critically sensitive area, but also Iranian proxies (such as Hezbolla-like units) and even detachments of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards themselves. If on the other hand, Assad’s adversaries prevailed, Israel would be threatened by the presence of Jihadi affiliates of Al-Qaeda and/or ISIS in territory dominating the entire North of the country.

Sound common sense

Accordingly, the Trump decree not only reflected a sound common-sense acknowledgment of a half-century long reality, but also recognition that post-2011 events have made any notion of relinquishing the Golan to Assad—and therefore to his Iranian patrons—unthinkable.

Despite this, the decision immediately provoked shocked response in much of the West and outrage across the Arab and Muslim world. Dire warnings were made as to how detrimental and destabilizing it would be and how it would spark renewed violence in the region—very reminiscent of similar warning following Trump’s historic decisions to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, to move the US embassy to the city, and to pull out of the nuclear deal with Iran.

None of these past warning proved true—and it is unlikely that any of the new ones will either. Among other things, this is due to one other highly controversial and fiercely condemned component of Trump’s “maverick” conduct of foreign policy—the decision to reinstate sanctions against Tehran.

Fortune favors the bold?

More than anything, this has debilitated the capacity of the Iranian regime to propagate, and certainly to proliferate, its destabilizing mischief across the globe. In light of growing domestic disaffection at the deteriorating economic conditions and increasing criticism of its military adventurism abroad, it seems unlikely that Tehran will be eager to devote dwindling resources to a retaliatory initiative that almost certainly will provoke a costly punitive response.

So, perhaps once again, Trump’s decisive initiative on the Golan is like to validate the well-known dictum: “Fortune favors the bold.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Israel Announces Hundreds of New Housing Units in Judea and Samaria

How Border Security Failures Make US Sick: The Hypocrisy in our Immigration Debate.

Several weeks ago I wrote about how Open Borders Are Dangerous To Our (Public) Health and noted that Ellis Island was a quarantine station.

In the weeks that followed, attention has greatly increased over the growing measles epidemic that is infecting increasing numbers of children particularly in New York State.

On March 26, 2019 the headline of a Newsday report blared: “State of emergency declared in Rockland County because of measles outbreak”.  The subtitle of that article stated, At least 153 people, mostly children, have been affected in the county. And nearly 200 cases have been counted in recent months in Brooklyn and Queens.”

News coverage of the worrying outbreak have focused on the orthodox Jewish community blaming their supposed religious beliefs and practices for not permitting their children to be vaccinated.

This raises the disquieting question if health concerns are being used as a way of demonizing members of the religious Jewish community by blaming them for the measles outbreak.

However the Newsday report provided this important quote:

“I am an Orthodox rabbi, and there is absolutely no religious authority that forbids one from getting vaccinated,” said Dr. Aaron Glatt, chairman of medicine at South Nassau Communities Hospital in Oceanside, and a specialist in infectious diseases.

“Unfortunately, there is a segment of the population that has fallen under the influence of the anti-vaxxers,” Glatt said of people who espouse anti-vaccine beliefs. “You see this among Jewish and non-Jewish parents. There is a strong contingent of anti-vaxxers who have ulterior motives, but most are decent parents who are just misinformed.”

The Newsday article went on to report:

Earlier this month a federal judge barred 50 students from attending a Rockland school because they were unvaccinated. Health officials believe the outbreak was ignited in September by an international traveler who arrived in the area with measles. The situation worsened when six additional international travelers with measles arrived in Rockland, further spreading measles to vulnerable children.

The issue has a clear nexus to international travel yet most news outlets refuse to focus on this significant aspect of the health crisis.

Having used the term crisis we cannot ignore the headline of a March 26, 2019 report published by WAMC Northeastern Public Radio, Rockland County Exec Declares State Of Emergency For Measles Outbreak.

Under the terms of the declaration of the State of Emergency children under the age of 18 years of age who have not been vaccinated against measles must not enter any public place until April 27 or until they are vaccinated to protect against measles, mumps and rubella.  The penalty for violation of this order is a maximum fine of $500 dollars and/or six months in prison for committing a Class “B” Misdemeanor.

Before we go any further, we must consider what this really means.

Out of a concern for the health of the general population of the residents of Rockland County, a country that lies north of New York City, the fact that several hundred children have contracted the measles prompted swift and decisive action to safeguard the lives of children and others who might be vulnerable to a dangerous disease.

However, under the premise of “Sanctuary Policies” illegal aliens who enter the United States without inspection are shielded from detection by Immigration and Customs Enforcement leaving them free to wander about those communities with impunity.

Aliens who enter the United States are illegally present and, as I have noted in ever so many of my articles and Congressional testimony, pose a threat to public safety and national security.  They also may well pose a threat to public health.  Under a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S. Code § 1182 (Inadmissible Aliens), aliens may not be granted visas or admitted into the United States if they have a communicable disease or cannot provide proof that they have been vaccinated against at least the following: mumps, measles, rubella, polio, tetanus and diphtheria toxoids, pertussis, influenza type B and hepatitis B, and any other vaccinations against vaccine-preventable diseases recommended by the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices.

Aliens without inspection are not vetted and their very presence in the United States is not known by our government.

Now let’s consider how frequently advocates for sanctuary policies justify their outrageous policies by claiming that many businesses depend on what they refer to as “undocumented immigrants” (Orwellian Newspeak for aliens who are illegally present in the United States and may have entered the United States illegally and without inspection).

Among the businesses that eagerly hire these aliens who evaded the vetting process at ports of entry are restaurants and food processing plants.

So, while unvaccinated children are to be kept away from public events under the threat of having their parents or legal guardians arrested and imprisoned for up to six months, potentially separating the American parents from their American children, illegal aliens whose medical backgrounds are unknown along with the potential public health risks that they pose are free to go where they wish in those “Sanctuary” jurisdictions and may even help to prepare your next meal.

Bon appetite!

To further support my concerns about health issues that relate to aliens who seek entry into the United States consider on January 15, 2019 Newsweek published a report, “Anti-Vax Movement Listed By World Health Organization As One Of The Top 10 Health Threats For 2019.”

Here a few excerpts from the Newsweek report to help keep you awake at night:

Fragile and vulnerable settings

Crises—such as drought, famine, conflict and population displacement—and poor health services have left more than 1.6 billion people around the world, or 22 percent of the planet’s population, without access to basic care.

Ebola and other high-threat pathogens

Two outbreaks of Ebola in the Democratic Republic of Congo occurred last year, causing the deaths of nearly 400 people. This highlights the danger of known high-threat pathogens with the potential to cause epidemics—like Ebola, Zika, Middle East respiratory syndrome corona virus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)—as well as those that have yet to be discovered.

Weak primary health care

People in many countries around the world lack access to adequate primary health care services. This is a significant problem because they are the first point of contact that an individual has with a health care system. Often, service is of poor quality or is simply unaffordable


Every year, about 390 million people around the world are infected with dengue fever and about 40 percent of the global population lives in regions where it risks contracting the disease. Transmitted by mosquitoes, the flu-like fever has a mortality rate of below 1 percent when it is detected early and the patient receives medical care. However, this figure can rise significantly if the disease is left untreated.

Finally, on March 11, 2019 CNN reported, More than 2,000 people in ICE custody quarantined for contagious diseases.

It is more than a bit ironic and hypocritical that while Congress collectively voted against President Trump’s declaration of an emergency at our porous and dangerous southern border that the local government of Rockland County in New York State have declared a “State of Emergency” over health concerns that may well have a nexus to border security, or lack thereof.

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission.

INTELLIGENCE UPDATE: Jihadis being supplied in Benghazi, ISIS and ‘most wanted’ international terrorists in Libya

The following information was reported on the program sin’at al-mawt (Industry of death) on the Dubai-based, Saudi owned satellite TV channel al-Arabiyya.  This is a weekly half-hour program that discusses aspects of international terrorism and jihadism.  For this installment, the program host was in Libya where he first interviewed a Libyan maritime officer, and then a Libyan journalist who tracks all the radical groups operating in Libya.  Following are the main take-away points from that program aired on Friday 29 March 2019.

  • Though ISIS radicals were supposedly driven from the coastal city of Sirte, Libya, in 2018, the ISIS black flag still flies over a few buildings—and, most ominously, the port of Sirte remains as the primary artery for Qatar and Turkey to ship jihadis, arms, and cash for ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Muslim Brotherhood groups.
  • Even though the city of Benghazi is the Headquarters for the anti-jihadi army of Egyptian-supported General Khalifa Haftar, Benghazi harbor also still remains as a conduit through which the Jihadis are getting supplies from the outside.
  • (The above two items were reported by the maritime officer.  The remainder of this wrap-up will come from the Libyan journalist who has specialized in following radical movements since the fall of Qadhafi.  This journalist had a large screen full of icons, each icon represented either a terrorist he was following, or a jihadi group.  When he touched the icon, it would bring up an entire page of info on the individual or group.)
  • Nearly every terrorist on international “most-wanted” lists are here in Libya.
  • One of the chief suspects in the killing of the U.S. ambassador (Stevens, in the Benghazi incident), fled Libya for Turkey.  Turkey has steadfastly refused to extradite him to America, and instead sent him to Tunis where he joined the ansar ash-shari’a (which participated in the Benghazi job) and is now active again in Libya.
  • Saif al-‘Adel (the sword of justice), al-Qaeda’s chief military figure, is also among the international “most wanted” currently present in Libya.
  • Qatari ministry of defense officers have been seen and filmed interacting with jihadi groups in Libya.  So, they are not just delivering supplies, they are most likely actually involved in the training of some of the jihadi personnel.


The same TV program sin’at al-mawt reported the week previously that Qatar was flying foreign jihadis and equipment into the NE Libyan city of Derna which is under the complete control of ISIS.

The U.S. has offered a $10,000,000 reward for information on Saif al-‘Adel’s location, due to his alleged part in the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in East Africa.  He joined the Egyptian army in the mid-70’s, did some training in the Soviet Union, and rose to the rank of Col. Before leaving the Egyptian army in 1981.  He was considered to be an expert in explosives.  After leaving the army he joined the Egyptian Islamic Jihad terrorist group.  As such, he was accused in 1987 of plotting to overthrow the Egyptian government.

After charges were dismissed he fled to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets who had once trained him.  He is believed to have opposed the 9/11 operation on the grounds that it would backfire, though he was thought to be connected with the kidnapping of journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002.  After the Soviets were booted out of Afghanistan, he stuck around for awhile to train the Taliban.

At some point during the 1990s he was in Southern Lebanon (along with a few other al-Qaeda bigwigs) training a group called “Hezbollah al-Hejaz.”  This is significant for a couple of reasons.  First off, the term “Hezbollah,” which means “Party of God,” is a term used almost exclusively by Shi’a terrorist groups aligned with Iran.  Therefore, this is yet one more example of al-Qaeda-linked Sunni terrorists cooperating with Shi’a groups aligned with Iran.  A fact of life that “inside-the-beltway” experts refuse to acknowledge.

“Al-Hejaz” refers to the western part of Saudi Arabia where the pan-Islamic Holy Sites of Mecca and Medina are located.  Thus, the very name of this group indicates that its primary purpose is to wrest the Islamic Holy Sites from the hands of the Saudis, if not to overthrow the Saudi government itself.  Al-Qaeda’s helping to train this group is significant.

Since “Saif al-‘Adel” is an obvious movement name, it was originally thought that his real name was Mohammed Ibrahim Makkawi.  On 29 February 2012 a person of that name flew into the Cairo airport whereupon Egyptian authorities promptly arrested him (because that name was on international watch lists).  After he donated a couple of fingernails to his Egyptian interrogators the unfortunate fellow was finally able to convince them that he wasn’t Saif al-‘Adel.

It is now thought that his real name is Salah ad-Deen Zaidan.  According to Wikipedia, however, the FBI, however continues to misidentify him as Mohammad Ibrahim Makkawi.

Reflections on the Christchurch Massacre [+Video]

To begin, let me say that any person regardless of race, religion, or ethnic group who walks into a house of worship were worshippers have gathered together to worship what ever they are worshipping, and regardless of whatever race, religion, or ethnic group the worshippers belong to, and opens up fire with the intent to kill as many people as he can,  like shooting toads in a barrel, that person is a coward, and is the scum of the earth–or total nut case.

But, just as evil is the person who shoots up a nightclub during peak hours with the intent to kill as many as possible . . . just because he doesn’t approve of the skin color, accent, or sexual orientations of those inside.

Just as evil is the person who throws a Molotov cocktail, grenade, or other explosive device into a house of worship with the intent to kill as many worshippers as possible, just because those worshippers aren’t Muslims, or if Muslim don’t belong to the right brand of Islam.

Just as evil is the person who waits just outside an Ariana Grande concert with an automatic weapon so as to kill as many concert goers as he can when they exit the concert, because he knows that the concert goers are young girls and this was part of a wider-scale plot to reduce the target country’s potential breeding population.

Obviously, what is needed at this point in the aftermath of the Christchurch massacre, is to allow sanity and realism to prevail.

On one level, the New Zealand shooter was right.  We are in the midst of a war.  This is a war that Islam has declared on us based on verses in the Qur’an and ahadeeth that are so numerous I could spend the next ten pages quoting them.  The only problem with this war is that the West has failed to recognize that fact.  But, the New Zealand shooter was wrong in the method he choose to fight this war.

Our war is not against individual Muslims as people, it is against the ideology of Islam which is something completely different.  Rather than killing innocent worshippers in a mosque (and giving ammunition to the enemies of Western Civilization), this war must be fought in the minds of the Muslims themselves.  And, the bullets and the bombs must be the reality of their own scriptures quoted back at them, and not real bullets and bombs.  For a preview of what these “bullets” and “bombs” might look like, read the Islam section of my book, and/or the “Blogging the Qur’an” section of my website.

For some interesting insights on the possible motives of the Christchurch shooter, click on Brad Johnson’s video interview posted on www.intelreform.org:


Radical Islamists and the hard Leftists in the West have been trying for years to silence any and all intellectual and academic discussion of Islamic texts that promote jihad and acts of terror.  The actions of the New Zealand shooter have played right into their hands.

The term used by Islamists and Leftists to stigmatize all those who offer intellectual, scriptural, and/or academic criticism of the Islamic texts that promote jihad and violence against “the other” is “Islamophobia.”  This termed was coined by the 57-member Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) which dominates the UN general assembly in imitation of the American Left’s successful usage of the “Homophobia” term to demonize anyone who opposed “gay rights.”

The OIC has used the “Islamophobia” label to get the UN general assembly to okay the condemnation of anyone practicing “Islamophobia” but they have failed so far to get all the member nations to enact “Islamophobia” laws in their own countries.  The Christchurch massacre has given Islamists the world over the perfect tool for accomplishing that goal.  The Islamists and the Leftist have skillfully lumped those engaging in legitimate academic critiquing of Islamic texts in with the nut cases like the piece of detritus that opened up fire on Mosque worshippers in New Zealand.

On the Islamic side, everyone from the state-level OIC down to the terrorist group level such as the Muslim Brotherhood (declared a terrorist group by six countries) and its front groups in the U.S. such as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) (declared a terrorist group by the U.A.E. for its deleterious effect on U.S. policies) have jumped on board to exploit the New Zealand tragedy to further their agenda to silence any and all criticism and critiquing of Islam and/or any Islamic “sacred” texts.  In short, to kill the U.S. First Amendment.

That will give the Islamists a free hand to accomplish their goal to “eliminate and destroy the Western civil society and culture from within and to destroy their haughty house by their own hands and the hands of the believers in order to complete their removal so that Allah’s religion shall be over all religion” (from the Muslim Brotherhood’s Explanatory Memorandum for the general strategic goal of the group in North America. p. 4 of the Arabic original which was seized in an FBI raid of a Virginia safe house in 2004, the English translation of which was used in the Holy Land Foundation trial in 2008).  

Another trick that the Islamists and the Leftists skillfully pull is to lump any sort of intellectual, academic, or textual critiquing of Islam with hatred of all Muslims.  That is what the term “Islamophobia” does for them.  Unfortunately our media and political classes are ignorant enough of the issues involved to fall for that.

In countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran, people are routinely killed for doing just that.  Even in Egypt intellectuals have been killed for academically critiquing Islam.  More recently, others have been put in prison.  A high profile case of a couple of years ago illustrates the problem:

An Egyptian TV talk show host named Dr. Islam al-Beheri, who himself is a doctoral graduate in Islamic law from Egypt’s al-Azhar university (the closest thing Sunni Islam has to a Vatican) hosted a show dedicated to talking about Islam and issues related to Islam.  Becoming alarmed at the rise of ISIS and the increasing frequency of Islamic terrorist acts in Europe and elsewhere, he began calling for a reformation of Islam.  In his diatribes he began condemning the books of ahadeeth (supposed sacred sayings of Muhammad not a part of the Qur’an), as well as the sunna (traditions of everything that Muhammad supposedly did and said–also considered sacred), and the sira (the biography of Muhammad, how we can know of all the things Muhammad did and said that good Muslims should follow according to Qur’an 33:21).

All of these works were composed 100-300 years after the death of Muhammad, so Dr. al-Beheri thought he would be on safe ground by stimulating discussion on the possibility of desanctifying all of these works except for the Qur’an.  Indeed, President as-Sisi himself had said much the same thing in his own calls for an Islamic reformation.  Well, though al-Azhar couldn’t charge the president, private citizen Dr. Islam al-Beheri had no such protection.  The Shaykhs of al-Azhar hauled him into court and had him sentenced to prison for five years for the crime of isa’at al-islam (insulting or denigrating Islam).

Fortunately President as-Sisi had his sentence commuted after a few months in the slammer.  Dr. al-Beheri is a free man now and has started up a new TV show called “Free Islam.”

But, don’t think for a moment that the international state-level OIC, the governments of countries like Iran, Qatar, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, and groups like the international Muslim Brotherhood and its front groups in the U.S.A. like CAIR and its allies wouldn’t just love to be able to impose those sorts of laws on us here in the West.  That is exactly why the Islamists at all levels are playing this Christchurch massacre for all it is worth.  It was manna from heaven for them.

The crime of “insulting Islam” is closely related to the crime of “slander” in Islamic jurisprudence.  “Slander” in Islamic jurisprudence is saying anything to a Muslim, or about a Muslim, that he (or she) would not like–even if what is said is true.  This, would, of course include any comment about his/her religion–even if true–that the Muslim would not like.  This definition (along with more details) is presented by the Shafa’i scholar Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Masri in his classic book on Islamic Jurisprudence ‘umdat as-salik, pp. 730-732 along with quotes from Muhammad himself as related by several of the ahadeeth. 

To put all this together, what this means is that any non-Muslim who says anything, I mean anything, about Islam that any Muslim does not like–even if it is true–that person has committed slander against the Muslim, and has also “insulted Islam.”  These are only a few examples of Islamic jurisprudence, or shari’a, that the Islamists are itching to have imposed upon the West.  In Islamic countries these “crimes” (even when committed by a fellow Muslim) earn the person anything from five years in prison to death, depending upon the country.

Incidents like the Christchurch massacre do nothing except aid the Islamists in this endeavor.  Meanwhile the entire Left in America, from the DNC and its leading politicians down to its low-life base of “Antifa,” and “BLM,” are only too quick to assist this effort by lumping everyone who opposes jihad mass murder and Shari’a oppression into the category of “far right extremists” and placing them in the same basket as the KKK and Aryan Nation.


The media in the west has long been known for its biased reporting with regards to domestic politics, but what is really tragic is their rank double standards when it comes to reporting on any event or incident in which Muslims are the victims verse their coverage of similar acts when Christians are the victims.

Christian houses of worship are routinely bombed and shot up with worshippers inside on an almost weekly basis clear across the continent of Africa (including in pro-West Egypt), and South Asia from Pakistan to the Philippines.   These events are barely mentioned in our media, if at all.  It is as if our media and political classes believe that Christians living in those countries deserve to be killed, just for being there–even though in many cases they were there long before Islam arrived.  Egyptian Copts, for example, go back several thousands of years before the imposition of Islam over their daily affairs.  And, yet, they, the descendents of the pyramid builders, are being slaughtered like sacrificial lambs in their own homeland.  Where is our beloved media on that?

In fact, anyone who does dare to report on those atrocities against Christians, such as Robert Spencer does on his www.jihadwatch.com, is branded as a “racist,” and “bigot,” and, yes, as an “Islamophobe.”

Yet, when a white European type shoots up a couple of mosques like the Christchurch moron did, all hell breaks out.  You never hear the end of faux lamentations, and the linking of everyone to the right of Karl Marx (including President Trump and all those who voted for him) with the horrendous deed.

Don’t you just love the hypocrisy of it all?

And so, the big push to silence any sort of criticism of Islamic texts, persons, or practices is on full speed ahead, and is being aided “by their own hands,” thanks to the idiocy of the Left.  This is why I think it appropriate to conclude with a quote from Robert Spencer’s recent posting on the Christchurch incident on www.FrontPageMag.com:

“If and when we are all silenced, however, the jihad will not stop.  The multicultural paradise will not dawn on the planet; in fact, there will be more jihad violence and strife than ever.  There just won’t be anyone around who dares to oppose it.”

NATIONAL SECURITY ALERT: Soldiers at Fort Bragg Arrested for Alleged Marriage Fraud Conspiracy.

With nearly all of the focus of the immigration debate centering on the abject lack of security along the U.S./Mexico border, other failures of the overwhelmed immigration system are being utterly ignored. Make no mistake: that dangerous border must be made secure against the illegal and uninspected entry of aliens, but the other failures of the immigration system are no less serious and pose no less of a threat.

The majority of these failures center on the lack of resources for the enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States, an issue I addressed in my recent article about the importance of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), a division of the Department of Homeland Security.

In addition to arresting illegal aliens, there are many other elements critical to the interior enforcement mission. One of the most critical is to conduct investigations to uncover immigration fraud, whereby aliens are provided with various immigration benefits such as being granted political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even U.S. citizenship to which they would not be entitled if all of the relevant material facts were known.

Such investigations are conducted by a subdivision of ICE known as HSI (Homeland Security Investigations).

On January 27, 2019 military.com published an article, “Marriage Scam Paired Fort Bragg Soldiers with Immigrants, Feds Say” that had previously appeared in the News & Observer and focused on a marriage fraud ring that was allegedly operating at Fort Bragg that would have provided aliens with green cards and access to the military base.

Here is how this report began:

RALEIGH, N.C. — A sergeant and a private at Fort Bragg sought to arrange sham marriages between soldiers and immigrants, offering cash, housing benefits and furniture as incentive for potential brides, according to federal court documents.

Arrest warrants were issued last week for Sgt. Edward Kumi Anguah, described as “the facilitator” of the conspiracy, and Pvt. Ahmid Mohammed-Murtada, a recently naturalized citizen from Ghana serving in a Fort Bragg Army unit, court records show.

The investigation began in December when an agent for the Department of Homeland Security interviewed Pvt. Endasia East about having an affair with a single soldier while married to Sulemana Ibrahim, according to a criminal complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.

During that interview, “she confirmed the marriage was in fact fraudulent,” according to court records.

On February 22, 2019 the Military Times reported on the same investigation: “Fort Bragg soldiers indicted in marriage and immigration fraud sting,” which reported in part on the magnitude of punishment that the defendants in this case face:

Anguah faces up to 25 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for conspiracy to commit marriage fraud, harboring an alien to come to the U.S. and visa fraud, according to the release.

Hoomkwap and Murtadaas faces 15 years and a $250,000 fine for conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and harboring certain aliens to come to the U.S.

Ibrahim faces 35 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for conspiracy to commit marriage fraud, marriage fraud, harboring certain aliens to come to the U.S., visa fraud and making false statements under oath.

These penalties are extremely serious, befitting the nature of the crimes that were allegedly committed, and stand in stark contrast with the way a number of films have trivialized the crime of marriage fraud, in which an American marries an illegal alien, not out of love but to prevent the alien from being deported, as the basis for “romantic comedies.” Consider Green Card which starred Gerard Depardieu and Andie MacDowell, and the film The Proposal which featured Sandra Bullock, Ryan Reynolds, Mary Steenburgen, Craig T. Nelson and Betty White.

For many years the mainstream media and Hollywood have distorted the truth about immigration in many ways. Immigration law enforcement agents have been vilified in numerous films, some of which featured big-name stars, such as Crossing Over starring Harrison Ford.

The 9/11 Commission had a far more sobering take on marriage fraud and other forms of immigration fraud. The concerns of the Commission served as the premise of my article, “Immigration Fraud:  Lies That Kill.”

Consider this quote from the government report that was prepared by the 9/11 Commission staff, 9/11 and  Terrorist Travel:

Terrorists in the 1990s, as well as the September 11 hijackers, needed to find a way to stay in or embed themselves in the United States if their operational plans were to come to fruition. As already discussed, this could be accomplished legally by marrying an American citizen, achieving temporary worker status, or applying for asylum after entering. In many cases, the act of filing for an immigration benefit sufficed to permit the alien to remain in the country until the petition was adjudicated. Terrorists were free to conduct surveillance, coordinate operations, obtain and receive funding, go to school and learn English, make contacts in the United States, acquire necessary materials, and execute an attack.

Now let’s go back to the news report about the alleged marriage fraud ring at Fort Bragg.

As a former INS agent, the first issue that caught my eye was the fact that at least one of the key players in the alleged conspiracy is himself a naturalized citizen. Hopefully the HSI agents are assiduously reviewing his immigration file to determine if he committed immigration fraud in order to acquire lawful immigrant status and subsequent U.S. citizenship.

U.S. citizenship provides aliens with the “keys to the kingdom.” In the years since the 9/11 Commission wrapped up its work, a number of terror attacks in the United States states have been carried out by aliens who had been granted political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even U.S. citizenship.

The challenge for USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services), the division of DHS that adjudicates applications for immigration benefits, is being overwhelmed by millions of applications that they adjudicate each year with minimal resources to verify the information contained in those applications.

Although the Immigration and Nationality Act requires that Good Moral Character investigations be conducted for each naturalization case, today little more can be done than run fingerprints and query databases with relatively few if any actual field investigations conducted to weed out fraud.

It is also worth noting that according to a New York Times article published in May 2015, when Osama bin Laden’s compound was raided by Navy Seals on May 1, 2011, among the documents found in bin Laden’s personal library was a copy of the 9/11 Commission Report, three reports on Al Qaeda by the Congressional Research Service, and an application for United States citizenship.

I compare the plight of the hapless Adjudications Officers of USCIS with the hilarious episode of I Love Lucy in which Lucy and her friend Ethel are hired to wrap candy in a factory. The candy hurtles at them on a conveyor belt that continues to accelerate until all they can do is either eat the candy or stuff them into their clothes.

However, the prospect of overwhelmed Adjudications Officers approving applications because they cannot keep up with the tsunami of applications is no laughing matter.

In the months after the terror attacks of 9/11 we were constantly reminded that to succeed, the terrorists only need to “get it right” once. Each immigration application potentially provides that opportunity the terrorists eagerly seek.

Trump’s policies are rattling the Iranian regime

Death to America and Death to Israel

It was reported after Trump was elected that Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry met with the Iranian’s and counselled them that all the have to do is out-wait President Trump and the sanctions will be removed. Kerry was criticized but may not have broken any law although he appears to have acted on behalf of Iran without Registering as a Foreign Agent.

Quote:  “Tehran’s plan is to wait and see what will happen in the 2020 election,” Ghasseminejad said. “The clerical regime hopes that a less aggressive candidate will defeat Trump and the U.S. will return to the JCPOA,” the acronym used to refer to the nuclear deal  

Whether you are a Democrat or Republican one of the most important reasons to re-elect President Trump is to make sure the Iranian sanctions are not removed or watered down and that Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and its terrorism isn’t financed once again. Never forget, Iran continues to chant Death to America and Death to Israel. Iran continues to be the world’s greatest State sponsor of terrorism.

Iran’s New Long Game: Outlast Trump

Trump’s policies are rattling the Iranian regime

BY: Adam Kredo

Iranian leaders are running out of options as President Donald Trump tightens the economic noose on the already ailing hardline regime, which is now intent on outlasting the Trump administration in hopes that a friendlier U.S. politician can beat him in the 2020 election, according to U.S. officials and regional experts.

Iran has made no secret of its distaste for Trump, and is now making moves to grow closer with traditional American foes such as China and Russia. However, it has become increasingly clear that Iran is feeling the pain as the Trump administration continues to sanction a range of entities and individuals tied to the country’s contested nuclear program and oil sector.

As the sanctions continue to squeeze the regime—prompting protests that have threatened to topple Islamic theocracy—Iranian leaders have been left with only one long-term option: Outlast Trump and bet on a more friendly U.S. leader who will restore the landmark nuclear agreement that provided Tehran with billions in cash windfalls.

It now remains to be seen how far the Trump administration will go in its sanctions policy.


Trump Puts U.S. On The Moral High Ground In The Golan Heights

On Monday, while flanked by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Donald J. Trump reversed decades of foreign policy by declaring that the United States was recognizing Israel’s autonomy over the Golan Heights. Like so many of his decisions regarding Israel, Trump’s position is one that is as positive as it is bold — and one that is long overdue.

In fact, not only is it standing with our only free, democratic ally in the region, it actually is a moral imperative.

It’s imperative to understand the historical context that you will never, ever get in the media coverage.

The plight of the Jewish people and their relationship with the land adjoining the Mediterranean Sea dates back to the antiquities. Before the 8th century B.C., there was a Kingdom of Israel. In the 8th century B.C., it was conquered by the Neo-Assyrian Empire, thus ending Jewish self-rule in the area. The region exchanged hands numerous times between the Persians, the Romans, the Arabs, and the Crusaders, among others. However, through it all, the Jewish people never abandoned their faith, and they never abandoned their ties to the land.

Fast forward to the nineteenth century AD. Many Jews had been kicked out of their land and were living throughout Europe. The 1800s saw the growth of the Zionist movement by the diaspora (Jews living away from the homeland), called for a renewal of Israeli independence and self-rule.

In 1894, Baron Edmond de Rothschild, a French Jew, bought a large tract of land in Golan for settlement.  When the Jews tried to settle it, hostility from surrounding Arabs frustrated their efforts.

In 1918, the League of Nations adopted the Balfour Declaration heralding the support of a Jewish state in lands then held by Palestine. Many Jews responded by moving back to the area known as Israel.

After the First World War, Golan became part of the French mandate of Syria, and in 1941 it was passed to independent SyriaWWII saw the unprecedented slaughter of Jews by Nazi Germany, which led to the swelling of the Jewish population in Palestine.

In 1947, following the end of World War II, the United Nations recommended that the area east of the Mediterranean Sea be partitioned into independent Arab and Jewish states. Although the Jewish Agency was elated, Arab elements were adamantly opposed to the idea. In 1948, David Ben-Gurion, head of the Jewish Agency, declared the creation of a Jewish state, and on that same day, the United States of America recognized the provisional Israeli government as the State of Israel. The announcement was met with immediate hostilities from Egypt, Syria, Transjordan and Iraq, and the Arab-Israeli War began. Finally after fighting for its existence, in 1949, the State of Israel was admitted into the United Nations, officially validating its existence. But Israel’s relationship with its regionals neighbors was not to be a peaceful one.

Enter the Golan Heights again.

Almost immediately, the emerging State of Israel was attacked by the Palestinian Fedayeen, and in 1967, hostilities from Syria and Egypt led to the Six-Day War of 1967. That war saw Israel take the Golan Heights. They won that area like so many other countries had gained territories before them; they fought for it and kept it.

Never, in the history of the world has there been a situation where a country forcefully annexed a territory only to have the rest of the world attempt to renounce its claim. It is interesting that Israel should be the lone example of such diplomatic hostilities.  Regardless, between 80,000 and 131,000 Syrians fled from the area.

The attacks would continue upon Israel. During the 1970s, it fended off multiple attacks from the newly established Palestinian Liberation Organization, which quickly devolved into a fomenter of terrorism. And in 1972, the world reeled in horror when Jewish athletes were murdered by Palestinian terrorists at the Olympic games in Munich, Germany.

The conflicts would not cease — but were not started by Israel.

In 1973, the year after the horrific attack on innocent Israeli athletes, the Yom Kippur War began with Egyptian and Syrian armies launching an invasion into Israel. In one of the most brilliantly executed military responses in history, Israel repelled the attackers inflicting significant losses upon its vastly superior enemies while minimizing its own casualties.

The 1980s saw continued attacks from surrounding countries and terrorists upon Israel while Iraq worked to develop a nuclear reactor while Iran worked to develop a nuclear arsenal. In response, in 1981 Israeli military planes attacked and destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor. The following year, Israel responded to continued attacks by the PLO by destroying its bases in Lebanon.

As Israel forged into the 1990s, Iraq, under the control of Saddam Hussein, launched countless missile attacks upon Israel. Eventually, the United States would invade Iraq and unseat Hussein, while Israel stayed away from the hostilities.

An attempt was made to address the controversies regarding the West Bank and the governance of Palestinians living in Israeli territories through a negotiated solution with the signing of the Oslo Accords with the PLO in 1992, implementing self-rule by Palestinians living in portions of the West Bank.

But perhaps no more poignant a moment occurred in Palestinian-Israeli relations than when Yasser Arafat unilaterally walked away from the table without a commitment after being offered almost unbridled concessions by the Israeli Prime Minister, Erud Barak. The failure of the Camp David Summit led to the displacement of Prime Minister Barak by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon who, in 2001, still unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip.

But these actions would not lead to a peaceful Israeli existence. Instead, another terrorist organization, Hezbollah, largely supported by Iran, carried out open hostilities against Israel, which have continued to this day.

Today, Israel continues to be harassed and threatened by organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas, with support from Iran, and although the State of Israel has grown into a strong independent nation and a regional power, its security is not guaranteed under the open hostilities from neighboring countries voicing their intent to drive the Jews into the Mediterranean Sea. Through this time, Israel maintained control of the Golan Heights because it gave such a military advantage to its enemies who could see and attack most of northern Israel from it.

So why didn’t the United States recognize Israel’s jurisdiction over the Golan Heights?

When Israel took control of the Golan Heights in 1967 and subsequently annexed them in 1981, its actions were met with condemnation from Egypt, Syria, and other Arab nations. Not a single country recognized Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights. Instead, most nations, the United States included, and the United Nations claimed that they preferred a peacefully negotiated solution to the issue, and opted not to choose sides on the matter. Consequently, for more than 35 years, Israel has stood alone on this issue, the object of active hostilities from its neighbors who would use the Golan Heights to attack Israel again.

The fact is that the Golan Heights are of fundamental importance to Israel and its security. It acts a buffer against one of its mortal enemies, Syria. With its high topography, the Golan Heights serves as an excellent reconnaissance venue under Israel, and a strategic value launching site under its enemies. And not to be dismissed. the Golan Heights provide 30% of the nation’s water supplies.

Moreover, to pretend that a negotiated peace agreement regarding this strip is even possible is a nonsensical position and one that flies in the face of reality; a reality that for thousands of years has represented only aggression against Jews and their homeland.

So given all of this history and current reality, President Trump was absolutely correct in discarding the deceitfulness of political correctness that has thus far enveloped America’s position regarding Israel. Indeed, Israel is our greatest regional ally and the United States should unabashedly stand behind it in the world stage.

If the Golan Heights is important to Israel, then it is important to the United States. President Trump’s proclamation on Monday merely affirmed an unmistakably obvious fact — and an undeniably moral position.

RELATED ARTICLE: Recognition by the US Administration of Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights: Political and Security Implications

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission.

Gaza – Disaster foretold

What has unfolded in Gaza should not really surprise anyone willing to face up to the inclement realities. After all, it was not only entirely foreseeable, but easily foreseen

The nightmare stories of the Likud are well known. After all, they promised Katyusha rockets from Gaza as well. For a year, Gaza has been largely under the rule of the Palestinian Authority. There has not been a single Katyusha rocket. Nor will there be any Katyushas. – Yitzhak Rabin, Radio Interview, July 24, 1995.

I am firmly convinced and truly believe that this disengagement… will be appreciated by those near and far, reduce animosity, break through boycotts and sieges and advance us along the path of peace with the Palestinians and our other neighbors. – Ariel Sharon, Knesset address, October 25, 2004.

These two excerpts—from addresses made almost a decade apart—indicate just how grievously the Israeli public has been led astray for years by its elected leaders.

Distressing record of misjudgment

Indeed, there is a distressing record of documented evidence, underscoring the gross misjudgment of the senior echelons of Israel’s leadership on the “Palestinian” issue, in general, and the Gaza one, in particular.

Sadly, time and again, we have elected leaders seemingly willing to jettison every shred of prudence and principle to preserve their positions of power and privilege, even if it meant defending the most absurd policies; even if the ruinous consequences of their actions were not only eminently foreseeable, but explicitly foreseen.

The introductory citations by two past prime ministers, both with rich military backgrounds, are startling in the magnitude of their mistaken assessments.

Indeed, Rabin’s disdainful dismissal of clear and present dangers, and Sharon’s massively misguided prognosis of the political benefits that would ensue from abandoning Gaza, can hardly instill confidence in Israelis as to the competence of their leaders.

No less troubling is the display of inane imbecility seen in the debate that followed Sharon’s previously cited Knesset address, in which the disengagement plan was approved.

Indeed, some of the more embarrassingly erroneous assessments were exposed in a Channel 2 review of the vote, four years later, during Operation Cast Lead. It recorded for posterity the “pearls of wisdom” of many of the nation’s then-senior politicians – who, all at some stage, have held ministerial positions in the Israeli government.

Embarrassingly erroneous

The English-language transcript – in order of appearance—reads as follows:

Meir Sheetrit
 (at the time Likud transportation minister), with a marked tone of disdain: “Some claim that there will be a danger, a danger in retreating [from Gaza], a danger to the Negev communities. I have never heard such a ridiculous claim.”

Ran Cohen (Meretz, previously served as minister of industry and trade), in a voice both pompous and patronizing: “The disengagement is good for security. Right-wing representatives warned about Kassam rockets flying from here and from there. I’m telling you, if you really care about both Sderot and Ashkelon – both of them…we have to understand that if we don’t pull out of the Gaza Strip, in two to three years or even a year, the range will reach Ashkelon.”

(To Cohen’s “credit”, as someone belonging to the Left, his position did not comprise betrayal of his political credo – something the Likud MKs could not claim. His words do, however, reveal much about the “sagacity” of the Israeli Left.)

Orit Noked (subsequently agriculture minister for Ehud Barak’s Independence Party): “I want to believe that as a result of the evacuation of Gaza, the moderate Palestinian factions will be strengthened. Terrorism will be reduced. [Yeah, Right—MS.]”

Shaul Mofaz (then Likud defense minister): “I am convinced the [disengagement] process is necessary and correct. It will provide more security for the citizens of Israel, and will reduce the burden on the security forces. It will extricate the situation from its [current] stagnation and will open the door to a different reality, which will allow talks towards achieving coexistence. [And we all know how splendidly that worked out to be—MS. ]”

Embarrassing (cont.)

Ophir Paz-Pines (served as interior minister for Labor): “Before I arrived at the Knesset, I took my son to Tel Hashomer [the IDF induction center]. He received his call-up papers. I wish to thank Ariel Sharon, because he has given me and my wife hope that my son, when recruited, will not have to serve the People of Israel in the Gaza Strip.”

(Ironically, at the time of the Channel 2 broadcast, Paz- Pines’s son was in fact in Gaza, taking part in Operation Cast Lead – despite his father’s heartfelt thanks to Sharon.)
The program even caught Binyamin Netanyahu in a moment he would perhaps like to forget. For although Netanyahu is perceived as opposing the disengagement – and in fact often expressed his reservations—to his credit eventually resigning because of it – the Channel 2 camera tells a different story, or at least records a temporary lapse.

In an exchange from the Knesset floor, with the National Union’s MK Uri Ariel at the podium, Netanyahu, then finance minister, declared: “Let there be no mistake. In a referendum I will support the disengagement plan.”

The final speaker featured was Yuval Steinitz (Likud, then chairman of the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, later Finance and Energy Minister). He stated: “I think this plan, given these restrictions, is appropriate. It’s not an easy plan, but it has a good chance of improving our geostrategic position.”

Then came the vote and the disengagement plan was approved by a substantial margin, 67-45. All the Likud ministers – including Netanyahu – supported it, despite being elected on a platform that urged voters to oppose an almost identical proposal, put forward by Labor chairman, Amram Mitzna, who was overwhelmingly defeated at the polls.

The myth of managing the conflict

It is with this dismal history in mind that the Israel public should evaluate the declarations and decisions of its government in the present and the future.

This is true with regard to what appears to be the underlying rationale of the current policy—or lack thereof—of “managing the conflict”.

While in some conflictual contexts, “conflict management” may have some merit, this is certainly not so in the case of the conflict with the Palestinian-Arabs in general, and in the case of Gaza in particular.

After all, the underlying rationale of conflict management is the belief that, at some unspecified time, the Palestinian-Arabs of Gaza will, for some unspecified reason, and by some unspecified process, morph into something they have not been for over 100 years—and show no signs of morphing into in the foreseeable future. (Indeed, it would be intriguing to discover just how “conflict management” enthusiasts envision dealing with Gaza in 20 years time—if no such miraculous metamorphosis occurs.)

With its threadbare intellectual underpinnings, it is little wonder that “conflict management”—aka “kicking the can down the road”—has been a monumental failure. In this regard see: “Mowing the lawn” won’t cut it and “Conflict management”: The collapse of a concept.

After all, while Israel has been “managing the conflict” with Hamas in Gaza (and even more so with Hezbollah in the North), we have seen what was essentially a terrorist nuisance evolve into a strategic threat of ominous proportions. Perversely, after every military clash with Israel, designed to debilitate their military capabilities, the terror organizations have eventually emerged with those capabilities greatly enhanced!

Indeed, if when Israel abandoned the Gaza Strip in 2005, anyone had warned that Hamas—and its more radical affiliates—would acquire the offensive arsenal they have in fact acquired, they would have doubtlessly been dismissed as unrealistic scaremongers.

Gaza: Disaster foretold

But of course, what has unfolded in Gaza should not really surprise anyone. Indeed, as mentioned previously, for anyone willing to face up to the inclement realities, it was not only entirely foreseeable, but easily foreseen.

Indeed, as I have pointed out before, as early as 1992—more than a quarter century ago and well over a decade before Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005—I published, in both English and Hebrew, a detailed prognosis, predicting precisely what the security, socio-economic and diplomatic ramifications of Israel abandoning Gaza would be. Sadly, my ominous forecast proved accurate in almost every detail!

But perhaps more significantly—and certainly more disturbingly—in the same year (1992), Arik Sharon himself, the driving force behind the 2005 Disengagement, wrote a very similar article himself in the Hebrew daily, Maariv, explicitly elaborating the perils of the very policy he later so resolutely endorsed—and enforced.

In the article, Sharon recounts how the proactive measures undertaken in Judea-Samaria in the 1970s quelled the terrorist violence there. He then goes on to write: “These experiences prove not only that terror can be eradicated, but also the principle by which this is to be accomplished. It is imperative not to flee from terrorism, and it will be smitten only if we control its bases and it engage its gangs on their own territory.

Disaster foretold (cont.)

He then turned to Gaza: “And Gaza is the prime example. The populated sections of Gaza had become in 1970 an area controlled by the terrorist organizations because the Defense Minister [Yitzhak Rabin] decided to evacuate the towns, villages and refugee camps. Fortunately we returned to the correct policy before the Gaza Strip exploded like festering abscess, which could have poisoned the entire surroundings. But because of mistaken policy—of fleeing from the population centers and refraining from eliminating the danger in its early formative stages – we had to conduct a much more difficult and lengthy campaign.”

Sharon warned against repeating the same mistake: “If now we once more fall into the same mistake, the price will be much heavier than before—because now the terrorists and the means they have at their disposal are different and more dangerous than before.”

He accurately predicted: “If we abandon Gaza, it will be taken over by the terror organizations. Palestine Square [in Gaza] will become a launching site for rockets aimed at … Ashkelon.

He then asked: “…what will the IDF do then? Will it once again recapture Gaza? Shell and bomb the towns and refugee camps in the Gaza Strip?”

Finally, noting that, “We all aspire to a political settlement…” he prescribed :“…but we not will reach it by way of surrender but only after crushing terrorism and we can only eliminate terrorism if we control its bases, and fight its gangs there and destroy them.”

Time for a paradigm shift: Evacuation-Compensation for Gazan Arabs

Albert Einstein was attributed as saying “We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.”

The problem of Gaza was—indisputably—created by the patently ill-advised attempt to foist self-governance on the Gaza Strip. Accordingly, it is not a problem that can be solved by persisting with the same level of thinking that created it—i.e. by persisting with the attempt to foist self-governance on the hapless enclave and its inhabitants.

Accordingly, then, that paradigm must jettisoned and replaced by another.

As recent history has demonstrated, Israel can only determine who rules Gaza if it rules it itself. For even if Hamas is toppled, there is no guarantee that its successor will be any less irksome. Moreover, if it is significantly weakened, there is no guarantee that it would be able to withstand challenges from more radical rivals—especially given the involvement of Iran in the region and the presence of Jihadi forces in adjacent Sinai.

However, the only way for Israel to rule Gaza without imposing that rule on “another people” (i.e. the Gazan-Arabs) is to remove that “other people” from Gaza. The only non-violent way to remove that “other people” is by installing a robust system of material incentives for leaving and disincentives for staying.

Accordingly, the current paradigm, envisioning a two-state/land-for-peace outcome, must be replaced by one entailing incentivized emigration for the Gazan population, which will allow the non-belligerent civilians to find a more prosperous and secure life in third party countries.

None of this is “rocket science” and one can only wonder why the Israeli leadership has not embraced it—instead of pursuing the two-state pipe-dream which they knew—or should have known—was predestined for disaster.


The fact that the incentivized immigration paradigm may be immensely difficult to implement does not make it any less imperative. Indeed, the alternative of not doing so is far worse.

It is, after all, the only level of thinking that can solve the problem, in which two-state/land-for-peace thinking has tragically embroiled both Jew and Arab—for over a quarter-century. The sooner Israeli policy-makers come to terms with this grim reality, the better.

Trump Recognizes Israel’s Right to Golan Heights During Netanyahu Visit [Video]

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday praised President Donald Trump as the greatest friend Israel has ever had in the Oval Office.

EDITORS NOTE: Added video published by Golden State Times of President Trump’s press conference with PM Netanyahu.

Netanyahu’s comments at the White House came moments before the president signed a proclamation for the United States to recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights, territory seized from Syria in a 1967 war.

“Israel has been blessed to have many friends who sat in the Oval Office, but Israel has never had a better friend than you. You showed us time and again,” Netanyahu told Trump.

The prime minister noted that Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Iran nuclear deal that the Obama administration had entered into, that Trump moved the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and is now moving to recognize Israel’s claim to the Golan Heights, a strategic point to fend off enemy attacks.

“You’ve showed it once again, Mr. President, with your official proclamation recognizing Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights,” said Netanyahu, standing next to Trump.

“In the long sweep of Jewish history, there have been a handful of proclamations by non-Jewish leaders on behalf of our people in our land,” the Israeli leader said. “Cyrus the Great, the great Persian king; [Britain’s] Lord [Arthur] Balfour, President Harry S. Truman, and President Donald J. Trump. You, Mr. President, have done it not once, but twice, with your bold proclamation on Jerusalem and your bold proclamation today on the Golan.”

In signing the proclamation, Trump said, “This was a long time in the making. Should have taken place many decades ago.”

Netanyahu was set to return to Israel immediately after the visit, in a U.S. trip that was cut short because of a rocket attack from Gaza that damaged a home north of Tel Aviv, wounding seven people, including two small children.

The Israeli prime minister was scheduled to speak Tuesday to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and then meet with congressional leaders.

The visit between the two leaders also comes at an unusual time regarding legal issues both have faced. While the Justice Department announced that Trump had been cleared in a two-year special prosecutor’s investigation into whether his campaign conspired with Russians in the 2016 presidential election, Netanyahu faces the specter of an indictment for an alleged bribery scandal.

“Our relationship is powerful,” Trump said. “Today, Israel demonstrates the incredible possibilities when strong, sovereign, and independent nations chart their own destinies. There can be no better example of greatness than what Israel has done, starting from such a small speck of sand.

“Israel is an inspiration, a trusted ally, and a cherished friend,” he said.


Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLE: Recognition by the US Administration of Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights: Political and Security Implications

A Note for our Readers:

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely only upon the support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

We do this because you deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal today.


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. Video courtesy of Golden State Times.

Fox News Leans Left and Caves to Islamic Shariah Law

Within the government, within the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, you have practically eliminated any training or any use of the term ‘radical Islam.’ That’s what we’re facing. LTG Michael T. Flynn

I will not abridge my freedoms so as not to offend savages, freedom of speech is under violent assault here. Pamela Geller

It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law (sharia) on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet. Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan Al-Banna

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.  Voltaire

Fox News is no longer run by CFR member Rupert Murdoch.  It is now being controlled by Rupert’s eldest son, 47-year-old Lachlan Murdoch.  Although Lachlan says his politics closely resemble his father’s, Fox News and Fox Business are unarguably leaning to the left. Though Lachlan hired West Wing stalwart Hope Hicks, staffers believe he is likely to nudge the network away from its close marriage to Trump, and they have lost many of their famous male hosts to #MeToo claims against them.

Bill O’Reilly left the network in April of 2017 after numerous claims of sexual harassment lawsuits against him.

Roger Ailes, Chairman and CEO of Fox News had several women make charges against him.  He died shortly after he resigned.

Eric Bolling was accused of sending lewd pictures to female colleagues at the Network.

Unfortunately, none of these charges ever went to court.  The alleged perpetrators just resign.  Even black host Charles Payne was charged with sexual innuendos, but returned to his scheduled program after a month of absences.

Were all guilty?  We don’t know, and never will, but having a Y chromosome doesn’t make someone a lousy human being.

If sexual innuendos do not remove hosts, charges of racism often work, two things the left loves to use against their enemies.  But a guaranteed removal is telling the truth about Islam.  As Pamela Geller has said, “Truth has become the new hate speech.”

Fox News and Censorship

Chris Farrell of Judicial Watch used to be featured on Fox programs every week.  However, in October of 2018, Chris was on Lou Dobbs show regarding the southern border migrants and made the statement, “A lot of these affiliates are getting money from the Soros occupied State Department, and that is a great concern.  If you want to start cutting money, cut there.”

He was subsequently banned as being anti-Semitic for stating that Soros was funding the migrant affiliates.

Congressman Louie Gohmert was on Stuart Varney’s Show December 6, 2018, and he made this statement, “George Soros is supposed to be Jewish, but you wouldn’t know it from the damage he’s inflicted on Israel, and the fact that he turned on fellow Jews and helped (the Nazis) take the property that they owned.”

Representative Gohmert was undoubtedly supporting Chris Farrell and exposing Soros for what he really is…someone strictly interested in the globalization of America.

Attorney Sidney Powell, author of the book, Licensed to Lie, was on Lou Dobbs Show last November 2018 and made the statement, “We simply cannot tolerate continued invasion of this country when Americans suffer every day, national debt is exploding, we have diseases spreading that are causing polio-like paralysis of our children.”  Lou Dobbs immediately took her to task and cut her off.

We are in the midst of an invasion from people of various backgrounds, from various countries in Central America and South America, and just independently (with some days of separation apart), there’s a story of a shockingly unforeseen increase in polio cases in the United States.

No one can seemingly figure this out or where it’s coming from. Then there’s another story of mass numbers of people from various parts of the world, South America and Central America having this polio like disease. Common sense tells you there’s a relationship here.

The CDC and others have established the fact that new cases of polio and other diseases America previously cured and stamped out, are now showing up again.  There is official linkage to undocumented people arriving in the country and being released.  How can we not make the connection?  Sidney Powell is right.

Fox News Caves to Sharia

The recent outrage surrounding Judge Jeanine Pirro’s remarks concerning the hijab is a reflection of the abysmal degree to which common sense is under assault in America.

While discussing Muslim Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s anti-Israel remarks with Nancy Pelosi, Pirro said, “This is not who your party is. Your party is not anti-Israel. She is. Think about this, she’s not getting this anti-Israel sentiment doctrine from the Democratic Party, so if it’s not rooted in the party, where is she getting it from? Think about it. Omar wears a hijab which according to the Koran 33:59 tells women to cover so they won’t get molested. Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?”

There was nothing wrong with Judge Jeanine’s question.  Islamic “fashion” has political consequences.  The hijab is a symbol and it is a symbol of the fact that the woman wearing it is fully committed to the sharia.  It is a symbol that says to infidels that they are kafirs. Kafir is an Arabic term meaning “infidel.”  The term refers to a person who rejects or disbelieves in Allah or the tenets of Islam.  When you see a woman with a hijab, you are looking at the politics of Islam as it has operated for over 1400 years.  There has been jihad against the kafirs for 1400 years; it is a history of annihilation, death and suffering.  They are antithetical to freedom.

Terrorism became much more frequent in such societies as Indonesia, Egypt, Algeria, and the U.K. after the hijab became prevalent among Muslim women living in those communities.  Link

The reason for this correlation is clear: Islamic sharia commands jihad (terrorism) against unbelievers no less than it commands Muslim women to don the hijab. Where one proliferates—evincing a societal adherence to sharia—so too will the other naturally follow.

So just why is it that with any other politician we are allowed to ask personal and religious questions.  When John Kennedy ran for president, everyone was concerned that his Catholic faith would interfere with his political decisions and he was constantly questioned, but we are considered Islamophobic if we ask questions like Judge Jeanine asked?  Ilhan Omar should be asked the following questions regarding her visceral hatred of Israel and the Jewish people:

  • Will you repudiate the Koranic teaching that Jews are “ descendants of apes and pigs“?
  • Will you repudiate the attacks upon Israel by Hamas and Hezbollah?
  • Do you believe Israel has a legal and moral right to exist behind safe and definite borders?

Don Boys recent article asked many more legitimate questions, but Omar’s vitriolic diatribe against Jews needs to cease or she should be expelled.  She was neither reprimanded nor censored for her deeply ingrained bias.  The only consequence of her bigotry has been an innocuous resolution against hate speech.  She has not been removed from any Congressional committees.

And now of course, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is calling on all advertisers to drop Fox News until the network fires hosts Jeanine Pirro and Tucker Carlson due to comments by both hosts that CAIR called “Islamophobic.”  This is sharia and how Islam conquers and controls.

While Iranian women rip the hijabs from their heads in defiant protest of oppressive Islamic law, our Congress changed a 181-year law to allow Muslim women to wear the hijab.

Ilhan Omar’s district in Minnesota is where almost all of the 70,000 imported Somali immigrants were located by Obama.  That district was recently identified by the FBI as America’s terrorist capital and their Congresswoman is calling for the dissolution of America’s Homeland Security.  The Muslim Brotherhood has a plan for world domination and North America is their next target.

Oaths Sworn on Koran

None of the Muslims in Congress have sworn allegiance to the Constitution on the Bible.  This tradition of being sworn into office to swear on the Bible is because our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, states that our rights are given to us by the God of the Bible. Anyone who swears on any other book, like the Koran, is swearing an illegitimate oath.  Congressmen Andre Carson (D-IN) and Keith Ellison (D-MN) both used the Koran.  Congresswomen Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) took their oaths of office on the Koran.

The reason their oath is illegitimate is that the book upon which they swore teaches that the only acceptable religion is Islam, and they can lie (Taqiya) in order to advance Islam. When they swear on the Koran they are lying, knowing that the law of Islam does not allow freedom of religion.

Fox Muslim Attacks Pirro

Hufsa Kamal is a Pakistani American, born in England and raised in Tennessee. She is a producer for Bret Baier on Fox News, and has a long history of vicious attacks on conservatives including Michelle Malkin, Candace Owens, Dan Bongino and Charlie Kirk.

She took to twitter to excoriate Judge Jeanine for asking Speaker Pelosi if Ilhan Omar’s allegiance is to the Constitution or the Koran, and claimed that many Muslims work at the Fox Network.

The Gateway Pundit exposed this story and listed many of Hufsa Kamal’s vile tweets.

Fox found it necessary to condemn Pirro’s remarks and said they have “addressed the matter” with Pirro. It appears that Fox will continue to cave to sharia.

New Hires at Fox

Former Speaker Paul Ryan and Formula One Group executive chairman Chase Carey will join Rupert Murdoch, Lachlan Murdoch, and Jacques Nasser as members of the powerful Fox board.  Paul Ryan is married to Janna Little a liberal, left wing progressive, anti-Constitutional, big government George Soros supporter who voted for Barack Hussein Obama twice.  Ryan was the VP candidate with neo-con Trotskyite and pro-abort, Willard Mitt Romney in 2012.  During his time as Speaker of the House, he fought President Trump at every turn, and it became obvious he was pro-amnesty and pro-open borders.

Donna Brazile is joining Fox News as a contributor.  She was the former Chairman of the Democratic National Committee.  When former Fox host Megyn Kelly asked Brazile about passing debate questions to Hillary Clinton so she’d be one-up during debates against Donald Trump, she blatantly lied to Kelly.  Now she’s going to work for the very network she lied to.

The Jew Who Died for Ilhan Omar

Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism belies the fact that if not for a Jew who gave his life, she may not be in America and in politics.  Lawrence Freedman went to Somalia in 1992 as part of the U.S. led relief effort to help relocate tens of thousands of Somali refugees to escape starvation, famine and civil war that turned Somalia into a failed state in the early 1990s.

Freedman was a U.S. Army veteran from Vietnam, and original member of the Green Beret. He reached the rank of sergeant major and eventually became an instructor.  In 1990 he joined the Central Intelligence Agency and in 1992 he was sent as part of an advance team to prepare the way for American troops in Somalia.  On December 23, two weeks after the troops had arrived, Freedman became the first American killed as part of the relief effort.  Thousands of Somali refugees who live in Omar’s district had their freedom and security paid for with the blood of American soldiers – 22 of them, including Lawrence Freedman.


The Number One Cable Network is no longer teetering toward the left but is now an active part of it.  Brazile’s arrival in the aftermath of Fox News suspending Judge Jeanine Pirro, all for asking questions about radical Somalian activist Ilhan Omar on her “Justice” show, is not only a slap in the face to Pirro and her many followers, but a slap in the face to the network’s many conservative viewers.  Link

Cyber Security: Your Business May Be Under Attack

With the cost of cybercrimes reaching as much as $2.2 trillion a year, it’s clear that we are in a pitched battle when it comes to protecting our data against cybercriminals. And before you write yourself off as a target unworthy of a hacker’s attention, the statistics paint a very different picture.

We tend to think of cybercrime in terms of big breaches that are splashed across the media. However, it’s not these big breaches that actually make the most money for criminals.

Research suggests that the average cost of ransomware attacks is around $679. This, admittedly, seems quite low. But if you think about it, keeping the ransoms low makes good financial sense for the criminals.

If their demands were too high, people would be more likely to write off the infected computer as a lost cause and replace it with a new machine. By keeping the ransom affordable, it’s easier for the person just to pay it to regain access.

That doesn’t mean that it’s not profitable for the hacker, though. In the first quarter of 2016 only, criminals earned $209 million from these kinds of attacks. It’s estimated that the average ransomware attacker will earn around $90,000 per annum, which is nothing to sniff at, especially since there is very little work involved here.

We’ve gotten to a point where companies can now take out insurance to cover them in the event of a cyber attack.
What is a Business’s Highest Area of Risk?

When it comes to cybersecurity, your staff pose the highest risk for any organization, whether through plain carelessness, design, or malice.

Careless Employees

If your employees are careless with security aspects, you are heading for trouble. This is where regular security training will pay dividends.

Few people realize how simple it is for an experienced hacker to glean enough information about a person online and make an educated guess about the passwords she may be using.

Also, 70% of people use the same passwords on social media as they do for their corporate logins. And while your company’s servers might be secure, social media is certainly not.

Employees need to be educated about choosing a good password, keeping it safe, and how to recognize a potential threat or suspicious request.

Employees With a Design to Make Extra Money

Criminal syndicates will often look for a way to get someone on the inside. This might mean planting someone in the organization if it is large enough, but it can also mean turning someone who is already working there.

As a result, employees’ actions on the computer system should be monitored to ensure that they’re not accessing systems they shouldn’t.

Malicious Employees

These are more difficult, because you may not know that they have a grudge against the company straight away. It’s good practice to revoke access to the systems as soon as an employee leaves.

Overall, the key to guarding your data against criminals is always to be mindful of security and ensuring that it is well-maintained.

Infographic URL: https://techjury.net/blog/cyber-security-statistics/

VIDEO: Will the Death of Nuance Lead to a Civil War?

Clarion Project’s Shillman Fellow and head of Clarion Intelligence Network Ryan Mauro talks about the death of nuance in our political discourse and the ensuing “War of the Extremes.”

The extreme forces operative in our country and world — from Islamist terrorists to white supremacists to “progressive” facists — thrive on the chaos created by each new terror attack, which drives support to each of these causes. Will this chaos eventually cause a civil war?

Listen to Ryan’s analysis and see find out how to counter these different forms of extremism:


Twitter, Facebook and Google: A Soft Form of Extremism?

On Linda Sarsour and Preventing Extremism

Preventing Violent Extremism in Kids Where You Live

The Ghost of Soviet KGB Disinformation Within American Politics

After losing the 2016 Presidential Election, the inner circle of the United States government known as ‘Deep State’ has been pursuing a disinformation campaign at the highest level in order to take down, at any cost, the current duly elected President of the United States.

The premise is built around the allegation that Trump, and those surrounding him, colluded with Russia to win the election.

At an estimated cost of $25 million, the Special Prosecutor has mulled over millions of pages of documents, investigated hundreds of key people and is about to wind up its investigation.  There is much speculation that Robert Mueller’s team will come up empty handed on Russian collusion, unless they look at the Democratic side of the political divide in America.

But undoubtedly the Russians, or more precisely the former Soviet Union, have impacted the American psyche and are winning the disinformation campaign they launched over fifty years ago against both the United States and Israel.

Unfortunately, this disinformation campaign is being conducted by Americans against Americans.  In doing so, they are doing the Soviet’s bidding.

When you hear the new radicals of the Democratic Party bang on against their own country and its leaders, when they adopt the propaganda of radical regimes, when we hear allegations against Israel couched in anti-Semitic terms, you can be sure that they are ideologically colluding with the ghost of the old Soviet KGB.

To quote former KGB chairman, Yuri Andropov, in a conversation he had with General Ion Mihai Pacepa, the highest ranking defector from the former Soviet Union to the United States in 1978.

“We could nurture a virulent strain of American-hatred, grown from the bacteria of Marxist-Leninist thought…We have only to keep repeating our themes that the United States and Israel were ‘fascist, Imperial-Zionist countries bankrolled by rich Jews.”

Andropov went on to say, “Islam was obsessed with preventing the infidel’s occupation of its territory, and it would be highly receptive to our characterization of the US Congress as a rapacious Zionist body aiming to turn the world into a Jewish fiefdom.”

Who can say that what we are hearing from Ilhan Omar and others do not accurately reflect the KGB playbook from way back in the 1960’s?

This is the emerging dialogue being heard in the US Congress.

This is the indoctrination coming out of American campuses. It is the language we are beginning to hear from the new graduates of the campus industry of Soviet-style indoctrination, graduates that are emerging as the new generation influence and opinion makers.

It began in the early 1960’s after the Arab armies failed to destroy Israel. The Communist Soviet Union entrusted the KGB to embark on a global campaign to destabilize the United States and Israel through propaganda and terrorism.

The KGB was heavily involved in support of wars of national liberation in the Third World in order to disrupt the influence of the United States. The KGB relied heavily of their intelligence service not only to spy on their adversaries, but also to train their selected candidates in the arts of destabilization through disinformation and the skills of terrorism.

Many leading Cuban, African, and Palestinian revolutionaries were brought to the Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow. This ivy league campus was the finishing school for top terrorists, including Arabs who would promote the Palestinian agenda to chip away at the legitimacy of Israel and eventually replace it. Yasser Arafat was there. He came as an Egyptian from Cairo and left as a Palestinian revolutionary. Mahmoud Abbas was trained in Moscow and left as a KGB spy, known as ‘Krotov” in Damascus. The notorious Ali Hassan Salameh graduated from the KGB school at Patrice Lumumba University as head of the Black September Palestinian terror group to supervise the Olympic Games massacre of the Israeli athletes. Overly ambitious, Salameh, with the strategic help of the KGB, almost succeeded in bringing down the plane carrying Israeli Prime Minister, Golda Meir, over Rome Airport. He was eventually tracked down and killed by the Israeli Mossad in Beirut.

An integral part of the Soviet disinformation campaign in support of the Palestinian cause was to use language against Israel that we are familiar with today.

As part of the Cold War between the United States and Russia, the Soviet Union brought a 1965 United Nations resolution condemning Zionism as “colonialist and racist” to deflect from the international attention it was getting over the plight of Soviet Jews who wished to leave for Israel.  At that time, the Soviet Union was under pressure from the United States in the UN Security Council over their support for Syrian border clashes with Israel.

The Soviet resolution failed, but the KGB persisted and, with the help of the Arab and Islamic bloc then under the Soviet influence, the United Nations General Assembly proposed a second anti-Israel resolution condemning Zionism as a form of racism and racial discrimination. UN Resolution 3379 was passed in November 1975.  It took until December 1991 for this fraudulent resolution to be revoked.

The Palestinians were well trained by the Soviet KGB. In every conflict, the Palestinians have sided with America’s enemies.

In the early 70’s, the KGB launched Operation SIG, an international smearing campaign to fan the flames of Arab resentment against the United States and Jews represented by Israel.  It was launched in the Arab world to falsely portray America as an imperialist Jewish fiefdom financed by Jewish money and run by Jewish politicians with the aim of America and the Zionists subordinating the Islamic world. The KGB sent four thousand agents into Middle East to spread their anti-American and anti-Israel propaganda campaign.

All this was disclosed by Ion Mihai Pacepa.  Pacepa recalls a conversation in which the KGB chief, Andropov, said,

“We need to instill a Nazi-style hatred for the Jews throughout the Islamic world and turn this weapon of emotions into a terrorist bloodbath against Israel and its main supporter, the United States. No one within the American-Zionist sphere of influence should any longer feel safe”

Surely the echoes of this threat are alive and growing on the campuses of America, on the streets of America in pro-Palestinian (read ‘anti-Israel’) rallies, and, more worryingly, in the halls of Congress where CAIR, the NGO with strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, have been emboldened by the introduction of their candidates to positions of power as high as the US Foreign Affairs Committee.

You can hear it in statements such as “Israel has hypnotized the world. May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.”

The old Soviet KGB campaign is alive and revived in the current US Congress.

Nothing effective has been done to counter this surge of anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-Semitic ideology which is wrapped up and protected under the brand of intersectionality politics making it impenetrable to any form of criticism by intimidation campaigns that carry the same Soviet-style accusations of racism and oppression of minorities.

One thing is certain. The enemies of traditional American values and Israel feel they have the tailwind to progress their agenda and to fundamentally change political thinking and policy within the United States government.

And it will be done by following the old Soviet-KGB propaganda playbook.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The View From Israel. It is republished with permission.