INTEL REPORT: Libya, Syria, ISIS, Iran and Analysis


The war in Libya, after months of stalemate, has heated up again.  There is some evidence that the troops led by Gen. Haftar have been gaining some ground in Tripoli and other areas held by the Tripoli government.  The reason for this turn of events appears to be Russia.

The civil war in Syria was going rapidly south for Assad’s Damascus government and their Iranian allies–until Russia stepped in and turned the tide.  So, it appears that this is what Russia is now doing in Libya.  A week ago there were reports that Russian special forces were aiding Haftar’s troops probably as advisors embedded within Haftar’s units.

Al-jazeera has reported on the morning of 11 November that Haftar’s forces are now being trained by Russians in Egypt on an Egyptian military base.  They have also reported that Sudanese units have now been aiding Haftar’s troops as well, though the Sudanese government has denied it.


Why is Russia taking an interest in Libya?  And why did they choose Haftar’s side?

First of all, we should review for readers the who is who in the Libyan debacle.  The government based in Tripoli, in the far west of the country that Gen. Haftar is fighting against, is the “official” Libyan government as recognized by the EU and the UN.  As can be expected by any side of a dispute favored by the EU and the UN, it hosts a who’s who of international terrorism, including al-Qaeda lynchpin Saif al-‘Adel, the mastermind of the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in east Africa.  The Tripoli government is essentially a creature of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).

Most of Tripoli’s fighting forces are composed of militia’s made-up of ISIS, al-Qaeda, Ansar ash-Shari’a, and MB types.  It is supported militarily and financially by two of the world’s top three terrorism sponsoring states #1 Turkey, and #3 Qatar.  Even #2 Iran has chipped in a little with some weapons deliveries.

Gen. Haftar’s group, based in Libya’s second largest city, Benghazi, located in the far eastern part of the country near the Egyptian border, is supported by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.  The French (to the chagrin of their EU neighbors) have also chipped in with a small number of advisors embedded into Gen. Haftar’s forces.

Russia, though it sells weapons to terror-sponsoring state Iran, considered Sunni terrorism to be the greater threat since most of the Muslims in the Caucasus and Russia’s soft underbelly are Sunnis.  This was one of the reasons why they entered the war against ISIS in Syria.  For example ISIS fighters of Caucasus origin went to Syria and Iraq to gain battle experience, then returned to join Ukraine’s war against Russian-speaking separatists in Eastern Ukraine.

Libya is also rich in oil.  Russia is one of the world’s leading exporters of oil and gas and doesn’t need that resource for themselves, but Putin appears to trying to gain as much of a choke hold over that resource as possible having recently gained control of most of Iran’s oil assets, in addition to the right to build a pair of massive naval bases and an airbase in Iran.  Also, as a price for aiding Assad in his war, he forced Assad to grant Russia rights to all Syrian oil rights off its Mediterranean coast.  Putin’s venture in Libya might be more of the same.  There is also the possibility of gaining military bases there as well, once the civil war is over.

Russia could possibly have gained these goodies regardless of which side it supported, but its dislike of Sunni terrorism, and its new-found friendship with “moderate” Arab countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia may have pushed it to support Haftar.

The Egyptian angle is interesting and raises two interesting points.  After Obama helped place an MB government in power in Cairo, then after it was deposed, attempted to undermine the post-MB government down, so as to bring the MB back to power.  Part of Obama’s efforts included withholding arms shipments as a quid pro quo.

The Obama experience taught the Egyptians that they could not depend exclusively on the United States for their arms purchases.  So, they began to diversify, not just from the usual European suppliers, but also Russia.  Trump’s recent betrayal of the Kurds scared the living devil out of all of the West-leaning countries in the Middle East, from Israel to Egypt to Saudi Arabia.  It delivered a message that America just cannot be relied on in a pinch, so best to begin looking elsewhere for support and arms purchases.

Saudi Arabia has also recently grown closer to Russia in the wake of Trump’s perceived weakness vis-à-vis Iran, and his seemingly irrational, and constant, flip-flopping on Middle East issues.  During the Cold War, Saudi Arabia, as a “religious” nation, considered the officially athiest Soviet Union to be enemy #1.  They never recognized the USSR, and always considered it, and its representatives, to be “untouchables.”  Even after the end of the Cold War and the break-up of the USSR, Saudi Arabia continued to keep Russia at arms length.  This feeling of hostility has been maintained by Russia’s support of Iran.

However, Trump’s recent irrational behaviors (particularly his invitation to Turkey to invade Syria and ethnic cleanse the place) have terrified the Saudis and resulted in the aged, bent-over King Salman making a recent trip to Moscow to signify their improved relations.  It was shortly after that trip that the reports of active Russian military help to Gen. Haftar began to appear in the Arabic media.

We may be seeing Saudi Arabia also begin to diversify their arms purchases to include Russia, among others.

One more interesting tidbit about the Libyan thing:  Russia and Turkey, pretend allies in Syria, are openly supporting opposing sides in the Libyan war.  I predict that this will soon become a more intense “proxy war” between the two.  Unfortunately though, it will never escalate to the point of a full scale, direct, nation-to-nation war between Russia and Turkey as long as we are stupid enough to keep Turkey in NATO.


The Syrian Democratic Forces (composed of Kurds, Christians, and other minorities) whom we turned our backs on and which then allied with Assad’s Damascus Forces) have, in conjunction with Assad’s forces, retaken some areas in Hasaka, in eastern Syria, after defeating Turkish-supported terrorist groups.  There have been other scattered reports of Turks and regular Syrian army units firing upon each other.

This puts Putin in a difficult position because he is allied to the Assad government, but has also made an agreement with Erdogan for joint Russian and Turkish patrols in eastern Syria.  This has infuriated Assad who considered that to be a Turkish invasion of Syrian territory and a Russian surrender to Erdogan’s imperial dreams similar to Trump’s.

To further strain matters between Moscow and Damascus, Putin has also floated ideas on a new constitution for Syria which includes greater autonomy for the regions, and giving the regions more say in the Damascus government.  There are rumors floating in the Middle East that Putin might be ready to offer (as part of this over all deal) a Damascus government sans Assad (the number one demand of all rebel groups) in turn for the removal of Turkish and Iranian forces.

One is tempted to see Saudi and Egyptian (and possibly Israeli) hands in that proposal, coming in the wake of Egypt and Saudi Arabia stepping up their relations with Moscow. Unfortunately, the primary stumbling block to any such “federated Syria” solution giving the regions more autonomy, and driving Iranians and Turks out, is Trump’s bromance with Erdogan and his acceptance of Turkey’s aggression and occupation of Syrian territory.


ISIS, currently enjoying a recruiting and donations boom thanks to Trump’s irrational Syria behavior, has redefined itself as a “decentralized” organization as opposed to the “centralized” state organization it pursued as a “Caliphate.”  As one of the features of the next phase ISIS has called upon its supporters in America and Europe to set forest fires where ever they can as a way to weaken the enemy’s economy.


Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of the IRGC’s al-quds division, and perhaps the most powerful man in Iran outside of the Mullah’s clique, recently contributed the laugher of the week.  Soleimani claimed that Iran defeated ISIS won the Syrian war single handedly and that Iran has established stable states in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.

The facts:  As the anti-Assad revolution gained ground and looked like it was on the verge of collapse, and after Obama’s redline was crossed with no reaction from the U.S., Iran stepped in to save its ally.  But even with the help of Iran’s puppet Hizbollah next door in Lebanon, and the help of Iran-subservient Shi’a militia from Iraq, Iran was totally incapable of stemming the tide.

So, it is rich to hear Soleimani talk like that when it was he who (when the Damascus government was hanging on the barest of threads) rushed off to Moscow to beg Putin to come to the rescue.  It was Putin’s entry into the war, and the Russian airforce’s bombing of the ISIS oil assets (that Obama refused to touch) that turned the tide in the war.  Then it was Trump’s turning General Mattis loose, and the latter’s close cooperation with the Kurd-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces that put the finishing touches on the Caliphate.

As for the “stable” governments in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria . . . as I write this the Arab Spring 2.0 is going full blast in Iraq and Lebanon with country-wide demonstrations, riots, and outright revolt taking place.  The demonstrations in both countries have a decided anti-Iran flavor as the people there have grown tired of Iranian hegemony, and control of their affairs–even the Shi’as in southern Iraq.  In fact, it is among the Shi’a of southern Iraq where we see the most virulent anti-Iranian protests with the protestors burning pictures of Khamenei and Khomeini.

Iran has given orders to its clients in Iraq and Lebanon to put a stop to the demonstrations at all costs.  Iranian stooges in both countries have used live rounds to break-up otherwise peaceful demonstrations which has led to increased anger by the populace and violence by them in turn.

As for Syria, well there are still thousands of active ISIS fighters left in the country, and Turkey is committing genocide and demographic replacements in the parts of the country nearest to its border, with more demands for ever more territory to be forthcoming from Erdogan, the 21st century’s Hitler.

Robert Spencer: The Palestinian Delusion

Robert Spencer’s new book, The Palestinian Delusion, under the “light of reason” is an invaluable accurate account that ranks as a most worthy scholarly work on the subject by a man of outstanding credentials, impeccable integrity, and unsurpassed qualifications. This meticulously documented and comprehensive book is a treasure for anyone wishing to learn the truth of the Palestinian and Israeli conflict.

Spencer methodically demonstrates time after time that the Jews conclusively, not only have the right to live in their ancestral homeland, but the term “Palestinian” has been invented. “Invented people” may sound disturbing to some who have not taken the time to study historical facts. However, truth is the best weapon against falsehood. Spencer has carefully tied various historical origins with current events that provide facts and understanding about what is happening in our present time.

Spencer states:

“Another familiar theme of pro-Palestinian literature today is that the State of Israel exists on “stolen land”— stolen, of course, from the indigenous people of Palestine. In reality, the land is no more stolen than the Palestinian Arabs are its indigenous inhabitants.”

He continues:

“Nonetheless, the myth has taken hold, and it is now widely taken for granted, in our age that has little historical memory and scant interest in gaining more, that the Palestinians are a genuine nationality and are the indigenous people of the land that Israel illegally occupies.”

As a Persian who grew up with the Jews in Iran, I would like to add to Spencer’s insight of birth and rebirth of the State of Israel. In 539 BC, King Cyrus the Great of Persia liberated Babylon, decreed the freedom the Jews from captivity and enabled them to return to their “Promised Land” to rebuild the Solomon Temple. For his benevolent act, Cyrus the Great in the book of Isaiah 45:1-3, was referred to as “mashiach,” the anointed one or “messiah.” He was undeniably Zionist. Despite the worldwide spread of anti-Semitism, true Iranians have remained friends of the Jews by both belief as well as deeds.

May 14, 1948, is the rebirth of one of the oldest civilizations in history, the State of Israel. Israel with Judaism as its religion has historical continuity spanning more than 3,000 years. It is one of the oldest monotheistic religions and the oldest to survive into the present day.

In Palestinian Delusion, Spencer gets to the root of anti-Semitism. From Islamic sources to other sources “Anti-Semitism on campus, the virus continues to spread.”  Spencer in this new jewel has illustrated a long conflict that no one has been able to solve or simply come to a peaceful agreement. Palestinian Arabs refuse to compromise. Even after Israelis gave them Gaza (which I disagreed), this did not bring peace to the region. In fact, Hamas terrorists never stopped launching rockets and mortar attacks to Israel from Gaza. That is precisely why the ‘two-state’ solution will never work.

“The two-state solution was born out of the British duplicity regarding the Arabs and Jews in Palestine. The Balfour Declaration had called for the establishment of a “Jewish national home” in Palestine, an ambiguous phrase that may or may not have meant a Jewish state. But then Colonel Bertie Harry Waters-Taylor encouraged the grand mufti al-Husseini to incite the Muslim Arabs to riot in 1920, and helped pave the way by withdrawing British troops and the Jewish police from Jerusalem.”

In this book, Spencer gets into the details of the Camp David Accords. An agreement between Israel and Egypt was signed in 1978, the first such accord between Israel and its Arab neighbor. Forty-two years have passed and no such agreement has ever been signed again.

The situation in the Middle East is very intense and dangerous. The conditions for an all-out war in that region are greater than at any time in recent history.

In short, Robert Spencer has indeed put together a highly educational book about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian that is easy to read and understand. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in understanding the root and the foundation of this conflict, a conflict that has lasted so long, generated so many global headlines, and created so much controversy surrounding Israeli-Palestinian relations.

© All rights reserved.

Was Virginia Doctor Performing a Kind of Demographic Jihad?

Helping turn Virginia blue?

Because so many readers sent the news about a Pakistani doctor in Virginia under arrest for performing unwanted and unneeded medical procedures on women in his care, I need to post the news.

Even if there weren’t questions about why some women were unknowingly (allegedly) made infertile, Dr Perwaiz would have come to our attention, joining a growing list of ‘new American’ doctors who are busy committing Medicaid/Medicare fraud one of the interests highlighted here at ‘Frauds and Crooks.

Here is Robert Spencer’s (Jihad Watch) take on the incredible news at PJ Media

Demographic Jihad? Virginia Muslim Doctor Tied Women’s Tubes Without Their Consent

The details of this case are simply horrifying. One woman tried for years to conceive a child, but couldn’t. When she finally consulted a fertility specialist, she discovered, according to the Virginian-Pilot, that her “Fallopian tubes had been burned down to nubs, making it impossible to conceive naturally.” It turned out that her physician, Dr. Javaid Perwaiz of Chesapeake, Virginia, had tied her tubes without telling her was doing it or obtaining her consent. And she was by no means the only woman whom Dr. Perwaiz victimized in this way.


About the good doctor we are told that he was “educated abroad,” with no hint as to where – it was actually in his native Pakistan, as the Virginian-Pilot notes: “Perwaiz has had a medical license since at least 1980, according to state records, having attended medical school in his native Pakistan and completed a residency at Charleston Area Medical Center.”

Read the Virginian-Pilot story to see what Perwaiz is being charged with.

Spencer wraps with this after telling us what Muslim leaders have said in the past about demographic jihad:

Is it possible that Javaid Perwaiz has the same kind of mindset, believing that he is performing an Islamic duty by preventing infidel women from having children? It cannot be discounted, but of course the possibility will never be investigated; to do so would be “Islamophobic.”

Continue reading here.

One reader who sent me the story remarked that any woman who goes to a Muslim doctor is foolish (harsher words than that).  However, I will bet most American women have no clue if their ‘new American’ doctor is a Muslim and if they do they don’t know any basic tenets of Islam.

Changing America by changing the people!

Don’t miss my RRW story about how Muslims are winning big in local elections. Virginia was a big winner for them on election day 2019.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Campaigning for Catholics


You may remember your mom saying to you, “Never talk about religion or politics.”

Well, here at Church Militant, that’s all we do. And for the record, my mom, Mother Vortex, never said that. It was just the opposite — but I digress.

Catholics have traditionally voted and been involved in U.S. politics in numbers far greater than their percentage of the population. That’s something that political parties have noted in the past, most recently President Donald Trump when he was still just Candidate Trump.

In 2016, Trump scored gains among Catholic voters and may have been the first Republican who did better with Catholics than the electorate at large. There is a dispute among the so-called experts about that stat, however. Exit polls showed him beating Hillary among Catholic voters by 4% while losing the popular vote by two points.

If that’s true, Trump likely owes the White House to Catholic voters, who gave him the majority of the vote in blue wall states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Hillary failed to produce the so-called Catholic margin that Obama did in 2008 and again in 2012.

In fairness, a later academic survey claimed he lost Catholics by three points. But that would be a whopping seven-point swing between the exit polls and the later survey, so it remains an open question.

But however you slice it, Catholicism is a major factor in 2020, even in the face of a shrinking Catholic population. Trump, as he did in 2016, already has an active Catholic outreach in his campaign.

However, the only candidate from the Party of Death who openly claims the label “Catholic” is Joe Biden, the pro-abort phony — who was denied Holy Communion a couple weeks ago by a good priest in South Carolina — who is also singing hymns on the campaign trail.

Aware of Trump’s appeal to a seeming majority of Catholic voters, Biden is courting them, if even in a low-key kind of way. In Dubuque, Iowa last week, specifically Dubuque County, he sounded pretty devout, as you might expect.

Dubuque has the nickname “Rome of America,” and is one of only 74 counties out of 3,000+ that has a Catholic majority. So Biden used the opportunity to play up his faith, talking about it, but saying he doesn’t seek to impose it on anyone.

Notably, his campaign manager Greg Schultz is Catholic as well, and repeats the same mantra often on behalf of Biden in numerous press interviews.

Trump was able to secure his victory, at least in part, by convincing white working-class voters, especially in Midwestern rural areas and small towns, to get out and vote for him. Many of those places, like Dubuque County, also happen to be heavily Catholic.

In 2016, Trump won the county by roughly 500 votes, out of more than 45,000 cast. While the margin was razor thin in the more urban county, he cut deeply enough into it to neutralize it. That allowed him to secure a majority of Catholics in the more rural areas to win the entire state by a 51–41 margin over Hillary.

That win, incorporating a Catholic strategy, put Iowa in Trump’s column by the largest margin for any Republican since Ronald Reagan in 1980, and that is a hallmark accomplishment.

Biden still has to get past the raucous Democratic primary process, which changes frontrunners and margins almost daily.

One thing to keep an eye on, as a kind of political crystal ball for next November, is to see how Biden performs specifically in Dubuque County among Catholic voters in the Iowa caucuses — which, for the record, are less than 90 days away. Yes, you heard that right — February 3, it all kicks off in Iowa.

Two points worth noting in Campaign 2020: First, this may be the last election where the Catholic vote is so important. With the rapidly decreasing Catholic population as a share of the overall population, coupled with the upsurge of those with no religion, 2020 may signal the end of any intense politicking for the Catholic vote.

A short while ago, so-called nones (those professing no religious adherence) overtook Catholics as the most populous group in the nation in terms of religion, or lack thereof. In 2024, that lead will increase significantly, as the consequences of horrible catechesis drives more young people from the Church, and the culture remains unchallenged by compromised bishops.

Second point to note: Too many of the U.S. bishops equivocate on important topics like abortion, pushing a substitute morality instead, where issues like immigration and fake man-made climate change take center stage. Those issues are made-to-order Democratic talking points and play right into the hands of the Party of Death.

So we are left with the very interesting and curious situation that a man like Trump is actually pushing policies more Catholic than the Catholic bishops.

So when you hear “Don’t ever talk about religion and politics,” don’t believe it. Religion and politics are so tightly bound with each other that they are sometimes indistinguishable, especially on the campaign trail.

Church Militant will be your leading Catholic source for news and coverage of Campaign 2020 as election day approaches — now just 357 days away. And yes, we will be doing a lot of talking about it — religion and politics.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Preparing for War


We are in the last phase now of the studio’s physical layout being finalized, with the desks being put into place and wired and all the computers and so forth being hooked up and all that electronic business being put into place.

The staff moved over from our South building last Friday afternoon into their new digs here in the North building and got settled into their new spaces. What remains is getting all the lights in place and the somewhat daunting task of getting all the cabling for cameras and audio wired back to the control room.

We haven’t officially measured it, but it’s probably a safe bet that there’s a couple hundred yards or more of wires and cables and cords and strings and ropes; they are all over the place. We also beefed up the security of the website to a tremendous degree, as well as the technical specs and operation of our internal communications systems.

Church Militant is, in short, poised to become the most sophisticated media operation in the Catholic world.

And while this new studio space is all cool and exciting and so forth, the reason for it is not. There is a cultural and theological war taking place, and without overstating it, it is a fight for the moral survival of the race. This coming year on the political front — the U.S. presidential elections will be a bloodbath, as the extremely unlikely champion (mostly) of God and country battles forces hellbent on a redefinition of humanity.

We have built this Catholic media center to be the heartbeat of authentic Catholicism, which must, as its very charter, fight against this darkness. Our Blessed Lord did not establish His Church — and yes, it is His— to go along with the world, but to convert it and to bring it salvation.

But there are forces, dark forces, as we have well documented, at work in the Church to pervert Her divine mandate. They’ve been in place for centuries, but they reached a critical mass this last half-century, and now is the time to go on the offensive against them. That is the entire reason for this newly revamped facility — to go to war with these demons who make use of human agents to bring ruination to mankind.

Some of these forces within the Church enjoy much celebrity and command large followings. They are false prophets and must be denounced. Whether destruction of the Church is a conscious motivation of theirs or they are just useful idiots in Hell’s plan no longer matters. The destruction they bring about through malice or cowardice must be confronted and defeated. They are present in every aspect of the Church and the life of the Church — in the hierarchy, the universities, the chanceries, parishes and so forth.

And if you think this sounds all crazy, then you don’t have a sufficient enough understanding of the activity of the diabolical.

If you believe in God, specifically the Holy Trinity, you therefore must believe that Lucifer refused to serve and fell from the celestial realms forever, driven out by St. Michael and his legions. Satan now unleashed his fury on the only beings he can — us. And his mission, what consumes him, is to deny to humanity what is everlastingly denied to him.

For this reason, the Eternal Logos incarnated saves us from a fate we would otherwise be powerless to fight off. He established a Church, one Church, His own mystical body on earth as a refuge, a means, the means, to salvation — the only means.

So, of course, Satan would wage war against the Church — it is the path of escape from him — and he seeks to destroy it. Think of the Church as a tunnel out of a slave labor camp, the only escape, and the commandant of the camp knows about the tunnel. He will do anything in his power to shut off that escape route.

Of course, God is more powerful than Satan so he will never defeat the Church as She is in Herself. But he can still destroy individuals. The Church will always be with us as Christ has promised. It will never be defeated.

So the Church will always be with us, but the question of whether we individually will always be with the Church is still an open question. And if we die apart from the Church, we lose — forever.

So Satan does everything he can to weaken the Church, leaving no stone unturned. That includes, even in a special way because of its power to influence, the media. It’s why we chose this arena to stand and fight.

No one in the Catholic world does media like Church Militant does.

We begin and end every day with prayer, including the Rosary, because no baptized Catholic can be Catholic without prayer. It is the very first weapon we have because it is supernatural. We combat directly the errors so common and profound throughout the Church, especially in the realm of so-called Catholic media.

These include liberal reporters like John Allen of Crux, Christopher Lamb of The Tablet, Austen Ivereigh and loads of others. It also includes the even more dangerous spiritual terrorists like James Martin, Bishops John Stowe and Robert McElroy, and the really poisonous characters like Cdls. Blase Cupich, Joseph Tobin and Donald Wuerl. These men and their evil pronouncements and agendas are supported by, and advertised for, by untrustworthy and deceptive outfits and so-called journalists like the ones we named, and more.

They are all allied against the Church, attempting to present a different picture of Her true mission handed to Her by Christ Himself while He was personally present here on earth: the salvation of souls. They don’t believe that and have therefore disqualified themselves from being considered reliable. They are not.

The entire culture is at a crisis point precipitated by the crisis in the Church.

A hundred years ago, Communism understood that to create a world without God, where the state would become God, the Catholic Church would have to be destroyed. But where centuries of other attempts to destroy the Catholic Church had failed, Marxism decided to quietly invade and pervert from within.

We are here to draw the line in the sand. All good Catholics must now draw the line in the sand, and that begins with information, knowing the enemy and exposing his tactics, so the glories of the Faith may shine forth.

The whole reason for this extremely cool, all newly equipped and updated facility is to take the war to Satan and his deceptions.

When Our Lord said the gates of Hell would not prevail, that presents a picture of the Church attacking, not crouching down, hiding and cowering in some defensive posture.We have the Queen of Heaven, St. Michael, the truth of God Himself, all present in the Holy Catholic Church. It’s time for war.

Before we wrap up, we’d like to continue to express our gratitude to all of you who have donated to this cause and continue to donate.

We still have bills that are outstanding, and whatever you can keep giving to help is very much appreciated.

Thank you for the incredible amount of trust you have placed in us. This is your apostolate. We run it day-to-day, but this is the work of the Church, and we want to thank you for allowing us to not just continue the fight but to step it up.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Here’s a List of 100 Members of Congress Supporting CAIR

Ahead of the Council of American-Islamic Relations’ 25th Anniversary Gala event last Saturday, the Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization boasted that “120+” members of Congress had sent them letters of support.

We never saw those letters, however, thanks to Clarion reader Viola Rose, we were directed to a list of 100 members of Congress who voiced their support of CAIR in 2018. The list was published by the Investigative Project on Terrorism, along with the letters of support.

You can see the list and the letter by clicking here.

The list includes Democrat presidential candidates Cory Booker, Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar. Ninety-seven out of the 100 names on the list were Democrats; three were Republican.

CAIR’s gala event took place November 9, 2019, at the Grand Hyatt hotel in Washington, D.C., and featured Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and Islamist activist and sharia-apologist Linda Sarsour.

CAIR describes itself as “America’s largest Islamic civil liberties group,” but in 2007, the U.S. government labeled CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for financing the Hamas terrorist group.

In November 2014, CAIR was designated as a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates along with a host of other Muslim Brotherhood entities.

CAIR was listed among “individuals/entities who are/were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organizations.” The Palestine Committee is a secret body set up to advance the Brotherhood/Hamas agenda in the U.S.

The FBI subsequently severed official contacts with the group, saying it “does not view CAIR as an appropriate liaison partner.”

Yet members of Congress – either ignorantly or intentionally — continue to endorse CAIR.

If your congressional representative is on the list, please write to him or her and include the above information on CAIR. Let us know if you get a response by clicking here.


We would still like to see the 2019 list of the “120+” members of Congress who CAIR claims sent letters of support to them ahead of this gala event.

You can copy and paste our letter below and send it to CAIR by clicking here. (This link takes you to CAIR’s home page. At the bottom of the page, there is a place to write a message. CAIR states its goal is to reply within 24-48 hours.)

Dear CAIR,

You recently claimed that 120+ members of Congress sent letters to you welcoming your upcoming 25th anniversary gala in Washington, D.C.

Can you please send me a list of those Congress people?

Join our campaign to get CAIR to publish the list of “120+” members of Congress who wrote them letters of support. Please write to CAIR and ask them to publish the list and the letters

Please tell us if you get a response by clicking here.


Obama, Clinton Alumni Serve At UN, Continuing Liberal Influence Over International Affairs During Trump Era

‘120+ Members of Congress’ Send Letters of Support to CAIR

Get CAIR to disclose Members of Congress Supporting Them

CAIR Is Suing Texas — You’ll Never Believe Why

RELATED VIDEO: 7 Things to know about Muslim Community Patrol cars in NYC.

EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

NYC: Humanitarian Worker Beheaded by Ethiopian Husband

He also is alleged to have slit the throat of their five-year-old daughter before hanging himself.

The woman’s distraught family says she wanted out of their marriage.

You may have already seen the news—the slaughter happened last Wednesday—but I hadn’t.  Thanks to reader ‘meanymom’ for bringing it to my attention.

The first thing I did was to see what the UK Daily Mail said about the case because they manage to get more details and definitely more photos especially when the story involves something that goes against the non-tabloid US mainstream media’s desired story line.

By all accounts, the Tedlas were living the progressive family dream-life in upscale Harlem.  They had been seen out recently trick or treating on Halloween, so the horror that went on behind closed doors came as a shock to the racially and ethnically mixed neighborhood.

But, even the UK Daily Mail didn’t report on how the brutal killer had become a ‘new American’ describing him only as an African immigrant from Ethiopia. There is no mention of his religion.

Below are some snips from the UK Daily Mail:

Husband, 46, decapitates wife, 42…

Police in New York City are investigating a grisly double murder-suicide in which they say a man decapitated his wife, slit the throat of their five-year-old daughter and then took his own life by hanging Wednesday night, just hours after the woman tried to get an order of protection.

According to the NYPD, at around 9.18pm officers responded to a 911 call requesting a welfare check inside an apartment at 151 West 121st Street in the Harlem section of Manhattan.

Upon entering the unit, officers found Yonathan Tedla, 46, Jennifer Schlecht, 42, and their five-year-old daughter, Abaynesh Schlecht Tedla, dead inside.

It is unclear how long the family had been dead before their bodies were discovered.

Schlecht’s heartbroken father, Kenneth Schlecht, 74, tells New York Daily News that his daughter’s marriage was unraveling, and that his son-in-law had threatened to ‘take them all out’ if Jennifer tried to serve him with divorce papers.


The New York Daily News reported, citing unnamed sources, that Schlecht was found decapitated, with her severed head resting in her lap.

Her daughter suffered a cut so deep to her neck that she was partially beheaded.

The five-year-old’s father was found hanging from a rope tied to a bedroom door.


Kenneth Schlecht, Jennifer’s father, tells the Daily News that the last time he spoke to his daughter was last Sunday and she was in tears.

‘She said her husband had indicated that if she served him with divorce papers he would ruin her or take them all out, which was apparently what he did,’ he said.

Jennifer and Yonathan Tedla, an immigrant from Ethiopia, met in the early aughts [early 2000s—ed] at Columbia University, where she was attending graduate school and he was working as an IT technician.

Jennifer Tedla was a senior adviser for a UN Foundation project called FP2020 which advocated for the rights of women and girls to make reproductive decisions for themselves.

UK Daily Mail continues…

Schlecht [apparently she used her maiden name—ed] served as a senior adviser for emergency preparedness and response with the humanitarian partnership Family Planning 2020.

Beth Schlachter, executive director of FP2020, sent a statement to addressing the tragedy.

‘Jennifer Schlecht devoted her entire career to ensuring that women and girls in crisis situations have access to the best medical care possible including family planning and other reproductive health care,’ it read. ‘Most recently, she has been a vital part of the FP2020 family at the United Nations Foundation.

She was a leader in the field of family planning and humanitarian response, and chose to work from New York so she could have more time with her darling daughter.

There is more here. There are links to other news accounts plus many more photos.

If anyone sees any information about how the killer became a ‘new American’ send it my way.  We do admit many refugees from Ethiopia, so I’m wondering if he came as a UN chosen refugee.


Surprise: NJ Muslim Mayor Who Cried ‘Islamophobia’ Has History of Jihad Support

Trump administration approves Hamas-linked CAIR to train US Customs and Border Patrol officers

Virginia: Muslim migrant doctor tied women’s tubes, performed hysterectomies without their consent

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: “Blasphemy is a right of (those who live in) the Republic of France” [WARNING: Nudity]

The woman in the middle of what appears to be a large crowd of leftists and Muslims starts out with a sign that says:

“Blasphemy is a right of (those who live in) the Republic of France”

It isn’t until people took her sign away that she went for a message that was harder to ignore.

“Do not sell secularism cheaply”.

This event appears to be a major march against “Islamophobia“, that took place in Paris today. This is likely a prelude to a new anti-free speech law in the guise of hate speech. We are seeing this all over the Western world now.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Digging In. And they are going nowhere.


There is nothing on the table that isn’t being weaponized by the Left — and we are talking about the Left inside the Church who, for the record, really aren’t in the Church because they reject Church teaching on a variety of issues. And they are digging in.

Nonetheless, since they continue to portray themselves as “Catholic,” then they get to be treated as “Catholic,” meaning their propaganda should be exposed on a theological level for the garbage that it is.

One of the leading provocateurs in the lefty Catholic camp is Austen Ivereigh, British author who never misses a chance to foster dissent. For example, just before the infamous Sex Summit began in Rome last February, Ivereigh tweeted, “Why do you say our Lord had no homosexual tendencies? By what signs or gestures do you deduce this?”

He was in a Twitter war with Fr. Jacob Straub, who responded, “This is very scandalous and possibly a heresy. You need to remove this tweet and confess your sin. Lord, have mercy.”

And so it goes with the lefty Catholic crowd, so closely associated with the lefty political crowd so as to be indistinguishable.

Ivereigh, who used to write for the notorious leftist Catholic rag The Tablet, located in the U.K., really came onto the radar for publishing a book on Pope Francis, The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope, back in 2014, jumping on the bandwagon of Team Francis.

Ivereigh is happy to not just support the so-called reforms of Pope Francis, but he never loses an opportunity to slam other Catholic media who question those reforms. Anyone who questions the pope’s moves gets torn to pieces by Ivereigh and the rest of his gang (although many of those same men had no problem openly criticizing Pope Benedict or Pope John Paul).

Ivereigh, you might recall, is the same fellow at one of the first press conferences of the Amazon Synod who tried to portray the Pachamama statues (really idols) as Our Lady and St. Elizabeth — until he got contradicted by panelists, and eventually the pope himself, who called them Pachamama, not representations of Mary and Elizabeth.

But with this crowd, whatever helps push the narrative is all that matters.

A few days back, America Magazine, the flagship publication of the largely dissident Jesuit order, hosted a book launch party for him for his latest tome titled Wounded Shepherd: Pope Francis’ Struggle to Convert the Catholic Church. 

The use of the term “convert” in the title is more than a little telling. Of course, Ivereigh’s book has the full-throated endorsement of homoheretic James Martin, who never met a fellow traveler along the road to overthrowing the Church he hasn’t joined forces with.

Ivereigh and his crowd see this pontificate as a tool, perhaps a willing tool, to talk in generalities about Church teaching and downplay any specificity. So in his book and in his comments at the book launch, he talks about the need to stop talking about dogma or doctrine and start emphasizing personal experience in making moral judgments — meaning, at bottom, whether to commit sin or not.

Problem is Ivereigh and company don’t seem to either know or care anything about the actual concept of sin and its resultant consequence of damnation if a soul were to die in that state. But that doesn’t matter to these guys. They don’t really believe in the Church as She is actually constituted.

It’s much easier for them to think of and present the Church in terms of a giant multinational outfit, whose mission is to create some kind of utopia — Heaven on earth — as opposed to focusing on attaining actual Heaven.

To this end, any moral teaching, especially the ones on sexuality, are free to be passed over because those sins aren’t really sins, their rightness or wrongness being left up to the individual’s “personal experience.” But eat a piece of beef or contribute to so-called man-made climate change — and the fires of Hell await you.

Ivereigh straight up is a liar, who follows the agenda of the Left like the nice, little waterboy he is. For example, the uproar about the Pachamama idols prompted him to say that it grew out of EWTN-fueled panic that never asked indigenous people themselves about the “idols.”

That’s not even in the slightest imagination true. EWTN was not the first to report on the Pachamama. As far as we can tell, Church Militant was the first to identify the statues as symbols of Pachamama and demonstrate their connection to “Mother Earth,” or more specifically, “Earth Mother.”

For the record, it may not have been us, but if it wasn’t, we were certainly among the first, and it was not EWTN.

Secondly, the so-called “indigenous people” didn’t need to be asked specifically when the reports were first issued, because the very telling video moment of them bowing down to them on an earth blanket in the Vatican Gardens said a lot all on its own.

People don’t physically bow down to concepts. They bow down to representations of a concept.

And why didn’t Ivereigh go and ask the “indigenous people” swarming all over Rome, instead of sitting in the Vatican press hall getting shot down by the panel when saying the statues were of Our Lady and St. Elizabeth?

Where did he get his wrong idea? Certainly not from the “indigenous people,” because the statues are a symbol of Mother Earth and fertility and so forth, as they themselves — and the pope and the Vatican — have said.

There are so many ways to dissect the lefty Catholic crowd’s agenda and war on the truth that it’s actually easy. On the sex abuse crisis — proven time and again that its foundational cause is homosexuality, seeing as how four out of every five victims was a teenage boy — Ivereigh simply ignores that truth and says of that assertion: “This leads to terrible diagnoses, best example is their diagnosis of the sex abuse crisis by likes of Viganó and Cdls. Mueller and Burke.”

Of course, Ivereigh is demonstrably wrong, so much so that he seems to require more pity than correction.

In perhaps his most telling quote, demonizing anyone who supports Tradition in the Church (meaning clear doctrine), he says: “Everything is filtered through an ‘ideology of suspicion'” by a party that is trying to undermine him.

“This is a direct attack on his leadership” but “of course they don’t see it that way.” They say it is justified in the name of saving the Church, and in the “name of Tradition.”

Hey, Austen, have you looked around the Church these days? For the past half-century, in fact?

Of course, things have to be viewed in a suspicious manner, just like a fire chief looks at a four-alarm blaze in a suspicious manner, until the objective truth is arrived at. You and your carrying of the water for the Left must also be looked at suspiciously, and eventually denounced — yours and the rest of your elitist-minded “journalist” crowd.

You aren’t journalists. You are little else than mere stenographers for the Left, dutifully repeating their talking points because they excuse any sin you may enjoy. You desire nothing else than to keep the discussion of morality centered on earth as opposed to Heaven.

That is not what the Savior of the world desired. You might recall that loving God is the First Commandment; neighbor comes second. Heaven comes before earth on the priority list.


Scalfari: Pope Francis Denies Bodily Resurrection of Jesus

ABP. VIGANÒ Sheds Light on Emanuela Orlandi Disappearance

The Detroit Disaster

Best of Mic’d Up: Catholic Media Collusion

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Two former Twitter employees accused of spying on Saudis and ‘thousands of others’ for Saudi Arabia

“Thousands of other Twitter users”?

What were they looking for? Are the Saudis behind the Orwellian treatment of opposition to jihad terror as if it were “bigotry”?

Twitter is so resolutely opposed to foes of jihad mass murder and Sharia oppression of women, it’s no wonder that they didn’t catch these guys.

“Two former Twitter employees accused of spying for Saudi Arabia,” by David Shortell, CNN, November 7, 2019:

Washington, DC (CNN Business)Federal prosecutors accused two former Twitter employees of spying on behalf of Saudi Arabia on Wednesday.

Ali Alzabarah, a Saudi national, and Ahmad Abouammo, a US citizen, used their access at the social media giant to gather sensitive and nonpublic information on dissidents of the Saudi regime, the Justice Department alleged in a criminal complaint.

The case, unsealed in San Francisco federal court, underscores allegations the Saudi government tries to control anti-regime voices abroad. It also recalls a move reportedly directed by the country’s controversial leader to weaponize online platforms against critics.

The accusations are certain to renew scrutiny of tech companies’ abilities to protect the privacy of their users.

“The criminal complaint unsealed today alleges that Saudi agents mined Twitter’s internal systems for personal information about known Saudi critics and thousands of other Twitter users,” US Attorney David Anderson said in a statement. “U.S. law protects U.S. companies from such an unlawful foreign intrusion. We will not allow U.S. companies or U.S. technology to become tools of foreign repression in violation of U.S. law.”

A third man, Ahmed Almutairi, also from Saudi Arabia, allegedly acted as a go-between to the two Twitter employees and the Saudi government, which according to the complaint rewarded the men with hundreds of thousands of dollars and, for one man, a luxury Hublo watch.

While no Saudi government officials are named as running the spy operation in the complaint, the Washington Post, citing a person familiar with the case, reports a Saudi national who groomed the two employees is tied into the inner circle of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman….


UK: Muslim rape gang faces 36 counts of rape and forcing children into sexual activity

Moderate Malaysia: Housewife charged with six counts of insulting Islam

Toronto: Muslim charged with 54 sexual assault-related offenses, including many with children

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

ISIS to its Followers: Cause the West Pain by Setting Forests Ablaze

This news from Fox News yesterday reminded me of a reader at Refugee Resettlement Watch who sent me information and stories to post for probably a year or so.

She (I think the tipster was a she!) told me how important fire is as a weapon of jihad as she often found stories about mysterious fires, not just forest fires, that she identified as linked to an Islamic imperative—to wage jihad.

I haven’t heard from her for about five years, but her admonitions about fire jihad stuck with me.

Here is Fox News:

ISIS encouraging followers to set wildfires in forests, fields of US, Europe

The Islamic State terror group may have recently lost its leader, but a media outlet affiliated with the group is urging followers to continue to literally set ablaze new paths of terror and destruction.

At least four propaganda posters have appeared in recent months from the pro-ISIS media outlet Quraysh Media that have encouraged followers to “ignite fires” of their own, literally setting wildfires in the U.S. and Europe as a means of “waging jihad,” according to the Middle East Media Research Institute.

MEMRI, which tracks communications of radical groups, said the first poster in the series was published in April.

“Oh monotheists [followers of ISIS], ignite fires in the forests and fields, and we are addressing especially those who live in Europe and America, for they are painful to them,” the poster read, according to MEMRI.


“Ignite fires in the forests of America, France, Britain and Germany, for they are painful to them,” the text reads, according to MEMRI.

More here.

It would be pretty darn easy!  And, even if authorities suspected that type of arson, they would likely keep it from us and blame global warming instead.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Gaza: Gratuitous gobbledygook

The obdurate resistance of Gaza to any type of resolution has led to such overriding exasperation that it has begun to undermine the quality of the public debate on the issue.

“Israel need not necessarily take control of the Gaza Strip, but it must take control of the situation.” Jerusalem Post Editorial, November 3, 2019.

“I would like Gaza to sink into the sea, but that won’t happen, and a solution must be found.” – then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, September 3, 1992.

… beyond the furrow that marks the border, lies a surging sea of hatred and vengeance, yearning for the day that the tranquility blunts our alertness, for the day that we heed the ambassadors of conspiring hypocrisy, who call for us to lay down our arms Moshe Dayan, at the funeral of Roi Rotberg, of Kibbutz Nahal Oz, killed by terrorist gunmen from Gaza, April 28, 1956.

The IDF swept triumphantly into the Egyptian-ruled Gaza Strip in early June 1967 and pulled out ignominiously in mid-August 2005—erasing every vestige of Jewish presence there that had been lovingly and laboriously developed over the preceding four decades.

A constant source of consternation

Gaza has been an almost constant source of consternation for Israel—well before it took over the Strip in 1967 –see opening excerpt. However, matters took a sharp turn for the worse, when, following the Oslo I Accords (1993) and the pursuant Gaza-Jericho Agreement (1994), facilitating Yassar Arafat’s entry into Gaza on July 1, 1994—to the cheers of jubilant crowds, whose expectant hopes of future prosperity and security were soon to be dashed.

Since then, largely due to Israel first reducing, and then totally withdrawing, its presence on the ground, Gaza has evolved from being a terrorist nuisance to a threat of emerging strategic dimensions. Indeed, this week the Israel Broadcasting Corporation (Kan 11) ran an exposé on the on-going global efforts by the external arm of Hamas to acquire advanced, high-quality weapon systems to intensify the battle against Israel.

Indeed, one of the few areas in which the Gazans have shown considerable expertise and enterprise, ingenuity and innovativeness is in honing their production and procurement of weaponry, with which to assault the Jewish state—attaining military capabilities seemingly inconceivable when Israel embarked on its poorly conceived policy of transferring control of Gaza to the Palestinian-Arabs.

Gaza: A bone in Israel’s throat?

Gaza has obstinately defied the effort of successive Israeli leaders and the naïve largesse of international donors.

The enduring nature of the Gaza predicament was succinctly articulated in an earlier Kan 11 exposé, entitled The Gazan Predicament (Dec 2, 2018). It begins with a dour review of events in Gaza over last the quarter-century:

When Israel left Gaza in 1994 and transferred control [over it] to Yasser Arafat, the [Israeli] decision-makers certainly did not believe that in 2018 [when the exposé was aired]—26 [sic] years later—the [Gaza] Strip would be one of the principal security problems of the State of Israel. Even the Disengagement that Ariel Sharon initiated in 2005, in which all the Jewish communities in the Strip were evacuated, was to no avail—and the problem of Gaza remained unresolved.”

Turing to the accumulation and enhancement of weaponry in the Strip, it noted: “The rise of Hamas to power and its continual armament procurement dragged Israel into unending military conflicts with Gaza and brought numerous cities and communities into the range of rockets with powerful warheads. Israeli leaders changed but the security “hot potato” of Gaza was passed on from one to the other…

Thus, Gaza has, indeed, remained an irksome “bone in Israel’s throat”.

Generating garrulous gibberish

The obdurate resistance of Gaza to any type of resolution has apparently led to such overriding exasperation and frustration that it has begun to undermine the quality of the public debate on the issue.

Typical of such garrulous gibberish was a recent editorial in the Jerusalem Post, entitled “Gaza policy”.

It bewails—with good reason—the current situation:

The situation should not be allowed to continue like this, with residents in the South held hostage to the whims of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other terrorist organizations.

It then diagnoses: “One thing is certain – the lack of a coherent, comprehensive Israeli strategy regarding Gaza has taken its toll during the years since the Disengagement in 2005 and particularly since Hamas took control of the Strip two years later.”

This, of course, is complete nonsense. It is clearly not because Israel lacked any coherent policy–before or after the Disengagement—vis-à-vis Gaza. Indeed, the policies adopted were very coherent: (a) the pre-Disengagement policy was based on the unequivocal belief that it was possible to reach a negotiated agreement with the post-Oslo Palestinian Authority; (b) the post-Disengagement policy was based on an equally unequivocal belief that it was not—and therefore unilateral un-negotiated measures needed  to be taken.

Coherent but misguided

The problem with Israeli policies was not that they were incoherent—in the sense that they lacked internal logical consistency; but that they were misguided—in that the assumptions, on which they were based, were dangerously detached from prevailing Gazan realities.

So, although Israel’s policies were based on flawed assumptions—concordant with political correctness but sharply discordant with factual correctness—they were comprised of measures totally—or at least, largely—compatible with those assumptions and the pursuit of their desired goals. In this regard, they were indeed coherent. Sadly however, the elemental foundations on which they were based were defective. Accordingly, no matter how they were implemented, they were doomed to failure.

Both policies, bilateral negotiations and unilateral measures, conceived of the Gazan-Arab collective as a future partner, either in (a) a mutually beneficial peace (the former); or (b) an uneasy but durable non-belligerent coexistence (the latter). Neither conceived of the Gazan-Arabs as they conceive of themselves—as an implacable enemy whose collective raison d’etre is to combat and cast out the infidel Zionist invader, or at least, to subdue him and compel him to submit.

In this regard, it is a dangerous misperception to view the Gazan public as somehow a hapless victim of its elected leadership; for it is in fact, the crucible, in which that leadership was formed and from which it emerged.

Accordingly, any policy—no matter what its internal coherence—that does not conceive of the Gazan-Arab collective as anything else, is doomed to continuing failure.

Fusing the banal with the illogical

The Jerusalem Post editorial continues, warning that the recent unprovoked volley of rockets fired at Israel “…indicates Hamas might be losing its grip to more radical terrorist organizations, and that an internal struggle among these terrorist groups could result in them trying to gain points by attacking Israel or even trying to drag Israel into an escalated conflict.

Accordingly, it assess that: “It is a matter of time before more rockets are launched and the country cannot rely on miracles and the quick responses of local residents finding shelter in time.”

Then, fusing the banal with the illogical, the editorial recommends: “The next government – regardless of who leads it – must form and implement a strategy regarding Gaza. This initiative needs to be both defensive and diplomatic.

So the next government will have to have “a strategy regarding Gaza”?? Gee, who would have thought? How profound! How insightful!And that strategy should be “both defensive and diplomatic”?? Really?!

One can only wonder, with some bewilderment, what kind strategic “diplomatic” measures the editorial staff at the Post envisage Israel undertaking that it has not already undertaken—during the Oslo Process, the concessions made to Abbas—the building freeze, the release of convicted terrorists, the facilitation of the transfer of the Qatari millions—to name but some. Sadly, the editorial offers not even the slightest hint of what the authors have in mind. Moreover, it no less intriguing as to why they would believe that Hamas and its more radical affiliates (over which it “might be losing its grip”), would be moved by any conceivable diplomatic initiative—however creative and ingenious it may seem to Western minds.

Illogical (cont.)

But perhaps even more puzzling is the recommendation that Israel’s future strategy should be “defensive”. After all, Israel already has a wide array of “defensive” strategic initiatives—from a billion dollar barrier to encircle Gaza, above and below the ground; though the multi-million the “Iron Dome” and other missile defense systems; to a land and maritime quarantine of Gaza.

One might wonder not only as to what ingenious defense mechanism/strategy the authors behind the Post’s editorial are contemplating that will be more effective than those already in place, but also why the Gazans will be less effective in circumventing it than they have been in the past.

After all, the pattern of violence in Gaza has been almost monotonously repetitive. Time and again, the Gazan terrorists have developed some offensive measure to assault Israel. In response, Israel devised some countermeasure to contend with it—defensive counter measures that were designed to thwart the attacks, rather than prevent them being launched in the first place.

Thus, suicide attacks resulted in a security fence and secured crossings; which led to the development of enhanced rocket and missile capabilities; which lead to the development of the vastly expensive Iron Dome; which led to the burrowing of an array of underground attack tunnels; which lead to the construction of a billion dollar subterranean barrier; which led to the use of incendiary kites and balloons that reduced much of the rural South adjacent to the Gaza border, to blackened charcoal—and only by luck did not result in the loss of life.

Perhaps the Post’s editorial staff are conjuring up in their minds some futuristic “force field” that will stop any overhead rocket or underground tunnel, block any incendiary balloon, explosive kite or armed drone, sink any vessel attempting to attack from the sea…

A cavalcade of failure

Virtually every kind of policy has been tried by Israel to resolve the Gaza conflict—with or without the backing of third parties.

As we have seen, the attempt to reach a negotiated resolution with the Gazans failed.

The attempt to defuse the conflict by unilateral concessions that gave the Gazans everything, which they could have demanded (and more) in a negotiated settlement, failed.

The attempt to placate Gaza by enhancing the socio-economic conditions with massive international aid also failed—as all the funds either found their way into the padded pockets of well-placed cronies or were channeled into expanding and upgrading weaponry and military infrastructure/installations, at the expense of the civilian sector: Schools, hospitals, housing and so on.

The attempt to constrain Hamas by weakening it—certainly by disarming it—will undoubtedly result in making matters worse. After all, as the Post editorial notes itself, even now, Hamas is in danger of “losing its grip to more radical terrorist organizations.” Accordingly, if Hamas were to be significantly weakened—and certainly if it were disarmed—the most plausible outcome would be that it would be replaced by an even more formidable foe—with the probable backing of Iran—even less susceptible to “diplomatic and defensive” strategies.

It is this cavalcade of failed past policies that comprises the context in which future proposed strategies should be assessed.

Gaza: The gratuitous gobbledygook

In this regard, it is edifying to refer to recent threats, issued by Hamas leader, Yahya Sinwar:

We have hundreds of kilometers of tunnels, hundreds of control rooms above and below the ground, thousands of anti-tank missiles and thousands of mortar shells…”, warning that his terror organization can strike at Tel Aviv for six full months [and] turn the enemy cities into ghost towns.”

Boasting of “70,000 armed young men from all the Palestinian factions”, Sinwar appears clearly unimpressed by Israel’s defensive abilities.

The Post editorial ends with a vain attempt to balance the dictates of prevailing political-correctness with some new—but unspecified—operational rationale: “Israel need not necessarily take control of the Gaza Strip, but it must take control of the situation.”

Whatever this means, it seems to me to be the archetypical example of the gratuitous gobbledygook that that has come to dominate  the discourse on Gaza.

For there is little alternative to Israel “taking control of Gaza”—and the blame for the blood and treasure that will be expended on that endeavor will rest entirely on those who urged Israel to leave the Strip.

Simple & compelling

After all, the foregoing analysis confronts Israeli policy-makers with almost mathematical algorithmic logic:

  • The only way to ensure who rules – and does not rule – Gaza is for Israel to rule it itself.
  • The only way for Israel to do this without “ruling over another people” is to relocate the “other people” outside the territory it is obliged to administer.
  • The only way to effect such relocation of the “other people”, without forcible kinetic expulsion, is by economic inducements i.e. by means of a comprehensive system of enticing material incentives to leave and daunting disincentives to stay.

Q.E.D. What could be simpler or more compelling?

This then, should be the conceptual foundation of any new coherent strategy for Gaza.

© All rights reserved.

The Left Targets Nuns—Again

The founders of America would be aghast at today’s assault against religious freedom and against what they called “the sacred right of conscience.”

Right now a group of innocent nuns is in the Left’s crosshairs—again. Why? Because the Little Sisters of the Poor do not believe in contraceptives and cannot in good faith and conscience abide by the HHS mandates—left over from the Obama administration—to force them to provide coverage for them.

The case went all the way up to the Supreme Court in 2016, and the high court said the nuns did not have to comply. A further executive order was issued by President Trump to protect the Little Sisters and similar groups from the contraceptive mandate. But the Left has continued to find loopholes—and friendly judges–in their crusade against religious freedom.

A recent adverse ruling from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals now means the nuns must once again appeal their case all the way to the Supreme Court.

First Liberty Institute, a Texas-based group fighting for religious freedom, just submitted a friend of the court brief on behalf of the nuns.

First Liberty noted that the Third Court of Appeals’ ruling “manifests an aggressive effort to compel the religious objector to assimilate with popular secular beliefs.”

Who exactly are the Little Sisters of the Poor? Since 1839, this group of Roman Catholic nuns have been helping the elderly and poor—providing a wonderful service for those in need.

I once asked Gary Bauer, former presidential candidate, about the Little Sisters case (first time around, when Obama was the president). He told me:

“This is the president that has brought the full weight and power of the federal government not against ISIS—on ISIS he’s kind of AWOL—but he’s brought the full weight and power in a threat to crush the Little Sisters of the Poor.”

Dr. Richard Land, the president of Southern Evangelical Seminary, comments: “I never thought that I would live to see the day in America, when the federal government would fine people for their religious convictions…..The idea that the federal government would come in and try to force the Little Sisters of the poor, a group of nuns, to pay for contraception and pay for abortifacients and sterilization in their health care insurance is grotesque.”

Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel said about this case: “Never before in the history of America have we told religious organizations like Little Sisters of the Poor you can do what your God-given call and mission is, so long as you participate in human genocide.” Included in the contraceptives mandate are some abortifacients—chemicals that induce abortions.

As a student of American history, I am convinced the founders would be in favor of the nuns and not the Third Court of Appeals’ awful decision:

  • George Washington said, “While we are contending for our own Liberty, we should be very cautious of violating the Rights of Conscience in others, ever considering that God alone is the Judge of the Hearts of Men, and to him only in this Case, they are answerable.
  • Thomas Jefferson wrote, after quoting the First Amendment, “Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”
  • James Madison, a key contributor to the Constitution, stated, “the civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship…nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed.”

What a contrast: James Madison, sometimes called “the father of the Constitution,” says the government should infringe on “the civil rights of none.” But the Left in effect says, “the civil rights of nuns” do not count.

At a press conference during the first go around, the Little Sisters of the Poor declared:

“The government forces us to either violate our conscience or to take millions of dollars that we raise by begging for care of the elderly poor and instead pay fines to the IRS.”

The founders were wary of an all-encompassing big state that decides who has rights and who doesn’t. The foundation of American liberty is our God-given rights, as affirmed in our nation’s birth certificate, the Declaration of Independence.  As John F. Kennedy put it, “the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.” Amen.

But in the Year of our Lord 2019, we again find some elements of big government shamefully going after a group of charitable nuns to try to force them to violate their conscience rights.

© All rights reserved.


Meet Sister Veronica of the Little Sisters of the Poor

Trump Invites Little Sisters Of The Poor On Stage

26 Muslim Candidates Won off-year Elections on November 5th, 2019 for Total of 34 Muslims Elected in 2019

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR),  Jetpac and MPower Change, reported that 26 Muslims were elected nationwide in the November 5th, 2019 off-year elections.

CAIR, Jetpac, and MPower Change’s preliminary statistical breakdown of American Muslim candidates running for office in 2019 shows:

  • 81 Muslim candidates in total ran for an elected office in 2019
    • 29 women
    • 52 men
  • Of those, 34 Muslims won elections in the 2019 calendar year
    • 16 women
    • 18 men
  • Of those, 26 Muslim candidates won their election on November 5th,2019.
    • 13 of those Muslim candidates won an election for the first time
      • 7 women
      • 6 men
    • 13 of those Muslim candidates were incumbents won reelection
      • 5 women
      • 8 men

SEE: American Muslim Candidate Master List

On behalf of the American Muslim community, CAIR, Jetpac, and MPower Change congratulate the following Muslim candidates on their hard-fought and trailblazing victories:


  • Pious Ali – Portland City Council (reelection)
  • Safiya Khalid – Lewiston City Council


  • Fazlul Kabir – College Park City Council (reelection)


  • Mehreen Butt – Wakefield Town Council (reelection)
  • Afroz Khan – Newburyport City Council (reelection)
  • Sumbul Siddiqui – Cambridge City Council (reelection)


  • Nadia Mohamed – St. Louis Park City Council
  • Abdisalam Adam – Fridley School Board (appointed in 2018 to fill a vacant seat but elected by the public for the first time yesterday)

New Jersey

  • Jamillah Beasley – Irvington Municipal Council (reelection)
  • Mustafa Al-Mutazzim Brent – East Orange City Council (reelection)
  • Denise Sanders – Teaneck Board of Education (reelection)
  • Raghib Muhammad – Montgomery Township Board of Education
  • Adnan Zakaria – Prospect Park City Council (reelection)
  • Esllam Zakaria – Prospect Park Board of Education (reelection)


  • Omar Tarazi – Hilliard City Council


  • Omar Sabir – Philadelphia City Commission


  • Buta Biberaj – Loudoun County Commonwealth’s Attorney
  • Ghazala Hashmi – Senate District 10
  • Babur Lateef – Prince William County School Board (reelection)
  • Harris Mahedavi – Loudon County School Board
  • Abrar Omeish – Fairfax County School Board
  • Sam Rasoul – House of Delegates District 11 (reelection)
  • Ibraheem Samirah – House of Delegates District 86 (reelection)
  • Lisa Zargarpur – Prince William County School Board


  • Turan Kayaoglu – Puyallup School Board
  • Zahra Roach – Pasco City Council


Minnesota: First Muslim Somali Woman Wins City Council Seat – Won’t Even Speak English To The People During Interview (Video)

Islamist Wins Virginia School Board Seat – IPT News

RELATED VIDEO: Amazing speech in the French parliament where the words are spoken aloud: “The Great Replacement.”

The Vortex — Bishop Busted (on Video). Caught lying and evading.


Bishop Michael Hoeppner of Crookston, Minnesota — the same bishop who put out multiple warnings to both clergy and laity not to attend a Church Militant talk back in September because we are “divisive” and don’t “represent” the Catholic faith — has been caught lying on a videotaped deposition about returning dangerous clergy to active ministry — and covering up about it.

Ron Vasek, who says Hoeppner resorted to extortion and threats to keep him from revealing what he knew from his own past about a priest Hoeppner covered for, sued Hoeppner and the diocese, for which the diocese was forced to settle for millions.

He spoke at a press conference yesterday, as his attorneys released damning video of Hoeppner’s deposition.

During the deposition, Attorney Jeff Anderson caught Hoeppner time and time again evading and using double speak to cover for his actions.

Anderson questioned and trapped the bishop regarding multiple priests, including one Vasek says sexually assaulted him and another who admitted to a porn problem and secret desires to sexually abuse children.

(deposition transcript unavailable)

Ron Vasek, who was instrumental in exposing the filth in the diocese, says Msgr. Ron Grundhaus assaulted him when he was a teen on an overnight trip. In 2011, Vasek started the process of becoming a deacon in the diocese around the same time his son had been ordained a priest.

When Vasek met with the bishop to speak about the sexual assault he endured years earlier, he says Hoeppner threatened to make life miserable for his son if he went public, and forced Vasek to sign a statement recanting his initial claim.

Vasek says he was bullied into this by a bishop more interested in cover-up than charity and said he signed it out of fear for what Hoeppner would do to his son, a fear that any father would have.

In May of 2017, about two years after this meeting, Vasek filed a civil suit against Hoeppner and the diocese, which, again, was settled in late September.

Hoeppner and the diocese insist that no cover-up or extortion was engaged in and claim they only settled the multi-million dollar suit to avoid further legal entanglements.

That wasn’t enough for Vasek, who said these settlement agreements, with their secrecy clauses and keeping things under wraps, need to be brought out and all of it exposed to the light of day. So he pushed forward, refusing to go along with any attempt to keep everything covered up.

A little bit of background on this whole story: A few months ago, Church Militant was invited by lay Catholics to the diocese of Crookston, Minnesota to partake in their Roman Catholic Revival Event.

The news that we were going to be in Crookston got back to the diocese, and Bp. Michael Hoeppner actually issued an official statement denouncing the event. He said that myself and Church Militant used “divisive” tactics, and that we were more “destructive” than fruitful.

Just days before our talk this same bishop — Bp. Michael Hoeppner — became the first bishop in the world to be investigated according to the pope’s new guidelines for allegedly covering up clerical sex abuse.

Now we have official deposition transcripts from top officials, documents from the files of several clergy sex offenders and the damning video testimony of the bishop himself!

Two months ago, while Church Militant was in Crookston, we sat down and interviewed Ron Vasek himself. And here now is that interview — and it is well worth the watch to understand all of the dynamics at play in these types of cases, multiplied thousands and thousands of times over by a corrupt clergy, more interested in themselves and their reputations than the truth and the victims.

(transcript unavailable)

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.