I live in Sarasota, Florida. Two of the radical Islamic terrorists who flew planes on September 11, 2001 trained to fly at the Venice airport about 15 minutes from where I live. The flight trainor said that the two muslims he trained were not interested in learning how to land properly. Now I understand why!
The Facts About The September 11, 2001 Attack
On September 11, 2001, 19 militants associated with the extremist group al-Qaeda hijacked four commercial airliners in a coordinated suicide attack on targets in the United States.
The Attacks and Timeline
8:46 AM:American Airlines Flight 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City.
9:03 AM:United Airlines Flight 175 crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center.
9:37 AM: American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the west side of the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia.
9:59 AM:The World Trade Center’s South Tower collapsed.
10:03 AM: United Airlines Flight 93 crashed into a field in Stonycreek Township near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Passengers fought back after learning of the earlier strikes, forcing the hijackers to crash the plane before reaching its intended target, believed to be the U.S. Capitol or the White House.
10:28 AM:The World Trade Center’s North Tower collapsed.
Casualties and Impact
Loss of Life:2,977 victims died in the attacks, alongside the 19 hijackers.This included 2,753 people at the World Trade Center, 184 at the Pentagon, and 40 aboard Flight 93.
First Responders:The casualties included 343 firefighters and 72 law enforcement officers, making it the deadliest day for first responders in U.S. history.
Perpetrators: The attack was orchestrated by al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. 15 of the 19 hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia, two were from the United Arab Emirates, one was from Egypt, and one was from Lebanon.
Global Consequences: The attacks prompted the United States to launch the Global War on Terrorism, invade Afghanistan, establish the Department of Homeland Security, and drastically reform aviation security through the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
Never Forget What Happened 25 Years Ago and Who Did It!
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/NEVER-FORGET-9-11-2.jpg360640Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)2026-09-06 14:41:482026-09-06 14:56:28The Facts About The September 11, 2001 Attack — Never Forget!
Sami Winc: Let’s turn then to somebody who’s not a lunatic, Scott Bessent, our treasury secretary. And he had a couple of things this week. One, he is engaging in a new Operation Economic Outcast, where he is continuing new sanctions, sanctions on bank and finance entities with Iran.
And I think that’s interesting to me because it seems like just about every two or three weeks he announces an operation of this kind. And maybe our audience knows a little bit more, but it seems like they find new things all the time, countries that are helping Iran, finances that Iran has access to that they can cut off, and he’s always got something new on the horizon.
I was wondering if you had any thoughts on that.
Victor Davis Hanson: I think the problem was that on Feb. 28, when they finally unloaded on them after the fruitless negotiations, and they did overwhelming damage with the Israelis, that they were going to collapse.
But they were like Japan after Okinawa in July. Japan was done for. Their harbors were mined. Their cities, 60% of which were hollowed out by the B-29. They had no control of their own airspace. Battleships sent salvos into their shores with impunity. Submarines wouldn’t let anybody go in or out. But they lasted all of July and all the way up to the atomic bomb. So it was very hard to make them give up.
So, you need a shock. So, we thought they were going to surrender, but this is a theocratic, unhinged regime that just killed 30,000 to 40,000 of their own people. They don’t care. So, their attitude is the Americans stopped, so we’ll negotiate.
And, by the way, not all the countries are following the blockade or embargo. And they will never enforce it because people like the Spanish, the North Koreans, the Chinese, the Russians, and we have rail links on land that haven’t been touched. We have airports. So, we don’t get all of our stuff out or in just by sea.
And we kept thinking it was hurting them, the embargo and sanctions. And then finally people said if you can’t trust these people, the 60-day memorandum of understanding was a joke. And they had a lot of, as people say, there’s a lot of rot left in an institution.
So, what I’m getting at is each time they make a pronouncement, somebody tells them you can do it better than that. So, now we are embargoing and sanctioning not just them from trading, but people who trade with them.
So, in theory, if we find out the Chinese are sending missiles, say, then we’re not going to deal with China. That would bankrupt China. We’ll see how that goes.
And then, secondly, we’re trying to tell the world that these theocrats that feel that any day they would like to be in heaven with 72 virgins are unhinged, but at another time they’re savvy business people, and they’re greedy and they have luxury estates in London and Paris and property and vineyards. And we are going to trace every single one and confiscate it, and that’s going to hurt them.
There are people who have been writing that the problem that we’re going to have is that, since the currency is worth nothing more than wastepaper, and there’s no oil getting out for revenue, and even being pumped in some cases for gasoline because they need spare parts and they don’t produce their own oil and gas. It all has to be imported. Everything in that country has got to be imported except drones, and even those components have to be imported.
And so, now, after March, April, May, June, July, August, six months, they’re running out of parts and the whole thing is starting to grind to a halt.
So, now the existential question is, [President Donald] Trump said yesterday those people have to rise up and fight. Which is greater: the fear of being slaughtered as in the past, because these people will kill 40,000 more, or the idea you’re going to starve to death or you’re going to not just be confined in your home and you’ll have no air conditioning, no heating, with winter coming on?
And that’s what we’re worried about. There are people who say, “What are you going to do, Trump, when they can’t eat?”
And the government likes that because they think that you’ll ease up. They’re using their own people in the way that Hamas uses people to shield their tunnels and mosques, schools, and hospitals. They’re doing the same thing on a national scale. They’re using their own people that are pro-American and we like, and they’re saying, you can do what you want, but they’re going to die before we are, and that’s a problem.
Trump’s attitude, as I said, is kind of the anaconda, and it’s trying to make the war livable by basically saying we’ve got it down now so we don’t have to do kinetic action very much. It’s expensive. We’ve tragically lost 17, but we’re not going to really lose any more people.
The price of oil goes between $70 and $90, but 9 million. Everybody said they’re lying. It can’t be 9 million barrels. We found out this week there are 9 million barrels getting out, and there will be 15 million very quickly on pipelines to the Mediterranean, the Gulf of Oman, and the Red Sea.
So, what I’m getting at is Trump is basically saying, I can sustain this and it’s a war, but it’s not a war. Everybody says it’s a war. We’re losing it. No, it’s not a war. It’s sanctions now. It’s like the blockade of Cuba in 1962. How long did that last? They couldn’t withstand that.
So, that’s what we’re doing, and as long as we’re not spending a great deal of money, we are, but not like a real war, and we’re not getting people killed, it’s sustainable. But it’s not sustainable for them.
What the Left is terrified of, both the European Left, Canadian Left, and the American Left, is a scenario like this. Everybody should listen very carefully.
So, everybody is saying Trump, as in the Republicans, are generically down eight points and they may lose the Senate, maybe even get the Democrats to a Senate-seat majority, and they’re going to lose the House.
And then, on Oct. 20, guess what? The people come out. Thousands of them are starving in Iran and they head for the Iranian National Islamic Guard Corps, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and they go in there and they get in a pitched fight and they win. And it’s like jubilation. And they have pro-U.S. signs.
That is what everybody’s afraid of. If that happens two weeks before the election, then all bets are off for the Democrats because at the cost that we paid to get rid of a 50-year existential threat that everybody said was impossible to get rid of and it would be another Vietnam or Iraq, to get that out with no bomb, and then not just to get rid of them but to have them pro-American, basically the most sophisticated, largest population except for Egypt, biggest area, pro-American on both sides of the Gulf.
Can you imagine what that would do to Hamas and the Houthis and Hezbollah? They would be flat broke forever. It would free Lebanon. It would empower Syria. That could happen.
So, that’s what they’re really worried about. I would say the odds of that happening are 30-70.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.
Really, what did you expect? Besides hating and plotting to murder infidels, there is something else that Islamic jihadis and their allies and enablers do with furious consistency: They never, ever take responsibility for their actions. Every jihad massacre, if they admit it happened at all and don’t stick to the claim that the whole incident is a media invention, is someone else’s fault. And of course they have a favorite group that they love to blame above all others for all the atrocities that they and their brethren in the faith commit. Yeah, you guessed it.
After all, the Qur’an says: “You will find the Jews and the idolaters the most vehement of mankind in hostility to those who believe” (5:82), so it’s only natural that Muslims would blame Jews for virtually everything. If they’re “the most vehement of mankind in hostility” to the Muslims, they must be trying to disrupt and destroy the lives of Muslims whenever and however they can, and the Qur’an and Islamic tradition are full of passages that reflect this view. So why wouldn’t they have staged 9/11 in order to bring down the full weight of “Islamophobia” upon Muslims?
The Jerusalem Post reported Sunday that the New Jersey chapter of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), to which the Post naively refers as “the US’s largest Muslim charity,” has advocated “teaching students that the 9/11 terror attacks were due to ‘America’s support of Israel’ and said, ‘terrorism is defined differently by different groups of people.’” Of course. Anything but admitting that the hijackers were Islamic jihadis acting in line with Islamic texts and teachings, killing unbelievers in accord with Allah’s command to “kill them wherever you find them” (Qur’an 2:191, 4:89, 4:91, cf. 9:5) in service of the overall objective of destabilizing and destroying the United States, the world’s foremost infidel polity.
The guide also “contains advice for Muslim students regarding their religious rights in schools, a section on ‘Discussing Palestine in the classroom,’ and a page on ‘Muslim Studies: 9/11.’ The page reads: ‘The catastrophic events of 9/11 catapulted the Global War on Terror, marking an aggressive shift in US domestic and foreign policy and an erosion of civil liberties through the Patriot Act, which practically targeted Muslims. The 9/11 attacks also marked a renewed and egregious ‘othering’ of Muslims and those who may appear to be Muslim, which has been evident in mainstream media, on campaign trails, in literature and advertising, and even in the classroom.”
In other words, “Muslims murder nearly 3,000 people, and Muslims are the real victims.” There was nothing, of course, in Hamas-linked CAIR’s guide about Islam’s jihad imperative, or the increasingly common boasts from Muslims in the U.S. about their imminent takeover. Nothing about law enforcement and intelligence officials actually dealing with a genuine threat. Instead, it seems as if CAIR wants students to assume that 9/11 had nothing to do with the hijackers’ Muslim identity, and that Muslims were cruelly scapegoated as a result. CAIR also, of course, is silent about how the Muslim population of the U.S. more than doubled during the period of the “egregious ‘othering’ of Muslims.”
And so this is how the guide described what happened on September 11, 2001: “A group self-identifying as al-Qaeda hailing from the mountains of Afghanistan launched separate plane hijackings that ended up in different cities, causing the death of almost 3,000 people, and the resulting debris from the fallen towers caused lasting health issues in first responders.” So we apparently can’t even be sure that they were really al-Qaeda.
The Post states that the guide “then cites the 9/11 Commission Report as saying that al-Qaeda ‘launched the attacks in response to America’s support of Israel, their involvement in the Persian Gulf War, and the vast presence of the US military in the Middle East.’ It is important to note that while page 362 of the report does identify US support for Israel and American military presence in the Middle East as among the grievances that helped fuel al-Qaeda’s extremism, it at no point says 9/11 was in response to these things.”
Indeed, because it wasn’t. In his 1996 Declaration of Jihad against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holiest Sites, Osama bin Laden said that “the worst catastrophe that was inflicted upon the Moslems since the death of the Prophet” was “the occupation of the land of the two holiest sites, Islam’s own grounds, the cradle of Islam, source of the Prophet’s mission, site of the Ka’bah.” Osama was primarily enraged because U.S. troops had entered Saudi Arabia in order to fight Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
The guide “also suggests students read the full text of Bin Laden’s ‘Letter to America,’ which is hard to find online now after it became a TikTok craze in 2023 and the Guardian removed it from its website. But in that letter, Osama wrote: “What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you? The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam…. It is the religion of Jihad in the way of Allah so that Allah’s Word and religion reign Supreme.”
“Allah Word and religion” may only “reign Supreme” in this view when the fullness of Islamic law is imposed and enforced in society. That would requirement the replacement of the U.S. Constitution with Sharia.
After this guide brought unwanted attention to the unsavory gang of pro-jihad thugs who produced it, CAIR hastily revised it, and added this note: “An earlier version of the document did not go through proper vetting and included a link to a primary source document that was removed in November 2025.” Yeah, sure, CAIR, you’ve changed all your views now. Pull my other leg.
The New York City chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America is trading its worn-down headquarters for two upscale offices that will run $22,000 a month.
The socialist group is abandoning its Lower East Side base in favor of new spaces in Midtown and Bed-Stuy, according to the New York Post. Co-chair Grace Mausser laid out the plan for members at a recent meeting while walking them through the chapter’s budget.
The Manhattan location sits inside a 14-story building on West 35th Street and comes with a doorman, round-the-clock security and a furnished rooftop, the Post reported. That office alone will cost $15,000 monthly, making it the chapter’s biggest recurring bill behind leadership pay.
The timing lands weeks after the chapter agreed to start cutting six-figure paychecks to its top two officers. Members approved annual salaries of $95,000 plus benefits for Mausser and co-chair Gustavo Gordillo, who had both served as unpaid volunteers, according to City & State New York. The Citywide Leadership Committee cleared the resolution by a 51-10 vote. Those salaries and benefits will total roughly $20,000 a month against monthly revenue of about $84,700.
The chapter routinely attacks landlords, yet its new Manhattan home belongs to the Chetrit family, one of the city’s largest developers, which has drawn class-action complaints from Brooklyn tenants over alleged violations of rent-stabilization rules, according to the Post.
“Nothing says ‘we hate capitalism’ like sitting in a high-rise Midtown boardroom cosplaying as extras in Succession,” former NYC Council minority leader Joe Borelli told the Post.
The Brooklyn addition gives the group its first outpost in the borough at another $7,000 a month. The two-story Bed-Stuy space carries central air and what its listing calls the feel of a high-end artist loft. DSA leadership set a goal of raising $20,000 in monthly donations to renovate and sustain offices across the city, according to the organization’s fundraising page. The chapter later lifted its overall target to $100,000 and has pulled in more than $68,000 so far, according to the Post.
The upgrade replaces a cramped Jefferson Street room with red-painted walls that cost $5,200 a month. The chapter scrapped a meeting there last week over a leak.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Cosplaying-As-Extras-In-Succession.jpg360640The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2026-09-06 04:16:532026-09-06 04:21:41‘Cosplaying As Extras In Succession’: DSA Reportedly Shelling Out $22,000 A Month For Two New Luxury Offices
We were stuck by a post on X by Visegrád 24 stating, “The Gays for Gaza activist Cameron Capara has been shot dead in a random attack in front a gay bar in Tucson by an Islamist migrant from Gambia. The gay pro-Palestine activist was killed on August 31st along with a gay friend he had just left the bar with.”
Here’s the picture of the “Gays for Gaza” activist Cameron Capara and the Islamist migrant from Gambia Ousman Ceesay:
As we are just six days away from the attack on 9/11/2001 here’s the history of Islamists attacks.
We decided to remind our readers about the history of Muslim attacks in the USA.
Major terrorist attacks in the United States motivated by Islamist/jihadist ideology between 1990 and 2026 include:
1990s
1993 World Trade Center Bombing (Feb 26, 1993): A truck bomb was detonated below the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City. Six people were killed and over 1,000 were injured.
1997 Empire State Building Shooting (Feb 23, 1997): Palestinian gunman Ali Hassan Abu Kamal opened fire on the 86th-floor observation deck, killing one person and injuring six others before dying by suicide.
2000s
September 11 Attacks (Sep 11, 2001):Nineteen al-Qaeda hijackers commandeered four commercial airliners, crashing them into the World Trade Center towers, the Pentagon, and a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.The attacks killed 2,977 people and injured thousands.
2002 Seattle Jewish Federation Shooting (Jul 28, 2006): Naveed Afzal Haq opened fire at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle, killing one person and injuring five others.
2009 Little Rock Recruiting Office Shooting (Jun 1, 2009):Abdulhakim Muhammad opened fire on a U.S. military recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas, killing one soldier and wounding another.
2009 Fort Hood Shooting (Nov 5, 2009): U.S. Army Major Nidal Hasan opened fire at the Fort Hood processing center in Texas, killing 13 people and injuring more than 30.
2010s
2013 Boston Marathon Bombing (Apr 15, 2013):Brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev detonated two pressure-cooker bombs near the finish line of the Boston Marathon, killing 3 people and injuring over 260.
2014 New York City Hatchet Attack (Oct 23, 2014): Zale H. Thompson attacked four NYPD officers with a hatchet in Queens, injuring two before being shot dead.
2015 Garland Attack (May 3, 2015): Two gunmen inspired by ISIS opened fire outside a Curtis Culwell Center event in Garland, Texas, injuring a security guard before being killed by police.
2015 Chattanooga Shootings (Jul 16, 2015): Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez opened fire at two military facilities in Chattanooga, Tennessee, killing four U.S. Marines and a Navy sailor.
2015 San Bernardino Attack (Dec 2, 2015): Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik carried out a mass shooting at the Inland Regional Center in California, killing 14 people and injuring 22.
2016 Pulse Nightclub Shooting (Jun 12, 2016): Omar Mateen pledged allegiance to ISIS before opening fire inside the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, killing 49 people and wounding 53.
2016 St. Cloud Mall Stabbing (Sep 17, 2016): Dahir Adan carried out a mass stabbing at a shopping mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota, injuring 10 people before being killed by an off-duty officer.
2016 Ohio State University Attack (Nov 28, 2016): Abdul Razak Ali Artan rammed pedestrians with a car and used a butcher knife to attack people on campus, injuring 11 before being killed.
2017 New York City Truck Attack (Oct 31, 2017): Sayfullo Saipov drove a rental truck down a bike path in Lower Manhattan, killing 8 people and injuring 12 in the name of ISIS.
2019 Naval Air Station Pensacola Shooting (Dec 6, 2019): Mohammed Alshamrani, a Saudi aviation trainee inspired by al-Qaeda, opened fire at the naval station, killing 3 people and injuring 8.
The Bottom Line
Concerns regarding antisemitic incidents, rhetoric, and political friction in New York City related to Zohran Mamdani focus on several key developments:
Key Incidents and Criticisms
Central Synagogue Incident (August 2026):Following an attack where a suspect disrupted services, struck a congregant, and spat on a guard at Manhattan’s Central Synagogue, critics and local community members held rallies accusing the administration’s rhetoric of fostering hostility toward Jewish institutions.
Park East Synagogue Protest (Late 2025):Protesters gathered outside the Manhattan synagogue chanting hostile slogans.The administration faced criticism for a statement that addressed both the protest language and the use of sacred spaces for political events, which opponents argued drew a false equivalence.
Neighborhood Demonstrations:Tensions arose during demonstrations outside various Jewish institutions and land-sale events in Brooklyn, leading to localized clashes and an increased police presence to separate rival demonstration groups.
Pro-Israel activists, community organizations, and political opponents argue that Mamdani’s vocal anti-Zionist positions, refusal to explicitly condemn phrases like “globalize the intifada,” and public calls to protest visiting Israeli leaders create a permissive environment for antisemitism and intimidation against Jewish residents.
Muslims like Mamdami follow shriah law that requires the the absolute domination of infidels, non-Muslims.
As we approach the 2026 mid-term elections many Muslim candidates are on the Democrat Socialist Party’s nominees.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/terrorist-attacks-in-the-United-States-motivated-by-Islamist-jihadist-ideology.jpg360640Dr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Richard M. Swier, LTC U.S. Army (Ret.)2026-09-05 14:08:122026-09-06 05:40:38Muslim Terrorist Attacks in the United States — 1990 to 2026
Hasan Piker & Abdul El-Sayed have become the greatest comedy duo since Abbott & Costello.
Bud Abbott and Lou Costello thrived from 1935 to 1957 in burlesque, radio, motion pictures, and TV—from their beloved “Who’s on First?” routine to their “7 x 13 = 28” sketch. Abbott & Costello intended to be funny. They worked hard at it and became legends.
Piker and El-Sayed are comedy naturals. They effortlessly earn laughs, especially when they are unintentionally hilarious.
Their latest schtick is called “Hasan who?” While running as the Islamo-Socialist Democrat nominee for U.S. Senate in Michigan, El-Sayed pretends not to know Piker and forgets the über-divisive, hard-left podcaster’s initial, affectionate, and touching words:
“Abdul El-Sayed is my guy, right? He’s a Rhodes Scholar. He’s a doctor. He’s a stud, too,” Piker swooned on “The Breakfast Club” on June 16. “He can do three plates on the bench press. And, I mean, that’s beside the point, but, you know, I like that personally.”
As for wooing voters with El-Sayed, Piker gushed, “He reached out to me. He said, ‘Oh, let’s go. Let’s do a campaign rally together.’ And I had already done stuff with him. I traveled to Dearborn. We worked out, played basketball—all this stuff.”
Piker and El-Sayed did even more stuff. Seemingly inseparable, they appeared jointly at campaign events, lifted weights together, and chuckled about men’s fashion at a pool party the day before the Aug. 4 Democrat primary.
Piker cheered at El-Sayed’s election night celebration.
But, ironically, El-Sayed’s victory intensified scrutiny of his relationship with Piker. Americans learned that Piker outrageously said, “America deserved 9/11,” “I would vote for Hamas over Israel every single time,” and much more.
Suddenly, El-Sayed was not that into Piker. El-Sayed told NBC’s Kristen Welker on the August 9 “Meet the Press”: “I’m less concerned now with who I’m campaigning with and a lot more concerned about who I’m campaigning to.”
Signaling that he and Piker had grown apart, El-Sayed told Semafor’s Nicholas Wu on Aug. 26 that he had “no plans” to campaign again with Piker and ridiculed their defunct partnership: “The effort to make this race about a streamer in LA is actually kind of laughable.”
Since then, Piker has scored big laughs as a jilted-boyfriend type who ignores El-Sayed’s ghosting, listens to the silence of his non-phone calls, and yet dreams that the two never have been closer.
“He asked me to stump for him,” Piker recalled Aug. 28, also via Semafor. “I’ve already had the guy on, like, a hundred times on the broadcast. You know, I’ve fundraised for him. I like him a lot.”
El-Sayed dissed Piker anew on Aug. 29.
“I don’t want to have a conversation about a Twitch streamer in California,” El-Sayed told journalists in Lansing, Michigan. “That’s just not a serious conversation.”
The towering Piker soon chased down the fire-plug-like El-Sayed, and threw his long, loving arms around him. Piker then rebuked critics who, he claims, have mischaracterized his and El-Sayed’s previous comments. “ … At the same time they were doing it to me, and they did it to Abdul,” Piker told Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti on their Sept. 1 “Breaking Points” podcast.
Piker also applauded El-Sayed’s apologies for some of his earlier, provocative remarks: “I hope that people see that as humility and grace and understand that he’s not this like scary Islamist, jihadist guy that he’s being presented as.”
Audiences are roaring, from Denver to Detroit and from Manhattan Island to Mackinac Island. (As it happens, El-Sayed slammed the Northern Michigan vacation spot in a hot-mic knee-slapper: “I hate Mackinac SO much,” he said in 2020. “Every time I’ve ever come here, I’ve hated it. Why am I here?”)
Piker & El-Sayed are expected to dominate the airwaves through Tuesday, Nov. 3. After that, they either will be picked up for six years or canceled and soon forgotten.
Now that’s comedy.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.
They will be using reporting requirements on government programs.
The new standard put forward by the Justice depart is stated as such: when a state chooses to participate in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs, all agencies within that state — not only those that administer TANF or SSI benefits — must report individuals known to be not lawfully present in the United States to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (Justice).
The Justice department has withdrawn a Clinton-era memorandum that did not require states to report who is receiving government assistance. Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt (R) summarizes: Sanctuary cities just lost one of their favorite loopholes. States taking federal welfare money cannot order their police, DMVs, or others to hide known illegal aliens from DHS. Sanctuary jurisdictions must obey federal law or lose federal funding (Schmitt).
The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel’s opinion withdraws a Clinton-era opinion that only required the welfare programs themselves to report undocumented migrants.
The Justice Department announced Wednesday that it has released a new legal opinion that clarifies state reporting requirements of illegal migrants who are enrolled in welfare programs, such as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel’s opinion withdraws a Clinton-era opinion that only required the welfare programs themselves to report undocumented migrants. The new one widens that to make it necessary for all states enrolled in TANF or the Supplemental Security Income program.
“Congress wrote this requirement plainly,” Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel said in a statement. “When a state chooses to participate in TANF, it accepts the obligation to report illegal aliens in the United States.
“Tax dollars intended to help vulnerable Americans should not perversely encourage illegal entry into the United States, but rather should reinforce our laws and our borders,” he added.
The department clarified that the new requirement will only affect states moving forward, and will not be retroactive.
All 50 states, Washington, D.C., and several U.S. territories currently participate in TANF and SSI. Federal TANF funding grants exceed $16.4 billion annually.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/In-Historic-Shift-DOJ-Threatens-Billions-in-Cuts.jpg432640The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2026-09-05 06:37:242026-09-05 06:38:11In Historic Shift DOJ Threatens Billions in Cuts to States Refusing to Report Illegals
‘Why Jews Must Support Man Who Said “I like to kill Jews.”
When it comes to some areas, the media has gone so far in on political advocacy that it filters out, rejects and suppresses any contradictory facts and no amount of appeals to truth or decency will change the lines that it insists on telling.
One such area was the endorsement of pro-Hamas campus activism after Oct 7 where, despite ample evidence that the ‘activists’ supported Hamas and wanted to kill Jews, the media along with leftists and even most Democrats decided to falsely claim that these were “non-violent student activists” facing a “crackdown on pro-Palestinian speech” and turned foreign Islamic activists calling for terrorism and the murder of Jews into ‘martyrs’ who had to be protected from deportation.
told a gun shop owner “that he had considerable firearm experience” and used guns to “kill Jews while he was in Palestine.”
Another member of the community recalled Mahdawi stating “I like to kill Jews.”
In a police report, a concerned individual reported that Mahdawi requested to purchase a sniper rifle and a machine gun. He also claimed that he said he used to make guns for Hezbollah
Mahdawi told 60 Minutes that he could empathize with the Hamas atrocities of Oct 7. He also wrote a poem celebrating a terrorist that contained the words, “I will breathe home… / And fill my shame / And clean my gun / And collect my packages, my bombs / And embrace my gun…”
He Wanted Peace in the Middle East. ICE Wants to Deport Him – NY Times
Why Jews must support Mohsen Mahdawi – The Forward
‘This is a light of hope’: Mohsen Mahdawi says release shows democracy is functioning – PBS
There’s a new report authored by David Collier with more information about Mahdawi’s peacefulness…
It is 2010 – his patience is wearing thin – and he promises that “soon, very soon, we will annihilate the Jews”
Mahdawi is now on U.S soil, but that does not stop him. Mahdawi explicitly praises the armed wings of Hamas and Islamic Jihad – calling them lions and describing those pursuing resistance abroad as “mere dwarves.”
Is this going to change anything?
Sadly no, the media is in full on Goebbels mode and will keep on repeating its Big Lie. Democrat politicians will rally for Mahdawi and their judges will protect him. The pro-Hamas movement is now part of the ‘resistance’ and nothing it does, no matter how evil, will meet with anything other than support and glamorization from the media and the liberal groups which have embraced the message, “very soon, we shall annihilate the Jews” as a message of peace.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Mohsen-Mahdawi-JW.jpg372640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2026-09-05 06:14:372026-09-06 06:21:17The New York Times Said He ‘Wanted Peace,’ He Said He Wanted to ‘Annihilate the Jews’
While I was born into a non-practicing Shiite Muslim family in Iran, as children, no one within the family forced Islam down our throats. In other words, in my younger days in Iran, I had never been exposed to Islam at all, except by observation. I think I speak for many Iranians as well.
Most Iranians truly did not know what ‘real’ Islam was until after the invasion of 1979, the Islamic Revolution. To be exact, until Ayatollah Khomeini set foot in Iran and took the genie out of the bottle for everyone to see the ‘true’ Islam.
The type of Islam Iranians practiced during the time of the Shah did not even exist at all. It was only a fiction or a fantasy manufactured out of whole cloth. Some people in Iran, however, are still in disbelief and refuse to accept that true Islam is not what Ayatollah Khomeini introduced in 1979.
As humans, we know religion casts a huge shadow on everything in life. Like other humans, I, too, had to deal with this enigma and couldn’t simply just set it aside. And Islam, the Shiite Islam was the most pervasive religion around. I wanted to know more about this ‘religion,’ beyond the textbooks. In our schools, we were forced to memorize a few non-violent Surah (verses) from the Meccan period when prophet Muhammad’s beliefs and sayings were relatively innocuous.
Short Reminder
To polish Islam’s image, Muslim apologists usually quote verses from the Quran that were written in the early days of the Islamic movement while Muhammad lived in Mecca. Those passages make Islam appear loving and harmless because they call for love, peace and patience. This is a deception. The apologists fail to tell the gullible masses that such verses, though still in the Quran, were nullified, abrogated and rendered void by later passages that incite killing, decapitations, maiming, terrorism and religious intolerance. The latter verses were penned while Muhammad’s headquarters were based in Medina.
I still recall what my high school history teacher told us in our class. He explicitly said that the Islamic creed was imposed on an enlightened, tolerant and free Iranian people at the point of the sword. For me, that was the defining moment to start to find out for myself.
Findings
I came to the realization that the root cause of Iranian peoples’ degradation and suffering was Islam. I found out that it was an ideology imposed on a sophisticated, tolerant and free people at the point of the sword by savages hailing from the Arabian Peninsula during the seventh century, with promises of booty and women in this world and glorious eternal sensual rewards in the promised paradise of Allah in the next.
Even at this very young age, things Islamic did not resonate with me, and often clashed head-on with what I valued and loved in life. I realized Iranian Muslims were victims of the Islamic invasion of centuries ago that was imposed on their ancestors through Jihad.
Ironically, Iran was never Islamized. Why? I have come to understand it is the Iranian ancient fundamental belief in the validity and value of diversity that is enshrined in the Cyrus the Great Cylinder, the unconditional respect for complete rights of all people of the world (anathema to the Islamists’ credo) that has held the nation together over the millennia. Without that, Iran, though not Arab, would become like another Arab nation, like Egypt, Syria or Iraq.
Although Islam was imposed on Iran some 1,400 years ago, most Iranians still deeply value their own ancient non-Arab identity and have never fully surrendered to the Arab culture, even after 47 years of the non-stop Islamic cultural revolution, Islamic propaganda and indoctrination by the current regime.
Interesting Story
An Iranian journalist once asked Mohamed Hassanein Heikal (b. 1923), a famed Egyptian journalist, commentator, and a former editor of Al-Ahram, that “we Iranians were once invaded by the Arabs, just as you were, but we managed to keep our culture and the Persian language. So, why is that your language today is Arabic? You are not Arabs. What happened to your authentic culture?” Heikal answered, “Because we didn’t have a poet like your Ferdowsi.”
That would be the tenth-century Persian poet, the author of the epic book of Shahnameh (Book of Kings), who revived not only the Persian language, but also the Persian identity. Ferdowsi is known for his efforts to save the Persian language and its history from oblivion. It has been suggested that Ferdowsi is Iran’s Homer:
“Twice as long as Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, taken together, the Shahnameh blends Iran’s ancient myths and legends with accounts of major events in its past. Its 55,000 rhyming couplets chart the history of the Iranian world from its creation to the fall of the Persian Empire in the seventh century.”
Egypt, one of the crown jewels of the ancient world, rich in culture and filled with illustrious antiquities, has no memory of its glorious past. Unlike the Persians, the Egyptians became completely Arabized, and have little or no nostalgia for their ancient past. Islam has dominated the Egyptians’ lives.
Interestingly, the new generation in Iran is eager to distance itself from the Islamic credo and embrace the ancient creed of Zoroastrianism or even other religions. In fact, Christianity has become the fastest growing religion in Iran.
How did Islam Form?
From the primeval land of the Arabian Peninsula of over 14 centuries, ago rose a man by the name of Muhammad. An illiterate hired hand of a rich widow, Khadija, he claimed that he was the bearer of a perfect life prescription from Allah — the Quran. He claimed humanity could do no better than to follow its precepts, as well as to emulate Muhammad’s own life example for a guarantee of bliss and salvation. In exchange for this, people must embrace Islam — surrender — by surrendering their liberty to Muhammad.
“Christianity has become the fastest growing religion in Iran.”
To this day, in places where Islam rules, many books are banned, newspapers and magazines are systematically either censored or shut down, and other non-print media are methodically blocked. Liberty, deeply cherished by free people, is replaced by submission — unquestioning obedience and adherence to the dictates and precepts of the all-knowing and all-wise Allah.
In no time at all, the savages of Arabia, won over by the allure of the win-win promise of Muhammad — you kill and you get the booty from your victims in this world; you get killed and your abode will be the unimaginably glorious sensuous paradise of Allah — sword-in-hand, sallied forth to lands near and far.
Present Time
Perhaps few people would deny any longer that Islam and its variants mean, in practice, bloody terrorism, deadly purges, lethal actions, forced hijabs, show trials and genocide. It is a widespread plague upon humanity. It is disguised as a religion and has penetrated the Western system of government with the aim of replacing civility and liberty with the barbarism of Sharia Law.
It is Muslims, Muslim organizations and the radical left who are guilty of dissimulation and fraud. Muslims act meekly when they lack sufficient power. Once in power, ‘Real Islam’ emerges from its shell of dissimulation and puts free people and their way of life to the sword.
Conclusion
I have never practiced nor embraced Islam at any time in my life. In fact, I looked at it as an invader and found it to be my solemn duty to expose this fraud of a religion, help other Muslims to free themselves from it, and warn the good-hearted and gullible non-Muslims against falling prey to it.
Islamdom is at a crossroad. Millions in Iran, a hugely important force of sustaining and fanning the Islamic fire, have already turned and are turning against the Islamic credo. They and the rest of the world need to hear the voices of secular decent people who are in league with them and can help to put Islam, the very spawning swamp of the deadly virus that makes for jihadists, out of business.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Amil-Imani-2.jpg359640Amil Imanihttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAmil Imani2026-09-05 04:48:242026-09-06 04:06:41My breach with Islam started as far back as I could understand things. More to the point, I never embraced Islam in the first place and I speak for many Iranians.
Regular readers of this column know that I have become a big fan of Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.
For many months I have been saying that Treasury’s efforts, under his direction, to undermine the Iranian regime’s ability to access international financial markets are a critical complement to our overall campaign against Tehran.
For sure, if our military had not totally disabled Iran’s air defenses and taken out huge numbers of missile launchers and production plants, our allies in the Gulf would be in a world of hurt. But if Treasury can pull off its plan to isolate Iran from international financial markets, the regime is likely to collapse.
This week, Bessent got a big assist from the European Union, which formally signed on to Operational Economic Outcast during talks at the G20 summit of finance ministers in Asheville, NC.
Europe has long had sanctions aimed at cutting off supplies to Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs, but frankly that was mere lip service given that Germany, France, the UK, and Italy are largely responsible for having built the dual-use industrial base in Iran that allowed the regime to grow its military capabilities so dramatically over the past decade.
Bessent was effusive in his praise of the Euros this week. “We appreciate their strong and early stance,” he posted to social media on Thursday. “The world is sending a clear message to the Iranian regime: We will not stop until every remaining financial lifeline has been severed.”
But I would like to see the Euros take real action, starting by closing down all branches of Iran’s national bank — Bank Melli — which Bessent ticked off as an action item when he unveiled Operation Economic Outcast on August 24.
I’d like to see the Euros actually seize those “hundred million dollar mansions” owned by top Iranian regime leaders that Bessent said Treasury has located around the world. I’d like to see them shut down companies and banks owned by Iranian operatives or through Iranian shell companies, instead of allowing them to operate as domestic entities, as happens often in Germany and France.
The North Carolina confab gave Bessent the opportunity to have one-on-one meetings with his G20 counterparts, so he could lay out chapter and verse on the Iranian assets in each of their countries.
And remember: Economic Outcast is sweeping. In addition to all the earlier sanctions against Iranian banks, oil, construction, mining, and manufacturing companies, Treasury is now targeting five additional sectors of the Iranian economy: aviation, digital assets, gold, shipping, and technology.
Example; Iran is the world’s fifth largest gold consumer in the world. In 2022, it cut import tariffs on gold to zero “to facilitate the return of funds held abroad due to US sanctions,” according to a report from the Italian Trade & Investment Agency. It was believed to have imported around 200 million tons of gold between March 2024 to March 2025 (the Iranian year begins on March 21).
Iran’s main gold suppliers have been China, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. But that’s just for semi-open gold purchases. Iran also operates a sophisticated oil-for-gold barter system to get around the international banking system where Treasury closely monitors its operations.
Already in April, Treasury exposed and sanctioned an IRGC-Quds Force network that smuggled Iranian oil to the Maduro regime in Venezuela in exchange for gold they shipped back to Iran or sold through intermediaries in Turkey.
Much of the illicit oil was moved through dozens of companies controlled by Iranian shipping magnate Mohammad Hossein Shamkhani, the son of the now-deceased secretary of Iran’s Supreme Council on National Defense.
Since Shamkhani’s demise, his replacement, Mohsen Rezai, appears to have transferred the oil smuggling networks to his surviving son, Ali Rezai.
The younger Rezai was identified in an Iran International investigation earlier this year as one of nine “trustees” who managed the regime’s illicit oil sales, and who now stand accused of having pocketed $11 billion of the proceeds instead of returning them to the Iranian state treasury.
“Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive.” — Sir Walter Scott.
Many Republicans facing tough re-election bids in November are sweating bricks over the continuation of the Iran war.
That may be why Vice President JD Vance told the White House press corps on Thursday that we are no longer “at war” with Iran. I guess we are just mowing the grass, as the Israelis used to say of periodic air strikes against Hamas.
But those Republicans are going to have to grow a spine and explain to their voters why we are in this fight, and why it is absolutely critical to the future of their families and this country. They are going to have to learn, and explain, why the Iranian nuclear weapons program is a threat to America, and to applaud President Trump for being the only American leader to take decisive action to destroy it once and for all.
When Iranian regime leaders chant “Death to America,” they are not just exercising their vocal cords. They mean it. And nuclear weapons were the means they had chosen to carry out that threat.
I discuss these subjects, as well as Putin’s meeting in Kyrgyzstan this week with Iranian president Massoud Pezeshkian, and Europe’s energy woes, on this week’s Prophecy Today Weekend.
As always, you can listen live at 1 PM on Saturday in the Jacksonville, Florida, area on 104.9 FM or 550 AM, or by using the Jacksonville Way Radio app. Later, you can listen to the podcast here.
Ken Timmerman’s 14th book of non-fiction, THE IRAN HOUSE: Tales of Revolution, Persecution, War, and Intrigue,can be ordered by clicking here or by viewing my author’s page, here.
Raising Olives in Provence, can be ordered by clicking here.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Europe-Timmerman.jpg360640Kenneth R. Timmermanhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngKenneth R. Timmerman2026-09-04 13:36:442026-09-04 13:42:34Europe Signs On!
Reclassifying the Islamic Paradigm: Constitutional Supremacy, Parallel Legal Systems, and the Limits of First Amendment Protections
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution establishes protections for liberty of conscience, private devotion, and voluntary spiritual association. It was never designed, intended, or structured to grant an extraterritorial legal shield to foreign or non-territorial geopolitical governance systems operating to supplant domestic constitutional authority.
When analyzing an ideology, the State is not bound by the group’s self-selected labels; rather, the state retains the authority to examine its structural, functional, and operational realities. As established in Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333, 342 (1970), the judiciary may distinguish between protected, deeply held religious beliefs and non-protected “essentially political, sociological, or philosophical views.”
By applying standard American constitutional principles to the foundational, authoritative legal texts (Fiqh), international charters, and modern strategic documents of Islam, an absolute legal paradigm emerges: Islam does not operate as a private religion. Because there is no Islam without Sharia, and no Sharia that does not mandate a continuous geopolitical effort by Dar al-Islam (the Domain of Islam) to legally, institutionally, and territorially supplant Dar al-Harb (the Domain of Secular Law), the system functions structurally as an expansionist sovereign state order.
Consequently, active adherence to this paradigm sets up an irreconcilable conflict with Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution (The Supremacy Clause). Under standard common law principles and constitutional jurisprudence, this analysis outlines the unified legal case for stripping the Islamic system of religious non-profit protections and barring its submitters from executing the constitutional oath of public office or exercising franchise rights.
Defining the Legal Framework: Islam, Muslim, and Sharia Under Authoritative Sources
To ground this framework in objective jurisprudence, the state must define the target of regulation using the precise legal terminology found within the ideology’s own primary sources, international declarations, and domestic parochial curricula.
The Etymological and Juridical Meaning of “Islam” and “Muslim”
In classical Arabic and sacred legal text, the word Islam is a noun denoting “absolute submission” or “complete surrender.” Correspondingly, a Muslim is characterized textually and operationally as “one who submits” to that authority without reservation.
According to Reliance of the Traveller (Book A: Introduction to Sacred Knowledge, Section a4.0; Book O: Justice), a Muslim is legally defined as an individual who has reached maturity, possesses sanity, and has bound themselves to the execution of the sacred Law (Sharia). The primary texts establish that this bond represents a complete surrender of individual autonomy to a predetermined legal order.
The Indivisibility of Faith, Law, and Statecraft
Traditional Islamic jurisprudence rejects the modern Western concept of a separation between private faith and public law. Under Reliance of the Traveller (Book O: Justice, Section o1.0–o2.0), faith (Aqeedah), law (Sharia), and statecraft (Siyasah) are structurally indivisible:
The Legislative Prerogative (Hukm): Belongs exclusively to the divine authority, meaning human legislative bodies like Congress or state assemblies commit an act of fundamental illegitimacy by creating man-made laws.
The Constitutional Status of a Believer: An individual who actively identifies as a Muslim accepts Sharia as their supreme, unalterable legal and political constitution.
The Status of Secular Frameworks: Adhering to a system that functions as a comprehensive civil, commercial, and penal code means that a Muslim acknowledges an independent, transnational authority that overrides any municipal law or secular constitution.
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) as a Transnational Caliphate
The global posture of Islam is formally unified through the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), an international confederation consisting of 57 member states, including all 56 Islamic sovereign nations and Palestine. Acting as a de facto global governing body or modern Caliphate, the OIC represents a unified Islamic geopolitical entity that asserts legal jurisdiction over the worldwide community of believers (the Ummah (nation)).
The OIC executed a binding international legal notice via the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (1990), formally presented to the United Nations. In Articles 24 and 25, the Cairo Declaration explicitly dictates that all civil liberties, human rights, and legal limitations are strictly subordinate to the Islamic Sharia as its sole source of reference, thereby officially rejecting secular international law and Western constitutional supremacy on behalf of the entire Islamic world. Note: There is unanimous consensus on one Islamic Constitution aka Shariah.
Domestic Educational Subversion: What Islam Is All About
The primary textbook utilized across full-time and weekend Islamic parochial schools (madrassas) in North America—What Islam Is All About by Yahiya Emerick—reinforces this totalizing, non-religious state framework for American youth:
Explicit Rejection of Religious Classification:Chapter 2 of What Islam Is All About is explicitly titled in bold type “Islam is Not a Religion,” instructing students that Islam is an all-encompassing social, political, and judicial system rather than a private faith.
Sharia as the Unalterable Constitution: The textbook defines the Sharia as the supreme, unalterable constitution for human society and explicitly commands students that their primary allegiance belongs to the Sharia and the global Ummah (nation), rather than to the United States Constitution or American national identity.
Parallel Governance Architecture: What Islam Is All About directly compares the governance branches of the Western constitutional model to the structural components of an Islamic state:
The Judicial Branch is equated to the Qadi (Islamic Sharia Judge).
The Legislative Branch is equated to the Shura (Islamic Consultative Council governing under divine law).
The Executive Branch is equated to the Caliphate (the executive head of the global Islamic state, led by a male Khalifa tasked with establishing Sharia worldwide).
Under a standard legislative evaluation, a Muslim is not defined as an individual practicing a private, voluntary matter of conscience. Rather, a Muslim is characterized as a citizen-subject who has formally bound themselves to a parallel, competing, and non-territorial legal-judicial state apparatus (Sharia).
Constitutional Jurisprudence and Legal Arguments for Reclassification
Argument I: The Doctrine of Structural Inseparability—Sharia as a Parallel State Constitution
Because Sharia regulates every aspect of statecraft, civil administration, commercial transactions, and criminal enforcement, shariah operates as a fully formed parallel legal system rather than a private religion.
While Western religions limit themselves to voluntary acts of worship and private conscience, Sharia jurisprudence integrates acts of faith directly with statecraft, judicial procedures (Book O), corporal sentences (Hudud), and commercial/taxation law (Zakat). This totalizing integration leaves no secular jurisdiction for municipal laws, local ordinances, or constitutional amendments.
Authoritative legal proofs within Islamic jurisprudence demonstrate this structure:
Reliance of the Traveller (Book O: Justice, Book P: Enforcing the Penal Law): Defines the judiciary, court evidence, and state governance as direct execution modules of divine law. It contains a complete penal code—mandating specific, unalterable physical punishments (Hudud) for actions like theft, illegal sexual intercourse, and alcohol consumption—entirely separate from and independent of the municipal laws of any host country.
Sayyid Qutb, Milestones (Chapter 4: Jihaad in the Cause of God, p. 58): Qutb documents that any human system that creates man-made laws is an act of Jahiliyyah (barbaric rebellion against Allah/god). He directly writes: “Islam is not a ‘religion’ in the common Western sense… It is a universal declaration of the freedom of man from servitude to other men, which means the complete abolishing of human governance to establish absolute divine sovereignty (Uluhiyah).”
Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (1990), Article 19: Explicitly rules that “there shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shari’ah,” completely invalidating the authority of secular criminal statutes and constitutions over an individual bound by the covenant of submission.
Fiqh Council of the Muslim World League (Jeddah Ruling on Governance): Affirms that political rule must be based strictly on Al-Hukmu bi-Ma Anzalallah (governing by what Allah revealed), declaring that democracy—by placing sovereignty in the hands of the people—is a direct violation of Islamic jurisprudence.
Supporting United States Supreme Court jurisprudence reinforces that parallel political and legal systems do not qualify for First Amendment religious shields:
Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 215 (1972): The Supreme Court held that for a system of actions to receive protection under the Free Exercise Clause, it must be rooted in purely religious beliefs, completely separate from political, sociological, or philosophical considerations: “A way of life, however virtuous and admirable, may not be interposed as a barrier to reasonable state regulation… if it is based on purely secular considerations; to have the protection of the Religion Clauses, the claims must be rooted in religious belief rather than political, sociological, or philosophical ideologies.”
Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States, 136 U.S. 1, 49–50 (1890): The Court established that when an organization integrates political, economic, or civil elements that challenge public law, the state has the authority to revoke its corporate protections and dismantle its assets: “The state has a supreme interest in ensuring that no organization uses the cloak of religion to establish a state within a state, or to introduce a separate legal code that subverts municipal law.”
United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163, 176 (1965): The Court defined the strict boundaries of religious belief, noting that while it protects internal concepts of faith and duty to a Supreme Being, it excludes “essentially political, sociological, or economic considerations” that seek to regulate temporal, public actions within the state.
Gillette v. United States, 401 U.S. 437, 461–462 (1971): The Court held that the state is not required to provide systemic exemptions from neutral laws of general applicability when an individual’s or group’s religious tenets overlap with political alignments and systemic assertions of state policy.
Argument II: The Geopolitical Imperative—The Jurisdictional Dichotomy and Mandatory Subjugation of Secular States
Because the Islamic system divides the earth into two warring domains and mandates continuous efforts to expand its legal jurisdiction, it operates as an expansionist political order that is fundamentally hostile to the United States Constitution. Fiqh splits the global surface into Dar al-Islam (Domain of Sharia) and Dar al-Harb (Domain of War/Man-Made Law), mandating a continuous state of structural transformation or state of war (Offensive Jihad) until secular frameworks are completely subjugated.
Primary legal proofs include:
Reliance of the Traveller (Section o9.0: Jihad, o9.1): Traditional Fiqh defines Jihad as “warfare against non-Muslims… to establish the Deen.” Section o9.1 confirms that the ruling authority must actively launch offensive operations against Dar al-Harb (the Domain of War/Secular Law) at least once every year to expand the jurisdiction of Sharia, explicitly rejecting peaceful coexistence with alternative legal frameworks. The term Deen—often mistranslated into Western parlance merely as “religion”—is defined in classical jurisprudence (such as the Tafsirs of Ibn Kathir and Al-Qurtubi) as a totalizing, all-encompassing way of life, a binding legal constitution, and a complete system of governance encompassing law (Sharia), judgment (Hisaab), and societal submission (Inqiyad). Therefore, establishing the Deen via Jihad mandates the structural expansion and political supremacy of the Sharia state apparatus over secular human governance.
Reliance of the Traveller (Section o11.0–o11.4: Non-Muslim Subjects of the Islamic State): Details the status of non-Muslims conquered by the Islamic state. They are classified as Dhimmis, stripped of political rights, required to pay a mandatory poll tax (Jizyah) as a sign of subjugation, and subject to rules designed to keep them socially inferior: “The non-Muslim subject is forbidden to openly practice their faith, build new places of worship, or hold any position of authority over a Muslim.”
Sayyid Qutb, Milestones (Chapter 9: A Muslim’s Nationality and His Belief, p. 113): Qutb declares that modern borders, regional citizenships, and nation-states are illegitimate: “A Muslim has no nationality except his belief (Aqeedah)… Islam recognizes only two places: Dar al-Islam, where Sharia rules, and Dar al-Harb, where man-made systems rule. A Muslim must stand against Dar al-Harb until it submits.”
International Muslim Brotherhood, The By-Laws of the International Ikhwan (Section 2: Goals): Details the political intent to rebuild the global Islamic state (Caliphate), explicitly rejecting modern secular borders and mapping a path to unify all geographic regions under Sharia law.
Supporting United States Supreme Court jurisprudence directly addresses subversion under religious titles:
Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333, 341–342 (1890): The Supreme Court forcefully rejected the argument that an ideology could use a religious title to shield doctrines that advocate against civil laws and societal stability: “To call their advocacy a tenet of religion is to offend the common sense of mankind… It was never intended that the First Article of Amendment to the Constitution should be a protection against legislation for the punishment of acts inimical to the peace, good order, and morals of society.”
Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 166 (1879): The Court established that while religious belief is protected, actions that challenge the state’s public laws must be regulated: “Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices…To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land.”
Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47, 52 (1919): The Court affirmed that speech, advocacy, or organizational structures that create a clear danger to the state’s security can be restricted, confirming that protections do not apply to actions that threaten the constitutional order.
In re Summers, 325 U.S. 561, 572–573 (1945): The Court held that a state may deny admission to a position of public trust to individuals whose deeply held convictions prevent them from taking an unconditional oath to support and defend the state’s secular constitution.
Argument III: Civilizational Sabotage and the Institutional/Educational Pipeline
The operational reality inside the United States matches the aggressive assertions found in traditional Fiqh manuals. This pipeline uses religious immunity to fund, protect, and execute an explicit strategy of civilizational replacement through parochial curricula (What Islam Is All About), strategic cores (Explanatory Memorandum), and parallel tax shields (using non-profit status to build parallel legal, media, and banking centers shielded from oversight).
Authoritative Sharia and institutional evidence includes:
An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America (1991): Introduced as federal evidence by the U.S. Department of Justice in United States v. Holy Land Foundation, Case No. 3:04-CR-240-G, this strategic blueprint states: “[The mission] is a ‘Civilization-Settlement Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”
Yahiya Emerick, What Islam Is All About (North American Parochial School Curriculum, p. 248): Instructs youth that Western democratic society is corrupt (Jahiliyyah). It teaches students to reject integration and regional patriotism, explaining that Dawah (proselytizing) is a systematic method of statecraft designed to expand Sharia influence until it becomes the dominant legal framework.
The Underground Movement Plan (“The Project”, November 1982), Section 4: A strategic document found by international intelligence services detailing a clear plan to use the open, democratic legal systems of Western nations to build parallel financial, media, and legal institutions that shield the growth of the alternative sovereign state.
International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), The Methodology of Dawah:Frames propagation not as sharing a personal faith, but as a strategic tool to transform the legal, academic, and cultural landscape of non-Muslim nations from within.
Supporting United States case law demonstrates the authority of the state to protect itself from long-term institutional replacement:
Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494, 509 (1951): The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of individuals organizing an ideological movement to overthrow the constitutional order, confirming that the state does not have to wait for an active rebellion to defend itself: “If a society cannot protect its foundation against a systematic, long-term conspiracy to replace its laws and values, then the constitution becomes an instrument of its own destruction. The state has an inherent right to act before the subversion is fully realized.”
United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78, 86–87 (1944): While Ballard prevents courts from ruling on the objective truth of a theological dogma, it preserves the right of the state to examine the sincerity and secular function of an organization. When an entity’s internal files (Explanatory Memorandum) reveal that its actual purpose is civilizational sabotage and the creation of a parallel political structure, the organization operates as a secular conspiracy rather than a protected faith.
United States v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, Case No. 3:04-CR-240-G (N.D. Tex. 2008): This landmark federal case exposed how a network of domestic non-profit organizations, operating under religious tax-exempt status, funneled millions of dollars to militant groups abroad while establishing parallel political and social entities within the United States.
Scalise v. National Science Foundation, 315 F. Supp. 3d 85, 93 (D.D.C. 2018): This precedent affirmsthat administrative and educational entities cannot use religious exceptions to shield curricula or organizational practicesthat directly conflict with federal laws, national security, or established public policy.
Argument IV: The Integrated Blackstonian Definition—Law of Nature vs. Theocratic Subversion
To confirm these arguments within the history of Anglo-American common law, we look to Sir William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England (Book I, Chapter 1; Book IV, Chapter 4). Blackstone defines religion by its relationship to human conduct and the state:
Core Devotional Religion (Protected by Municipal Law):Encompasses matters of private conscience, enhances social and relative duties, and subordinates itself to public peace. Blackstone explains that human municipal law regulates “social and relative duties… as a member of civil society.” A religion qualifies for protection when its moral framework encourages citizens to fulfill their civil duties to the state.
Theocratic State Interference (Reclassified as Subversion):Rejects the authority of human law, claims separate civil and penal jurisdiction (Hudud), and directs actions against public peace. If an ideology commands its followers to reject the authority of municipal laws, enforce an independent penal system (Hudud), and view the secular state as an enemy domain (Dar al-Harb), Sharia mandates thatIslam moves past Blackstone’s common-law definition of religion. It becomes a political-military movement that the civil magistrate has a duty to regulate or restrict to preserve public peace.
Conclusion and Judicial Verdict
The legal conclusion is absolute and clear: Because Sharia is an expansionist legal system that claims supreme authority over human society (Muslim and Non-Muslim), it is in a permanent state of jurisdictional war with the United States Constitution. The argument is locked by an unyielding legal syllogism:
The textual definition of Islam is submission.
The object of that submission is Sharia.
Sharia mandates the legal elimination of all secular law or competing ideologies.
Therefore, any individual who submits to Islam (Muslim) necessarily submits to Sharia under all legal Islamic sources, and is fundamentally choosing a competing, adversarial sovereign power and foreign constitution (Sharia) over the American republic in direct competition with the U.S. Constitution.
When an individual makes the choice to prioritize a foreign legal order that mandates a “civilization-settlement process” to dismantle Western institutions from within, they choose to walk away from the protections of the domestic social contract.
Under the Supremacy Clause, the state has a clear constitutional right and duty to recognize this dual allegiance, strip the system of its religious protections, disqualify its adherents from public office, and strip them of voting franchise rights under Davis v. Beason to ensure the survival of the constitutional order.
The only thing America lacks is leaders with the moral fortitude and courage to fulfill their Oath of Office and to act in defense of America and the Constitution they swore to protect.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Supremacy-Clause.jpg360640Randy McDanielshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRandy McDaniels2026-09-04 11:30:322026-09-04 11:32:48Supremacy Clause vs Islam: The Legal Blueprint to Save America!
Maybe we’re progressive regressives, and I don’t mean that just in the sense that progressives are regressive, and they are, but that one part of our society is advancing at lightning speed to the future and progressing. But the other part is regressing, and regressing at a phenomenal pace back to what I would call the medieval period.
Remember, the medieval period was roughly that area in time after the fall of the Roman Empire in the West, roughly AD 500 to around AD 1300 to 1400, the beginning of the Italian Renaissance. In medievalism, we often talk about primitivism after the destruction of the classical world during the Dark Ages, the early medieval period, and it’s characterized by epidemics, bubonic plague, typhus, typhoid, smallpox, terrible sanitation in urban centers. They had forgotten the Roman use of sewage and aqueducts.
There were open borders. National states popped up that couldn’t defend themselves, so you saw castles and walls pop up all over the European countryside in a way you had not during the Roman period. In cities, they were walled, towns even, and the gates closed at dusk to prevent gratuitous crime.
But at the same time that this was happening, you had some of the greatest works of literature in the Western world. You had Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales,” Dante’s “Inferno,” St. Thomas Aquinas’ “Summa Theologica.” And if you look at the architectural expertise and scientific knowledge of architecture, it was progressing at a geometric rate when you look at the huge cathedrals at Seville or Cologne.
I should remind everybody that around 536, Santa Sofia was created, the Church of the Holy Wisdom in Constantinople. It would be the largest church in Christendom for a thousand years. And everything from the mass production of crossbows to eyeglasses was a product of the medieval period, even if, as I said, the daily lives of most people were wretched.
Now let’s switch to the modern period. All of us now can call anywhere in the world in seconds on our iPhones. Anything you want to know, past, present, future, you can just get on a cheap computer and ask an artificial intelligence program from the many free platforms. You can watch movies, you can watch entertainment on satellites. Anything you want is at your fingertips.
The nation itself is exploring space. We’re getting close to conquering cancer. I can attest to that. Computers allow you to write without even speaking. You can, unfortunately, compose a whole term paper or a book with AI. You can make a movie with AI.
Yet at the same time that’s happening, look at what’s going on in Berkeley here in California or Los Angeles. We’re seeing outbreaks of medieval diseases that we thought had been conquered years ago, given our sophisticated knowledge of sewage and water treatment. We had a typhus breakout in Los Angeles. We had leptospirosis, a rat disease, in Berkeley.
You look at the homeless camps all over our major cities. People are just out in the open fornicating, urinating, defecating, injecting drugs. There’s tons of feces that has to be removed, and it’s so strange in this modern medievalism.
We have sophisticated researchers who go into a hospital in Chicago or go to a cancer center in San Francisco and have to check the bottoms of their shoes to make sure they don’t have feces as they go into their space-age laboratories.
It’s really funny. In the medieval period, public hangings and beheadings were sort of public events that people flocked out to see. Is that any different than our glorification of murderers?
And there is a difference. Luigi Mangione, they named an opera after him in California. The killer of Charlie Kirk brought people jubilation. I won’t even get into Lindsay Clancy, who strangled her three children and became every woman to the feminist left.
At least in the medieval period, they knew that the murderer had done something wrong and was being punished. In the post-medieval period, we are glorifying that murderer, and that’s really striking.
And so, what I’m getting at is we are the most regulated, the most advanced, the most modern, the most scientific society in history, even as we can’t solve problems that were solvable, and the medieval period would have died to know the solutions that we have in our hands to make sure we have clean water, to make sure there is no crime, to make sure there is no disease, to make sure that people don’t defecate on the street. But we don’t do it. We willingly don’t do it.
Now, the question to finish is why?
We have an elite that has embraced a very toxic ideology throughout history, and that is mandated, government-sanctioned equality of result. And they have divided, therefore, to further that ideology, the world into victims and victimizers, an arbitrary classification, sometimes based on class, but increasingly on race.
And once they identify someone as a victim who’s not responsible for his plight, then it’s the duty of the society to allow him to express himself. If you have a lot of teenagers who want to loot a jewelry store, then you say they were hungry and they needed food.
If you see homeless people living on the street, then it was because of something the majority culture did to them.
And the result of that is when people engage in very dangerous antisocial behavior, an elite will tell the rest of us that they’re not subject to law enforcement or they’re not subject to the laws that apply to the rest of us.
But there are two really pernicious addenda here.
No. 1, the people who do this on the left, who believe in this mandated equality and a binary of victim and victimizer, are never subject to the consequences of their own ideology. Nancy Pelosi‘s home is not surrounded by homeless people. Jane Fonda doesn’t have to trip over people injecting drugs when she walks outside her door. The Hollywood stars in Malibu who champion the homeless have very clear security. You can’t get near their homes.
In other words, we, the lab rats, are those upon whom they experiment.
And there’s another reason as well. It’s not just that they experiment on us. and this ideology is not applicable to itself, but more importantly, they believe that they are morally superior because most of them are agnostics or atheists. They have lost their God, but they have found it in a post-Enlightenment caring, abstract though it may be, for victims.
And when you put this religious element to it, because it makes no sense to allow medieval diseases and medievalism to dominate your cities in crime, filth and homelessness, but they do it. They feel morally superior, and it gives them meaning in their life in a way that we, the majority, find not morally superior, but morally repugnant.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.
EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Modern-Midieval-Society.jpg360640The Daily Signalhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Signal2026-09-04 07:12:142026-09-05 13:27:14Victor Davis Hanson: The Left Is Dragging America Back to the Dark Ages
New York City Mayor Mamdani Releases 400-Page Racial Equity Plan
The initial framework for the plan was released in April. This week: Mayor Mamdani’s office released the full 400-page plan. The plan is the product of the city’s radical Chief Equity Officer Afua Atta-Mensah, who said: “ The release of the final plan is the beginning of implementation, not the end of planning,” said Atta-Mensah, who is commissioner of the Mayor’s Office of Equity and Racial Justice. “Agencies now have to take these commitments and put them into practice” (Gothamist). From the city: this is what it looks like to govern with equity in mind (NYC).
Harmeet Dhillon with the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division has not been bashful to take action on legislation and policy unequally applied based on race. She spoke up when the initial framework was released.
New York Post: The Trump administration is reviewing a “racial equity” plan released by Mayor Zohran Mamdani — with a top Department of Justice official calling the city’s proposal “fishy.” The assistant attorney general for the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, in a statement to The Post, threatened to “bring enforcement actions if necessary” over the long-delayed report unveiled by Mamdani on Monday. The “preliminary citywide racial equity plan” aims to get dozens of local agencies involved to “solve decades of neglect and discrimination” against black and Hispanic and Latino New Yorkers — including through mandated “anti-racism” training and pay equity for city workers.
Assistant AG Harmeet Dhillon claimed Tuesday the plan “appears to be another example of divisive, race-based policymaking that the United States Supreme Court has routinely held to be unlawful.”
“Racist and illegal DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] has no place in our society,” she said in a statement.
“The Civil Rights Division is reviewing the plan and will bring enforcement actions if necessary.”
The report was legally mandated under a 2022 voter referendum and was released by City Hall at the same time as a separate study on the “True Cost of Living” in New York City.
The preliminary racial equity plan involved 45 agencies and more than 200 city workers in an effort to “build a more equitable, inclusive and just city,” following the intense protests over the police killing of George Floyd in Minnesota in 2020, said Mamdani’s Chief Equity Officer Afua Atta-Mensah on Monday.
Mamdani had promised to make the plan public within his first 100 days in office, after his predecessor Mayor Eric Adams repeatedly pushed back the release of the report, with his administration even being sued for failing to meet the 2024 deadline.
It comes as President Trump’s admin targets diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in liberal havens like New York.
The document, which explicitly does not use the controversial acronym DEI, includes the following policy suggestions:
–Increasing the number of city teachers who “receive professional learning in implicit bias and culturally relevant pedagogy.”
–Calls for a public school curriculum that reflects “the diversity of the families and communities.”
–Demanding “anti-racism training for City government staff” to help workers “combat racial discrimination in the workplace.”
–Requiring the Department of Housing Preservation and Development to “ensure racial equity is considered in evaluating 100 percent of new proposals” for construction projects.
“New York’s history has been one of colonization, exploitation, and racial oppression,” the plan states.
The report quickly sparked blowback from conservatives online, with Dhillon sounding the alarm.
“Sounds fishy/illegal. Will review!” she wrote on X Monday.
Councilwoman Joann Ariola (R-Queens) said she was looking forward to the results of the DOJ’s review.
“The mayor made it clear that he was going to go after white communities during his campaign, and this seems like his first step toward making that goal a reality,” she told The Post.
Mamdani, during his campaign, pledged to shift the property tax burden from outer borough homeowners to ‘more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods.”
Councilman David Carr (R-Staten Island) called the equity report a waste of time and money.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/New-York-City-Mayor-Mamdani-Releases-400-Page-Blueprint.jpg360640The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2026-09-04 06:46:362026-09-04 06:53:12New York City Mayor Mamdani Releases 400-Page Blueprint for Government-Enforced Racial Favoritism
The Austin Roll Call: How Texas Is Exposing Foreign Financial Networks on American Soil
Most people look for foreign influence at the federal border, but on July 30, a paper trail inside the Texas State Capitol proved the real beachhead might be in the state’s banking system.
While legacy news cameras chased federal soundbites in Washington, the Texas House Committee on Homeland Security, Public Safety, and Veterans Affairs quietly convened in Austin for something far more dangerous to the status quo: a methodical audit of foreign money in American backyards. This wasn’t political theater designed for a ten-second clip. It was a cold, calculated exercise in state power, laying down an evidentiary blueprint built to reclaim American land, lock down financial pipelines, and force federal agencies to answer for what they’ve ignored.
That strategy hinges on a unique Texas weapon: the interim charge. Because the state’s part-time legislature meets just once every two years, the real legislative warfare happens in these off-season hearing rooms long before the public ever sees a headline. This is where statutes are quietly pre-written, bulletproof evidence is locked into the public record, and next year’s sweeping state mandates are weaponized long before January’s opening gavel ever hits the bench.
The backdrop to this hearing was already historic. In November 2025, Governor Greg Abbott issued a landmark executive proclamation designating the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as foreign terrorist and transnational criminal organizations within Texas. The order took direct aim at foreign influence operations by barring both groups from acquiring land anywhere across the state.
Although CAIR and the Muslim Legal Fund quickly mounted a federal court challenge, alleging first amendment violations, Texas leadership signaled that the state would not back down from defending its borders and banking systems.
Taking the witness chair was Sam Westrop, head of Islamic Watch at the Middle East Forum and a senior fellow at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. Rather than offering political rhetoric, Westrop submitted a detailed, written filing directly into the official public record – a permanent document titled Sharia Finance in Texas.
The filing methodically detailed over a dozen financial entities operating within the state, highlighting major institutions like Guidance Residential, which reports over $2 billion in home financing, and Sharia Portfolio, with over $3 billion in globally managed assets. The record also named key operational firms and financial groups including Ijara CDC, University Islamic Financial, Amana Mutual Funds, and A Continuous Charity.Westrop’s testimony mapped out links between these domestic entities and foreign networks tied to radical Islamist currents – including Deobandi, Salafi, and Qutbist ideology – as well as state actors in Malaysia and Iraq.
More critically, the testimony traced the financial ecosystem back to the Islamic Development Bank, a multilateral financial institution whose major shareholders include the governments of Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. According to the filed record, this global institution has quietly funneled millions into state-level non-profits, mosques, and local educational institutions – including a $3.5 million expansion of the Austin Peace Academy, located in the heart of the Texas capital.
Following Westrop, senior fellow Ammon Blair outlined actionable enforcement mechanisms for state lawmakers. Recognizing that federal authorities hold exclusive power over international terrorist designations, state officials are turning to robust transparency laws – a domain where state authority remains unchallenged.
To counter foreign influence, the proposed Texas legislative strategy focuses on a three-tier framework centered on state-level oversight and financial transparency. First, the state would mandate full financial disclosure for local entities, requiring them to reveal their governance boards, corporate structures, and foreign backers. Second, lawmakers would establish systematic state-level vetting, subjecting any organization seeking tax privileges, state contracts, or land acquisitions to rigorous audits. Finally, the framework applies network-level enforcement, allowing regulators to track and restrict entire foreign-tied funding pipelines rather than evaluating entities in isolation.
The proposed framework urges state lawmakers to:
Build a State-Level Transparency Registry: Mandate comprehensive disclosures revealing who finances local institutions, who sits on governance boards, and where capital originates.
Implement Network Auditing: Require thorough vetting for any organization seeking state contracts, tax privileges, or land acquisitions, treating foreign-backed funding networks as unified systems rather than isolated entities.
Impose Strict Penalties: Enforce clear statutory consequences for organizations with verified ties to hostile foreign interests or designated foreign threats.
While representatives for the named financial entities maintain that their operations are fully compliant with standard commercial banking rules, and CAIR continues to dismiss state actions as political maneuvering, the official state record tells a clear story.
Attorney General Ken Paxton’s escalating lawsuit to strip CAIR of its ability to operate on Texas soil isn’t just local legal drama—it’s the frontline of a quiet revolution. States are finally realizing they don’t have to wait for Washington’s permission to defend their borders, their land, and their financial systems from unvetted foreign capital.
When the Texas Legislature gavels back in this January, lawmakers won’t be starting from scratch or relying on soundbites. Sitting on the shelf is a cold, fully documented financial paper trail—a line-by-line blueprint that hands states the exact model to police foreign influence on American soil.
First we learned to love our killers. Then we learned to hate ourselves.
After 19 Muslim terrorists killed nearly 3,000 people in the United States, the most sensible thing would have been to close the borders and keep out the people most likely to carry out attacks.
25 years later and with hundreds more dead and wounded in Islamic terrorist attacks since then, we’ve done the exact opposite and allowed the Muslim population to more than double from 1.8 million to 4.5 million. In New York, the epicenter of the attacks, the insurgent Muslim population shot up from 400,000 to over 700,000 so that New York City is now run by an Islamist politician.
Before 9/11, there had been a handful of Islamic terrorist attacks on American soil. This year alone there were three terror attacks and plots in New York and the summer isn’t even over yet. Multiple mosques in New York City openly preach hatred and terrorism in videos posted to social media and nothing is done since Zohran Mamdani has visited some of those mosques.
Mamdani appointed a lawyer for the 20th 9/11 hijacker who had argued that the terrorists were not driven by evil and that “the legacy of 9/11 ought to be recounted primarily through the stories of Muslims” as New York City’s Chief Counsel. More of the Muslim candidates running for office, like Mamdani, or Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, and Dariazilia Avila Chevalier in New York City “I just wiped my hand on the American flag”, express hostility and contempt towards America.
The political ascension of Islamists who openly despise us reflects our hatred for ourselves.
Mamdani, an Abdul El-Sayed, Avila Chevalier or Aisha Wahhab exist because large numbers of voters agree with their pal, Hasan Piker, that America deserved 9/11. The initial protestations of innocence, the clamor that it was only a ‘tiny minority of extremists’, has given way to pride. That’s why Mamdani, El-Sayed and all the others keep grinning at us even while they lie to us.
And it’s a justified pride. Muslim terrorism killed thousands of New Yorkers and now run the city.
Islamists in America celebrate 9/11 and claim that we had it coming the way they say Israel had Oct 7 coming. And in their religion, we did and still do. That’s why they keep killing us.
After 9/11, we learned to love our killers and when they proved unlovable, blamed ourselves and learned to hate ourselves for not being able to save them, for not being worthy of their love.
It didn’t have to be this way, but our leaders clung to the zombie ‘democracyism’ of three world wars, and set off to find the Kaiser, Fuhrer or Commissar holding Islamic terrorism together to replace him with ‘democratic’ elections in the certainty that would make it all better. We would unselfishly send generations of our young men to bring elections to a culture that can only think in tribal power whether it’s in Basra, Iraq or Dearborn, Michigan, with all the predictable results.
And then we learned the hard way that they really did hate us, not because of some mustachioed dictator, but because their religion teaches them from the earliest age to hate us.
But by then we had also learned to blame ourselves.
When Republicans decided to reach back to Woody, FDR and Ike, Democrats reached back to the Vietnam War movement. If Republicans were going to borrow their old ‘War for Democracy’, they were going to fast forward to LBJ and chant, “How many Iraqi kids did you kill today?”
Before long, Islamic terrorists had switched from being a vital part of the Republican coalition, back when it was run by oil money and the regime change ambitions of the Iraqi Shiites of Dearborn, to becoming a vital part of a new Democratic coalition against democracy, for terrorism and ultimately for the destruction of Israel, India and the United States of America.
Along with any other countries that got on the bad side of the Ummah and its Islamist operatives who by the 25th anniversary have a death grip on the Democrats, have bought up academia, wield significant influence over the media and are swallowing up much of social media which increasingly consists of Pakistanis and the Americans they pay to echo their propaganda.
Rather than creating clear boundaries between ourselves and the perpetrators, America after 9/11 perversely opened itself to the Muslim world, began feverishly studying Islam, seeking to fix Muslim countries with democracy and regime change, and inviting Muslims to come here as ‘refugees’ so when they carried out attacks, they no longer needed to do so on temporary visas.
Not only did we fail to fix the Muslim world, but we Islamized America so that terrorist attacks stopped being a rarity and are now a regular phenomenon that we do our best to ignore.
First we blamed the lack of democracy in the Muslim world. Then we blamed our own intolerance. We blamed Israel. We blamed global warming. We blamed mental illness.
And we blamed everything except Islam.
We contorted our worldviews, our foreign policy, our culture and our military into pretzels and went to great lengths to evade the conclusion that most people, including liberals, reached in those immediate shocking moments, hours and days after the September 11 attacks.
The heretical conclusion, the one you can spot only in the negative images of the propaganda that shot out from George W. Bush, from the media and from every good liberal and not a few good conservatives and libertarians, was that we could absolutely co-exist with Islam.
No one dared to discuss the possibility that we couldn’t. And what to do if indeed we couldn’t.
25 years later we would still rather hate ourselves, agonize over our folly in wasting blood and treasure in Afghanistan and Iraq, conduct circular firing squads blaming each other (“I was against the Iraq War”, “No, I was against the Iraq War first”), mainline conspiracy theories (“The CIA was really behind 9/11”) or suggest that an Islamic takeover would actually be a good thing (according to Tucker Carlson, no one steals cars in the UAE) than speak the unspeakable.
And so the thing that we can’t say has instead led us to accept truly unspeakable things.
We’ve accepted that an Islamist whose associates defend the 9/11 attacks runs New York City and we’ve accepted that an Islamist can run for the Senate in Michigan while accompanied by a streamer who celebrated 9/11. These are just the latest outrages we’re willing to accept rather than even entertain the possibility that we cannot co-exist with the people who think this way.
And so we’ve learned all the wrong lessons from that Tuesday morning twenty-five years ago.
We’ve learned to keep quiet. We’ve learned to hate each other. We’ve learned to die for Muslim elections. What we haven’t learned to do is live and fight for our country. And if we truly want to remember the attacks and the dead, that is the real unspeakable thing to be spoken.
Over the years I have rebuked the foolish liberal Zionists who hold up Golda Meir quotes like, “We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children, we cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children” and “Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us” as arguments for Israel. These quotes and their sentiments are completely backwards.
A people who would forgive the killers of their children but turn to self-hatred for having to kill their enemies is not moral or honorable: it is a contemptible people that doesn’t know how to survive. The people who unthinkingly repeat such slogans should be ashamed of themselves and ashamed before the children they would sacrifice to show their suicidal moral nobility.
The ability of a people to live in peace should never depend on the goodness of their enemies.
Governments do not exist to tell their people how to die well, but to defend them. America’s liberal elites imploded in the face of the Islamic enemy just as they formerly imploded in the face of the Communist enemy during the Cold War: momentary patriotism quickly giving way to shame, guilt, and outrage for wanting to live in the face of killers with the ‘right’ politics.
We’ve spent generations experimenting with governments of national suicide and it has nearly killed us. Now we’ve been exploring the controversial notion of a non-suicidal government.
And everyone is deeply upset over it.
The lesson of 9/11 is that we cannot co-exist with those who want to kill us. That simple. And the day we truly understand it, we won’t need any more anniversaries, tearful tributes, and candles on concrete, and we won’t need the self-hatred, because we will finally stand up for ourselves.
When America arises, then the thousands of dead, turned to ash, will finally be able to rest.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/UA-Flight-175-hits-WTC-south-tower.jpg360640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2026-09-04 06:10:252026-09-06 05:46:27What We Never Learned From 9/11
