Hamas on October 7th: The Teachings of Islam on Display Part 2

Please click here to read Part 1 of Hamas on October 7th: The Teachings of Islam on Display.

In this part we will look at Killing Non-Combatants/Disbelievers, Mutilation, and Burning People Alive.

Killing Non-Combatants/Disbelievers

It is important to note that the distinction between non-combatants and combatants is not found in the doctrines of Islam.  Instead, the fundamental distinction is between Muslims (believers) and non-Muslims (disbelievers).

This distinction has been in place since the early days of Islam.  According to the commands of Allah in the Koran and teachings of Muhammad, as long as a Muslim remained a Believer and did not violate any of the doctrines of Islam, he was not to be harmed by another Muslim.  However, there were three conditions that allowed a Muslim to intentionally kill another Muslim: adultery, apostasy from Islam, and killing another Muslim without legal authority.

With regard to non-Muslims, Muhammad taught that their “blood and property” were not protected from the Muslims unless they converted to Islam:

It has been narrated on the authority of ‘Abdullah b. ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, they establish the prayer, and pay the Zakat.  If they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.[1]

That non-Muslims were to be fought against and were not protected unless they converted to Islam is openly proclaimed by Allah in Chapter 9, Verse 5 of the Koran; this is the verse referred to by some Muslim scholars as the Verse of the Sword:

Then when the Sacred Months have passed, then kill the Mushrikun [non-Muslims] wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in every ambush.  But if they repent [by rejecting Shirk (polytheism) and accept Islamic Monotheism] and perform As-Salat (the prayers), and give Zakat (obligatory charity), then leave their way free.  Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

This command of Allah to kill the Mushrikun was followed during the time of Muhammad as Muslim warriors attacked unsuspecting, non-Muslim communities late at night or early in the morning to the undiscriminating battle cries of Kill! Kill![2] and O victorious one, slay, slay!.[3]

Muhammad even stated that there was to be no penalty for a Muslim who killed a non-Muslim (disbeliever), with no distinction being made between a combatant and a non-combatant:

It was narrated from ‘Amr bin Shu’aib, from his father, from his grandfather that the Messenger of Allah said: “A Muslim should not be killed in retaliation for the murder of a disbeliever.”[4]

And it is significant to note that the Muslim scholar Ibn Kathir said this about that statement by Muhammad:

No opinion that opposes this ruling could stand correct, nor is there an authentic Hadith to contradict it.[5]

During the time of Muhammad there were numerous incidents in which non-Muslims were killed by Muslims, whether they had surrendered after battle or were simply non-combatants.

For example, after the Muslims had emigrated from Mecca to Medina, the first major battle between the Muslims and their Meccan adversaries occurred in March 624 AD: the Battle of Badr.  The Meccans were defeated.  Among the Meccan captives were a man named Umayya bin Khalaf, and his son.  As they were being led away, unarmed, and to be held for future ransom, some of the Muslims recognized Umayya and his son and they killed them both with swords.  When Muhammad found out about these killings, he made no objection.[6]

As Muhammad gained power he personally ordered the killing of a number of non-Muslim poets and others who had criticized him and/or Islam (e.g. Ka’b b. al-Ashraf, Abu Rafi’, ‘Asma’ bint Marwan, Abu ‘Afak, and a singing girl named Quraybah).

Muhammad’s attitude and actions were best summed up in a letter written shortly after the Muslim conquest of Mecca in 630 AD.  It was sent to a non-Muslim poet who used to satirize Muhammad, from the poet’s brother; here is a portion of that letter:

Allah’s Messenger killed some men in Makkah who used to satirize and harm him, and the poets who survived fled in all directions for their lives.  So, if you want to save your skin, hasten to Allah’s Messenger.  He never kills those who come to him repenting.  If you refuse to do as I say, it is up to you to try to save your skin by any means.[7]

So to save their lives from Muhammad, poets had to flee Mecca.

At one time Muhammad even gave a general order to kill any of the Jews that fell into a Muslim’s hands:

The Messenger of God said, “Whoever of the Jews falls into your hands, kill him.”  So Muhayyisah b. Mas’ud [a Muslim warrior] fell upon Ibn Sunaynah, one of the Jewish merchants who was on close terms with them and used to trade with them, and killed him.[8]

And there were examples of individual Muslims taking the initiative to kill non-Muslims for criticizing Muhammad and/or Islam. When Muhammad was told of these, he gave his approval.[9]

And after the defeat of the Jewish Bani Qurayzah tribe, Muhammad supervised the beheading of 600-900 captured males of the tribe.  He ordered that all of the males who had reached puberty were to be killed; whether or not they were combatants was irrelevant.[10]  Muhammad sent for them and struck off their heads…as they were brought out to him in batches…This went on until the apostle [Muhammad] made an end of them.[11]

Muhammad even specifically ordered that elderly non-Muslims were to be killed:

It was reported from Al-Hasan, from Samurah bin Jundab who said: “The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Kill the old polytheist men, but spare their children.’”[12]

So we can see that Muhammad not only condoned the killing of non-combatant, non-Muslims, he even ordered it at times.  The Hamas jihadists were following those orders.


There were multiple reports that the Hamas jihadists mutilated men, women and children.  Much of the evidence of this was seen on dead bodies.  But for our purposes the issue is, did this mutilation occur while the person was still alive or did it occur after they died?  We know of two reports that victims were being mutilated while they were alive:

  1. “ZAKA personnel reported finding naked, injured women with mutilated sexual organs.”[13]
  2. “Sapir, a survivor of the Nova festival, describes a rape incident where the terrorists cut off the victim’s breasts followed by cutting her face.  With the disfigurement of her face, she collapsed and fell out of Sapir’s sight.”[14]

This is important, because support for the mutilation of the living can be found in the teachings and example of Muhammad.

According to Muhammad, Muslims were not to mutilate dead bodies. Before he sent Muslim forces against non-Muslims, it was reported that he would issue the following order:

… Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah.  Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah.  Make a holy war…do not mutilate (the dead) bodies…[15]

And on another occasion:

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Yazid Al-Ansari: The Prophet forbade robbery (taking away what belongs to others by force without their permission), and also forbade the mutilation (or maiming) of bodies.[16]

So when Muhammad talked about forbidding mutilation, he was talking about how dead bodies were to be treated.  This understanding that mutilation applied to dead bodies was reiterated by Ibn Hajar, a noted 15th century Islamic scholar, when he explained the meaning of mutilation:

Mutilation means disfigurement of the appearance of a corpse; for example, chopping off limbs for it to be remembered (by the opposition), and the likes.[17]

It should be noted that in Sunan An-Nasa’i we find a hadith stating that:

…The Messenger of Allah used to stress charity in his sermons, and prohibit mutilation.[18]

The modern commentary for this hadith explained:

Mutilation means cutting or tearing off the limbs of the person slain (ear, nose, private parts, etc.) so that the corpse is debased or desecrated.[19]

So Muhammad’s command against mutilation was directed toward how dead bodies were to be treated.

It was another matter for those who were alive.

In Koran 8:12, Allah stated:

(Remember) when your Lord revealed to the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed.  I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved…smite over all their fingers and toes.”

“Smite over” their fingers and toes means to cut them off.  Although this verse states what Allah had commanded the angels to do when they reportedly helped the Muslims during the Battle of Badr, it was also a command for what the Muslims (believers) were to do to their enemies:

Ibn Jarir commented that this Ayah [verse] commands, “O believers!  Strike every limb and finger on the hands and feet of your (disbelieving) enemies.”[20]

Why cut off fingers and toes?  In the commentary about this verse of the Koran, the modern Tafsir Ahsanul-Bayan explained:

If the fingers of the hands are cut off, they will become unable to move their swords.  Similarly, when the toes are cut off, they will be unable to run away.[21]

And for many years Muhammad had a standing order for the mutilation and then killing of a particular non-Muslim:

I have not seen the Messenger of God send an expedition ever, except he said:  If you defeat Habbar cut off his hands and legs and then his head.[22]

However, after the conquest of Mecca in January 630, Habbar converted to Islam and was spared by Muhammad.

The mutilation of living people was continued by Abu Bakr, who, after Muhammad died, became the first of the four “Rightly Guided” Caliphs (these first four caliphs were so named because they are believed to have held the most firmly to the teachings of Muhammad):

It is reported that certain women at an-Nujair having rejoiced at the death of the Prophet, abu-Bakr wrote ordering that their hands and feet be cut off.  Among these women were ath-Thabja’ al-Hadramiyah, and Hind, daughter of Yamin, the Jewess.[23]

And soon after Muhammad’s death two singing women appeared before Al-Muhajir, the Muslim governor of the Yemen.  One of them sang a song reviling Muhammad, and Al-Muhajir had her hand cut off and a front tooth pulled out.  Abu Bakr wrote to Al-Muhajir:

Now then: I have learned that you cut off the hand of a woman because she sang satirizing the Muslims, and that you pulled her front tooth.  If she was among those who claim (to have embraced) Islam, then (it is) good discipline and a reprimand, and not mutilation.[24]

So we can see that the command of Allah, the teachings and example of Muhammad, and the examples of the first “Rightly Guided” Caliph, make it permissible for Muslims to mutilate those who are still alive.  And the HAMAS jihadists did so.

Burning People Alive

There were many reports about finding burned bodies of civilians, some inside burned-down structures.  Were they intentionally burned to death?

According to the teachings and example of Muhammad, burning people alive is allowed.

Muhammad considered burning Muslims’ houses down around them to compel their attendance at congregational prayers:

It was narrated that Abu Hurairah said: “The Messenger of Allah said: ‘I was thinking of commanding that the call to prayer be given, then I would tell a man to lead the people in prayer, then I would go out with some other men carrying bundles of wood, and go to people who do not attend the prayer, and burn their houses down around them.’”[25]

In December 627 Muhammad…launched a raid against the tribe of al-Mustalaq and they fought back.  So he commanded to set fire to their fortifications all night long with the widespread knowledge that women and children were in there.[26]

In October 630, there was some resistance among the Muslims toward a military expedition Muhammad was planning against the Byzantines at Tabuk.  So Muhammad…heard that the hypocrites were assembling in the house of Suwaylim the Jew (his house was by Jasum) keeping men back from the apostle in the raid on Tabuk.  So the prophet sent Talha b. ‘Ubaydullah with a number of his friends to them with orders to burn Suwaylim’s house down on them.  Talha did so, and al-Dahhak b. Khalifa threw himself from the top of the house and broke his leg, and his friends rushed out and escaped.[27]

Muhammad’s example of being willing to burn people alive continued.  After Muhammad died, there were many Arab tribes that left Islam.  This resulted in the Wars of Apostasy (Riddah Wars) under Abu Bakr, the first of the four “Rightly Guided” Caliphs.  The commander of each army that Abu Bakr sent out had a letter to be read to the tribe before it was attacked.  The letter explained that if the tribe did not return to Islam, the army commander…will not spare any one of them he can gain mastery over, [but may] burn them with fire, slaughter them by any means…[28]

The commander of one of the Muslim armies was Khalid bin al-Walid. Here is a command that Abu Bakr gave to Khalid:

…kill them by every means, by fire or whatever else.[29]

And Abu Bakr gave Khalid a specific command when he sent him against the Bani Hanifah in Al-Yamamah:

Kill their wounded, seek out those of them who flee, put the captives among them to the sword and strike terror among them by killing and burn them by fire.  And I warn you against contradicting my orders. Peace (be upon you).[30]

Khalid took Abu Bakr’s admonitions to heart and was known for burning many captives alive.  Abu Bakr’s response to this was:

I shall not sheathe a sword that Allah had unsheathed against the ‘unbelievers.’[31]

Abu Bakr had even set the example when a captive who had fought against the Muslims was brought to him.  Abu Bakr…ordered a fire to be kindled with much firewood in the prayer yard (musalla) of Medina and threw him, with arms and legs bound, into it.[32]

The burning continued as ‘Ali, the fourth “Rightly Guided” Caliph, ordered some people to be burned alive for being hypocrites. A modern commentary explained this decision:

The people, who were burnt alive, were the followers of a Jew named ‘Abdullah bin Sabah.  They were hypocrites and they were involved in a heinous crime of preaching ‘Ali’s divinity, so ‘Ali giving a lesson for others, gave them such a severe punishment.[33]

And it is interesting to note that in 2015, the jihadist group ISIS burned alive a captured Jordanian Air Force pilot. Soon afterwards an article appeared in their online magazine Dabiq that included Koran verses, teachings of Muhammad, and examples of Muhammad’s companions to provide the Islamic doctrinal support for the burning alive of “the Jordanian crusader pilot.”[34]

Burning people alive is allowed by Islamic doctrine, and the Hamas jihadists were following that doctrine.


Dr. Stephen M. Kirby is the author of six books about Islam. His latest book is Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials.

On to Part 3

In Part 3 we will examine the remaining atrocities.

[1]           Sahih Muslim, Vol. 1, No. 22, pp. 21-22.

[2]           E.g.,; The Life of Muhammad: Al-Waqidi’s Kitab al-Maghazi, p. 355; Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol. 3, No. 2638, pp. 275-276; Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari: The Victory of Islam, Vol. VIII, trans. and annotated Michael Fishbein (Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 1997), p. 142;      and Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Sa’d ibn Mani’ al-Zuhri al-Basri, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, 2 Volumes, trans. S. Moinul Haq (New Delhi, India: Kitab Bhavan, 2009), Vol. 2, p. 146.

[3]           E.g., The Life of Muhammad (Sirat Rasul Allah), n. 738, p. 768, and n. 760, p. 770; The Life of Muhammad: Al-Waqidi’s Kitab al-Maghazi, p. 549; and Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Vol. 2, p. 237.

[4]           Sunan Ibn Majah, Vol. 3, No. 2659, p. 528.

[5]           Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Vol. 1, p. 485.  The significance of Ibn Kathir’s statement lies in the fact that his commentaries are still considered authoritative today.  In the publisher’s comments in 2000 for the ten volume English translation of Ibn Kathir’s commentaries, it was pointed out that this collection is the most popular interpretation of the Qur’an in the Arabic language, and the majority of the Muslims consider it to be the best source based on Qur’an and Sunnah.

Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Vol. 1, p. 5.

[6]           Essay Regarding the Basic Rule of the Blood, Wealth and Honour of the Disbelievers, At-Tibyan Publications, August 22, 2004, p. 24.

[7]           Safiur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri, The Sealed Nectar (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 2008), p. 521.

[8]           Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari: The Foundation of the Community, Vol. VII, trans. M. V. McDonald and annotated W. Montgomery Watt (Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 1987), p. 97.

[9]           1) A Muslim stabbed to death his pregnant female slave: Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol. 5, No. 4361, pp. 20-21; and Abu ‘Abdur-Rahman Ahmad bin Shu’aib bin ‘Ali bin Sinan bin Bahr An-Nasa’i, Sunan An-Nasa’i, trans. Nasiruddin al-Khattab (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 2007), Vol. 5, No. 4075, pp. 66-67.  2) A Muslim strangled a Jewish woman: Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol. 5, No. 4362, p. 21.  3) A Muslim killed a man who said he did not believe in Islam and would never become a Muslim: The History of al-Tabari: The Foundation of the Community, pp. 149-150.

[10]         The History of al-Tabari: The Victory of Islam, p. 38.

[11]         The Life of Muhammad (Sirat Rasul Allah), p. 464.

[12]         Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol. 3, No. 2670, p. 296.  A variation of this, specifying pre-pubescent boys instead of children in general, was reported in Jami’ At-Tirmidhi:

Samurah bin Jundab narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: “Kill the elder men among the idolaters and spare the Sharkh among them.”

Jami’ At-Tirmidhi, Vol. 3, No. 1583, p. 353.  The commentary for this hadith noted that “the Sharkh are the boys who did not begin to grow public hair.”

[13]         “Silent Cry, Sexual Crimes in the October 7 War,” The Association of Rape Crisis Centers in Israel, February 2024, p. 27, https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:f3c818f3-d9c2-4175-8459-4076c0714374.

[14]         Ibid., p. 30.

[15]         Sahih Muslim, Vol. 5, No. 1731R1, p. 163.  A second version of this hadith reported that Muhammad said, “…do not mutilate (the dead enemy)…”; see Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol. 3, No. 2613, p. 264.

[16]         Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 3, Book 46, No. 2474, p. 380.

[17]         The Clarification Regarding Intentionally Targetting Women and Children, p. 52.

[18]         Sunan An-Nasa’i, Vol. 5, No. 4052, p. 56.

[19]         Ibid.

[20]         Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Vol. 4, p. 274.

[21]         Tafsir Ahsanul-Bayan, Vol. 2, Commentary No. 2, p. 276.

[22]         The Life of Muhammad: Al-Waqidi’s Kitab al-Maghazi, p. 422.

[23]         Ahmad ibn Yahya ibn Jabir al-Baladhuri, The Origins of the Islamic State, Being a Translation from the Arabic, Accompanied with Annotations, Geographic and Historic Notes of the Kitab Fituh Al-Buldan of Al-Imam Abu-L Abbas Ahmad Ibn-Jabir Al-Baladhuri, trans. Philip Khuri Hitti (1916; rpt. Lexington, Kentucky: Ulan Press, 2014), p. 155.

[24]         Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarir al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari: The Conquest of Arabia, Vol. X, trans. and annotated Fred M. Donner (Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, 1993), pp. 191-192.

[25]         Sunan Ibn Majah, Vol. 1, No. 791, pp. 513-514.

[26]         The Al Qaeda Reader, trans. and ed. Raymond Ibrahim, (New York: Broadway Books, 2007), p. 167.

[27]         The Life of Muhammad (Sirat Rasul Allah), n. 858, p. 782.

[28]         The History of al-Tabari: The Conquest of Arabia,  p. 57.

[29]         Ibid., p. 100.

[30]         Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab at-Tamimi, Abridged Biography of Prophet Muhammad, ed. ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Nasir Al-Barrak, ‘Abdul ‘Azeez bin ‘Abdullah Ar-Rajihi, and Muhammad Al-‘Ali Al-Barrak (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 2003), p. 345.

[31]         The Origins of the Islamic State, p. 148.

[32]         The History of al-Tabari: The Conquest of Arabia, p. 80.

[33]         Jami’ At-Tirmidhi, Vol. 3, Comments to Hadith No. 1458, p. 244.

[34]         See “The Burning of the Murtadd Pilot,” Dabiq, Issue 7, February 2015, p. 5, https://islamseries.files.wordpress.com/2019/08/dabiq-issue-7-february-2015.pdf.

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

VIDEO: Florida Governor Ron DeSantis Speaks About Release of Jeffrey Epstein’s Secret Grand Jury Testimony

In a Business Insider column titled “DeSantis signs law to release records that could explain why Jeffrey Epstein got minimal charges in Florida and  report,

  • Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bipartisan bill into law that unearth more Jeffrey Epstein records.
  • The law will allow for the release of records from a 2006 Florida grand jury.
  • Prosecutors allowed Epstein to plead guilty to only a single prostitution solicitation charge.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday signed a bipartisan bill into law that could finally answer the lingering questions about 2006 grand jury probe that charged Jeffrey Epstein with just one criminal count.

“This is long overdue, but, again, we feel that we just can’t turn a blind eye,” DeSantis said shortly before signing HB 117 into law at a ceremony in Palm Beach. The law goes into effect July 1.

A Palm Beach grand jury investigation, which resulted in just one criminal count, of prostitution solicitation, has long been at the center of controversy for allowing Epstein to escape accountability for raping and sexually abusing girls.

Prosecutors decided to bring just a single victim before the grand jury even though law enforcement had concluded that Epstein sexually abused more than 30 girls, according to Miami Herald reporter Julie K. Brown’s book “Perversion of Justice.” A compensation program established following Epstein’s death identified 136 of his victims. More recent litigation, against banks that were alleged to facilitate Epstein’s sex-trafficking, put the figure at closer to 200 victims.

Continue reading.

WATCH: Ron DeSantis speaks out on new law that will release Jeffrey Epstein grand jury testimony

©2024. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.


Second Tranche Of Jeffrey Epstein Court Documents Unsealed

Hunter And His Uncle Can’t Get Their Story Straight About Key Meeting With Joe Biden

James Biden’s Feb. 21 closed-door congressional testimony conflicted with testimonies given by both Hunter Biden and Tony Bobulinski, a former business associate of Hunter’s.

James Biden says a meeting between him, Hunter, Bobulinski and Joe Biden at a California hotel during the 2017 Milken Institute conference never occurred, according to a transcript of his February testimony to the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability. Hunter Biden, however, attested that he, James, Bobulinski and his father did in fact meet at a hotel bar during his Wednesday testimony before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees.

Hunter Biden testified that he, Bobulinski and his uncle were drinking coffee in a hotel bar at 11 p.m. while waiting to meet with Joe Biden. Once Joe Biden arrived, he shook hands with Bobulinski, and the two spoke, according to Hunter’s testimony.

Hunter was unable to recall any details of the conversation between Bobulinski and his father beyond them talking about Bobulinski’s family member who was suffering from cancer.

Bobulinski claims to remember more details about the conversation.

Joe Biden met with the trio to discuss a business deal related to CEFC China Energy, a Chinese Communist Party-linked corporation, according to Bobulinski’s Feb. 13 testimony before the House Oversight Committee. Bobulinski said “the only reason I was there” was to talk business with the Bidens.

Joe Biden claimed in August 2023 he never “talked business” with Hunter’s associates.

James Biden, when asked about the alleged conversation with Joe Biden, said, “that I know did not happen.”

James Biden claimed that he “could have been there just with Tony Bobulinski” and that he “could have been there with Hunter as well” but that Joe Biden “was never there.”

James Biden previously denied having anything to do with Hunter’s CEFC China Energy dealings but changed his story when investigators presented him with a copy of an agreement featuring his signature alongside Hunter Biden and his business associates.

James Biden brushed off the possible reputational damage to his family over their Chinese business dealings, citing “plausible deniability,” according to Bobulinski’s testimony.





Hunter Biden Said He Was ‘High Out Of’ His ‘Mind’ When He Threatened Chinese Business Associate, GOP Rep Says

Hunter Biden Insists He Never Would Have Dropped His Infamous Laptop At Repair Shop —The Problem? There Are Receipts

‘No That’s Not True!’: Sunny Hostin Tries To Interrupt Co-Host As She Defends Trump’s Border Policies

Take A Look At Mika And Joe’s Faces As Their Heads Pretty Much Explode Over Trump’s Border Speech

RELATED VIDEO: Sean Hannity: How was Hunter Biden’s business in line with his experience?

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

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

Biden Campaign Co-Chair Suggests Deporting Illegal Immigrants Would Hurt The Economy

Democratic Texas Rep. Veronica Escobar on Friday suggested that deporting illegal immigrants would have adverse economic consequences.

President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump both visited the border and delivered remarks on Thursday. Escobar, co-chair of Biden’s 2024 reelection campaign, criticized Trump’s rhetoric and underscored the economic importance of immigrants in the workforce, advocating against deporting them on “CNN Newsroom With Jim Acosta.”

“Democrats have been willing over the decades to not just address border security as a whole, but also to address our workforce needs and to make sure that we remain a country of immigrants. Immigration is good for us economically,” Escobar asserted. “Republicans have created the current situation and we need solutions. But what Trump is signaling is horrific. He really does want to take us back to an era where people feared being in their own country simply because they belong to a minority group.”


Illegal immigration has massively increased under Biden as millions of migrants from around the world cross the southern border. One of Biden’s first actions in office was to issue executive actions revoking Trump-era border policies, including the Muslim travel ban and the border wall project.

“He‘s willing to violate the Constitution, violate our civil rights, violate constitutional rights,” Escobar told Acosta. “And let me tell you, it is impossible to deport every undocumented person in this country. There simply are not the resources nor is it advantageous to us. I mean, I’m sure you’ve seen the reports, Jim, that it has been immigrant labor, the immigrant workforce that has actually propped up our economy. The challenge we face is that Congress has not created legal pathways for them.”





Majority Of Americans Support Building Border Wall For First Time In Poll’s History

Federal Judge Blocks New Texas Law to Arrest Illegal Immigrants


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

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

Jewish Students Tell House Committee: ‘It’s Open Season on Jews on Our Campus’

Jews are fair game now. This is exactly what Jewish students and academics experienced in Nazi Germany.

For years, the growing Jew hatred on college campuses was ignored or excused. Before my colleagues and I were banned, we experienced vicious, violent hatred.

No one stood with us. Or took action.

What did they think was going. to happen?

‘I didn’t come to study in a living laboratory of antisemitism’

In DC, Jewish students tell House committee: ‘It’s open season on Jews on our campus’

Months after the Education and Workforce Committee hearing that contributed to the resignation of top school presidents, Jewish students say the hatred continues unchecked

By: Jordana Horn, Times of Israel, March 1, 2024:

NEW YORK — The House of Representatives’ Education and the Workforce Committee held a bipartisan roundtable Thursday with Jewish students from nine American universities to hear testimony about their experiences with antisemitism on campus.

Testimony given before the Education and Workforce Committee’s last hearing in December led to the resignations of Harvard University president Claudine Gay and University of Pennsylvania president Liz Magill.

“These students are dealing with antisemitism at their respective universities on a daily basis. Their courage to speak out and share their stories will give the American people a new look at what is truly happening on college campuses around the country,” Education and the Workforce Committee Chairwoman Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) said before the roundtable in a statement. “This roundtable will help inform the committee’s next steps in the antisemitism investigation as it continues to hold postsecondary education accountable for rampant antisemitism.”

Continue reading.



IT BEGINS: Muslim Guns Down Jewish Dentist in San Diego, Shoots Receptionist

UK Descending Into Mob Rule: Female MPs Given Bodyguards As Safety Fears Grow Over Islamic Threats

Anti-Israel Biden Regime Reverses U.S. Policy to Turn Up the Heat on Israel

Hamas Claims Seven Hostages Dead

MSNBC: Great Threat to Democracy is White Rural Voters

RELATED VIDEO: America Is Still the Land of Equal Opportunity (for Criminals, at Least) | TIPPING POINT


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

Democrat Senator Calls Pedophiles ‘Minor Attracted Persons’ Advocates for CHILD SEX DOLLS

The Democrat party is evil.

Good decent people should not be forced to live under their rule.

The election system has been hijacked by the Democrat party of treason.

Where is our George Washington?

Kentucky Democrat Proposes Child Sex Dolls for Pedophiles

By James Bickerton • US News Reporter

A Democratic state senator from Kentucky has suggested providing “child sex dolls” to pedophiles in a bid to reduce the chance of them abusing children.

Speaking at the Kentucky General Assembly on Thursday, Senator Karen Berg said there was research suggesting the dolls “actually decrease their proclivity to go out and attack children.” The remarks sparked an angry backlash on social media with one prominent commentator accusing Berg of “sexualizing kids and defending pedophiles.”

The Context

There is an ongoing debate involving academics and politicians over whether child sex dolls could help prevent assaults on children or whether they act as a gateway for potential abusers. Republican Representative Dan Donovan has twice introduced legislation in the House that would make the “importation or transportation of child sex dolls” illegal, while others have called for an outright ban.

What We Know

During her address in the Kentucky General Assembly, Berg said: “I was completely unfamiliar with child sex dolls, so I had of course to Google it last night…

“But there are what they call ‘MAPS,’ Minor Attracted Persons and the limited amount of research that’s done on these dolls suggests that they actually, for people who are attracted to minors, that these dolls actually decrease their proclivity to go out and attack children.

“That it actually gives them a release that makes them less likely to go outside of their home and what was interesting is the research did not support the same conclusions for people who were adult attracted using dolls.”

Footage of Berg’s remarks was shared on X, formerly Twitter, by Robby Starbuck, a conservative-leaning activist who produced the Elon Musk-endorsed documentary The War on Children. The clip has so far received more than 595,000 views and 3,100 reposts from other X users.

Continue reading.



The Deep State’s #1 Priority is to Legalize Anal and Vaginal Sex with Underaged Boys and Girls

Did You Know That Charles Darwin’s 10 Children Were The Products of An Incestuous Relationship?

Nancy Pelosi’s Husband Paul Charged with Possession of Child Pornography and Crack Cocaine

The ‘Transgender Revolution’: Sexual Anarchy in the Catholic Church, Boy Scouts of America and Public Schools

RELATED VIDEO: Marjorie Taylor Greene Says “Democrats Are Pedophiles” on 60 Minutes

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

Federal Judge Blocks New Texas Law to Arrest Illegal Immigrants

G-d help us.

Federal Judge Blocks New Texas Law to Arrest Illegal Immigrants

By Jack Phillips, NTD, February 29, 2024:

Federal Judge Blocks New Texas Law to Arrest Illegal Immigrants

A Border Patrol agent guides illegal immigrants that crossed into Shelby Park into a Border Patrol van to be taken to a processing center in Eagle Pass, Texas, on Feb. 4, 2024.

A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked a Texas law that grants state police the capacity to arrest people who are suspected of illegally crossing the U.S.–Mexico border.

The measure, called Senate Bill 4 and signed by Gov. Greg Abbott in December, was slated to go into effect on March 5, but U.S. District Judge David Ezra ruled that it violated the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy clause that grants the federal government sole authority over immigration matters. The judge also rejected Texas’s arguments that it was being invaded under the Constitution’s Article IV.

In his order, Judge Ezra, a Reagan appointee, said the law would run afoul federal immigration laws and claimed Texas would then be able to “permanently supersede federal directives” and would “amount to nullification of federal law and authority.” According to the judge, that’s a “notion that is antithetical to the Constitution and has been unequivocally rejected by federal courts since the Civil War.”

As a result, he argued, the federal government would “suffer grave irreparable harm” because other states would be inspired to pass similar measures. “SB 4 threatens the fundamental notion that the United States must regulate immigration with one voice,” he wrote.

At a Feb. 15 hearing, Judge Ezra expressed skepticism as the state pleaded its case for what is known as Senate Bill 4. He also said he was somewhat sympathetic to the concerns expressed by Mr. Abbott and other state officials about the unprecedented influx of illegal aliens. Judge Ezra then added that he feared the United States could become a confederation of states enforcing their own immigration laws.

“That is the same thing the Civil War said you can’t do,” he told the attorneys.

A lawyer for the state of Texas argued in court that due to the deluge of illegal immigrants, enabled by drug cartels and smugglers, it is tantamount to an invasion and that Texas has the right to defend itself under the Constitution.

But the judge said that while he is “sympathetic” to the state’s concerns, he appeared to be skeptical of the lawyer’s argument. “I haven’t seen, and the state of Texas can’t point me to any type of military invasion in Texas,” Judge Ezra said. “I don’t see evidence that Texas is at war.”

Continue reading.


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

The Shameful Silencing of Foes of Jihad Violence and Sharia Oppression of Women

Brendan O’Neill is right: “The intention is as clear as it is repellent: to send the message that it isn’t Islamism that’s the problem – it’s ‘Islamophobia.’” But this endeavor has been going on far longer than the brouhaha over Lee Anderson.

It goes back to incidents such as the British government’s persecution of Tommy Robinson and the banning of foreign foes of jihad violence and Sharia oppression from entering the country.

Many, if not most, of the “respectable” critics of “radical Islam” had little or nothing to say about those incidents, and now they, and Britain at large, are reaping the rewards of their cowardice and pusillanimity.

The shameful silencing of radical Islam’s critics

by Brendan O’Neill, Spiked, February 25, 2024:

What Tory MP Lee Anderson said this week was dumb. But what the cultural elites are doing on the back of Anderson’s comments is outright sinister.

They are using his outburst about ‘the Islamists’ having ‘control’ over London mayor Sadiq Khan to distract attention from the very real threat Islamists pose in 21st-century Britain. They are holding him up as oafish proof that the ‘real threat’ is the ‘far right’ and ‘Islamophobes’ – gruff gammon like him – not those mystical ‘Islamists’ people keep banging on about. They are exploiting the Anderson scandal to achieve something they’ve wanted to achieve since the 7 October pogrom and the orgy of bigotry it licensed in Britain and other Western nations – that is, shift the public’s attention away from Islamism and back to ‘Islamophobia’. It is one of the most cynical political manoeuvres of modern times….

And yet, for all their daftness, the reaction to Anderson’s comments has felt wildly overblown. Not to mention transparently self-serving. Political influencers have not contented themselves with criticising him, or branding him a raging Islamophobe, if that’s what they want to do. No, they’ve made him into the archetype of ‘Islamophobic Britain’. They’ve crowned him King Gammon, who merely gives voice to a phobic derangement that is all-pervasive. The irony is too much – they damn the conspiracist mindset that sees Islamists as the puppeteers of public life while promoting their own unhinged theory that actually it’s Islamophobes who haunt every corridor of power.

Khan says Anderson’s blather is symptomatic of a ‘massive increase in Islamophobia’. The Scottish first minister, Humza Yousaf, says Anderson’s comments are proof of ‘how acceptable and pervasive Islamophobia has become in our society’. We now know that ‘Islamophobia is rampant in the Tories’, says the Guardian’s Owen Jones.

This giddy extrapolation from one loudmouth’s musings on a TV show to the end of tarring the entire nation as ‘Islamophobic’ is not only cynical – it’s ominous. The intention is as clear as it is repellent: to send the message that it isn’t Islamism that’s the problem – it’s ‘Islamophobia’. Worse, Anderson-bashers are implying, if not outright stating, that critics of Islamism pose a larger threat to the nation than Islamism itself. Especially its right-wing critics, those ‘far right’ goons like Anderson and Braverman, as they crazily view those outspoken Tories. We are witnessing nothing less than a top-down cultural assault on truth – the truth here being that radical Islam is indeed a major threat to life, limb and democracy….

Continue reading.



Greece: Muslim migrant stabs Greek woman on central Athens street

California: ‘Disgruntled’ Muslim patient shoots and kills Orthodox Jewish dentist

William Dalrymple Is Out Far and In Deep

Hamas on October 7th: The Teachings of Islam on Display (Part 1)

Media Blackout: 67+ ‘Prominent’ Muslims in Minnesota Arrested in Biggest U.S. Pandemic-Era Fraud Scheme

Hamas Staged a Food Aid Riot to Blame Israel and Retain Control Over Aid

New Zealand designates Hamas a terror group and imposes sanctions on ‘extremist Israeli settlers’

Hamas’ Claim That IDF Killed 100 Civilians In Attack On Aid Trucks Doesn’t Hold Up to Scrutiny

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

Dr. Strangelove Returns From The Dead

Vladimir Putin on Thursday threatened global nuclear war if the West followed through on hints by French president Macron that NATO was contemplating sending troops to Ukraine.

Putin made those comments in his annual “state of the nation” address. Less than 24-hours later, he followed up by test-firing a solid-fuel Yars ICBM, which NATO dubs the SS-29.

The Yars, like its newer cousin, the liquid-fueled Sarmat (Satan-2), can carry nuclear-armed hypersonic glide vehicles that fly at speeds up to Mach 25 and that can defeat any missile defense systems currently deployed or under development. Both missiles, and a variety of hypersonic re-entry vehicles, are part of a $650 billion upgrade to Russia’s nuclear arsenal Putin announced more a decade ago.

As for Macron (or Little Cookie, as I call him in my latest book, Raising Olives in Provence), made his careless comments at a NATO summit in Paris on Monday.

But the one who really let the cat out of the bag was German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who told the group that Germany was not going to send its Taurus long range cruise missiles to Ukraine because it would require German military personnel on the ground.

Taurus “is a very long-range weapon,” he said, “and what was done on the part of the British and French in terms of target-control and target-control assistance can’t be done in Germany.” That prompted British lawmaker Tobias Elwood to tell London’s Daily Telegraph that Scholz had committed “a flagrant abuse of intelligence.”

That is undoubtedly true. Both comments were picked up by the online service of Russia Today (or RT, as it’s now called), Putin’s megaphone to the West.

The deployment to Ukraine of NATO weaponry that can reach deep into Russia has long been a red line for Putin. “They should eventually realize that we also have weapons that can hit targets on their territory,” he said on Thursday. “Everything that the West comes up with creates the real threat of a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons, and thus the destruction of civilization,” he added.

And if the threat of global nuclear war from Russia wasn’t enough, also on Thursday the commander of U.S. Space Force, General Stephen Whiting, told Congress that China has expanded its military capabilities in space at a “breathtaking pace,” with some 359 satellites currently in orbit, three times the number aloft in 2018.

Whiting testified that some of China’s satellites “could function as weapons that can disrupt” U.S. satellites. Like Russia, China was developing hypersonic glide vehicles capable of defeating U.S. missile defenses.

You could call this week’s events a throwback to the era of Dr. Strangelove, except that they involved real leaders, not Hollywood fictions.

©2024. Kenneth R. Timmerman. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Western Islamists Work to Build the Taliban’s Afghanistan into a Global Caliphate

I discuss this and developments in Iran and Israel on this week’s Prophecy Today Weekend. As always, you can listen live on Saturday at 1 PM on 104.9 FM or 550 AM, or by using the Jacksonville Way Radio app. And if you miss it, you can download the podcast here.

He Or She Who Is Given Power Will Use It

Is this the week that the First Amendment died? 

Blaze Journalist, Steve Baker, reporting the truth backed up with photos was arrested for reporting on J6.  Soon we will find out that their was no insurrection and the regime had a hand in sponsoring J6. We regime has too much power and now they control MSM.  Do not believe anything they say. They are looking to make an example of J6.  They want us to know that if we report the truth, we could wind up in Jail. I will not comply. I will not be silent. I will not go quietly.

As the election cycle rolls around it is up to us to decide who we will give power to.

According to “Rothbard’s Law,” namely that he who is given power will use it.

Once you give power it is difficult – not impossible to change that decision.   I wonder if the people in NY have learned that lesson yet.  It sees as though their “GET TRUMP,” Affirmative Action Graduate, Soros funded AG, Letitia James is going to make sure that every business in NY leaves. As Kevin O’Leary said, “No Business in NY is safe any more.”

Does James know that she is throwing out the goose and once gone there will be no more golden eggs or does she even care? Soros-Funded New York AG Targets World’s Top Beef Producer Over “Environmental Impact”:

New York Attorney General Letitia James on February 28th, 2024 filed a lawsuit against JBS USA Food Company and JBS USA Food Company Holdings (JBS USA), the American subsidiary of the world’s largest producer of beef products, for misleading the public about its environmental impact. JBS USA has claimed that it will achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2040, despite documented plans to increase production, and therefore increase its carbon footprint.

Personally, I believe that they are so drunk with power that consequences don’t matter. After all there is always Uncle Sam or Uncle George to bail them out. Of course both DA Fani Willis and James think they are above the law. There are no consequences for their actions.  While Fani was using taxpayer funds, Letitia was using campaign funds to support their lavish lifestyle.   James misuses campaign funds.

They both thought no one could touch them and for too long they were right. Driven like they are after listening to them talk about Trump I could see the evil streak of envy and jealousy ooze out of their every word. This is what Affirmative Action and CRT teaches.  I do believe however, that the truth will prevail and these scam trials will be seen for what they are and Corrupt Fani, Corrupt Letitia  eventually will fail.

I just said that they are Affirmative Action and CRT graduates but what does that mean? Affirmative Action and CRT are rooted in Globalism which is just the latest variation of socialism where the state (government) is all powerful. The people will own nothing. Everything will be given to you by the state. You must behave and spew the latest narrative to survive or if you speak in opposition, you lose.

Everything is connected. Nothing is random, Everything is run by the same people. Everything has a plan. All plans are lies. All Globalists want is MONEY, POWER, CONTROL They will never stop taking your stuff.

We must protect our local communities. Make sure your sheriff understands the constitution. Check all grants for loopholes.  Check and monitor legislation and rules that demand:

  1. The state has ultimate power over all local events
  2. The employees are DIE compliant not the best and brightest, You don’t need those that click a box in order to fill the position. As you can see corrupt Willis and James just clicked the right DIE box.  They are obedient and just follow orders.
  3. Prohibit you from getting on your planning and zoning boards. You don’t need to hire a “central planner ‘ or a “sustainability planner” from out of town to become your town planner. Remember they were trained to eliminate private property.
  4. Laws that inhibit “free speech”.  Your town does not need hate speech enforcers or censors.
  5. Eliminate or limit your time public meetings.  Always be courteous, never lose your temper but demand your time and issue be heard.

Remember, they lie about everything so it is important for you to always reference the facts. Always ask how much this will cost and who is paying for it? Conduct oversight where ever and whenever possible. Then contact your 5. Share the information.

I just gave you 2 examples of how Affirmative Action has destroyed the legal system. Our guests today will tell you how Affirmative Action has destroyed the medical and educational profession. Just because your state might have a law against Affirmative Action does not mean that the law is being followed. That part is up to us.


All Globalists want is Money Control and Power. They can only get Power if we give it to them. Don’t give them yours.

Challenge them with the truth.

Doing Nothing is affirmation.

Please say a prayer for all those families were ruined at the hands of this globalist regime.

©2024. Karen Schoen, All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: FBI Orders Blaze Reporter Steve Baker to Turn Himself In with Breanna Morello – OAN


Prism of America’s Education Show Link: https://www.americaoutloud.news/the-prism-of-americas-education/

Hamas on October 7th: The Teachings of Islam on Display — Part 1

On October 7, 2023, at about 6:30 AM, Hamas jihadists attacked Israel.  These jihadists killed people attending an open-air music festival and people who lived in the Israeli communities close to the border.

By the time the Israeli military regained control of the affected areas in southern Israel, more than a thousand people – mostly civilians – had been killed, hundreds of houses looted and burned, and more than 230 men, women, and children taken hostage.[1]

The Hamas jihadists also displayed a callous savagery toward the people they engaged.  Among the atrocities committed by these Hamas jihadists were:

  • Beheadings
  • Burning People Alive
  • Killing Non-Combatants/Disbelievers
  • Killing Women and Children
  • Mutilations
  • Rape of Non-Muslim Women
  • Torture

There has been a great amount of outrage expressed about these atrocities.  However, there has also been a large amount of support expressed for the Hamas jihadists.  This support is found largely on college campuses and among Muslim populations.

Unfortunately, such support among Muslim populations should not be surprising.  The Hamas jihadists were following the commands of Allah found in the Koran and the teachings and example of Muhammad, Islam’s Perfect Man and a timeless example that Muslims are expected to follow if they want Allah to admit them into Paradise (see Koran Chapter 33, Verse 21).

The jihadists’ attitude toward the Jews were formed by teachings of Islam such as these:

Koran Chapter 5, Verse 51:  O you who believe!  Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliya’ (friends, protectors, helpers), they are but Auliya’ of each other. 

Koran Chapter 5, Verse 82:  Verily, you will find the strongest among men in enmity to the believers (Muslims) the Jews and those who are Al-Mushrikun,

Koran Chapter 9, Verse 30:  And the Jews say: ‘Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allah.  That is their saying with their mouths, resembling the saying of those who disbelieved aforetime.  Allah’s curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!

It was narrated from ‘Amr bin Shu’aib, from his father, from his grandfather, that the Messenger of Allah ruled that the blood money for the People of the Book is half of that of the blood money for the Muslims, and they are the Jews and Christians.[2]

Narrated Abu Hurairah: Allah’s Messenger said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight against the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say, ‘O Muslim!  There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.’”[3]

And why were the Hamas jihadists following Allah and Muhammad?  Because the Koran commands them to do so, for example:

Chapter 33, Verse 36:  It is not for a believer [Muslim], man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger, have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision.  And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed into a plain error.

Chapter 59, Verse 7:  …And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad) gives you, take it; and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it).  And fear Allah; verily, Allah is Severe in punishment.

Chapter 4, Verse 115:  And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger (Muhammad) after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believers’ way, We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell – what an evil destination!

Each of the atrocities listed above is supported by the commands of Allah found in the Koran and/or the teachings and example of Muhammad.  Let’s examine each atrocity.

Rape of Non-Muslim Women

Islam allows the rape of non-Muslim women.  A non-Muslim woman captured by Muslims during a battle falls under the category of those “whom your right hands possess.”  She then becomes a slave to her Muslim captor and it becomes “legal” for him to have intercourse with her.  This is authorized by Koran 4:24, which begins by talking about how Muslim men are forbidden from marrying (and having sex with) women who are already married, but then makes an important exception:

…except those (slaves) whom your right hands possess.  Thus has Allah ordained for you…

The Muslim scholar Ibn Kathir explained the meaning of this verse:

The Ayah [verse] means, you are prohibited from marrying women who are already married, (except those whom your right hands possess) except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant.  Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri said, “We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands.  So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed…Consequently we had sexual relations with these women.”[4]

So instead of Muhammad prohibiting his Muslim warriors from raping the women they had captured in the area of Awtas, Koran 4:24 was “revealed” to him giving his Muslim warriors Allah’s authorization to also actually go ahead and rape them.

Muhammad’s attitude about how captured non-Muslim women could be treated was shown again in another eye-opening example in which Muhammad condoned the rape of female captives from the non-Muslim Mustaliq tribe.

In this story about the Mustaliq tribe we shall see that the only problem to be resolved was whether or not the ransom the Muslims were expecting for these particular female captives would be affected if those captives were returned pregnant.  In response to the question from his Muslim warriors about whether they should therefore engage in coitus interruptus with their soon-to-be rape victims, Muhammad, instead of prohibiting the rapes, merely said that coitus interruptus would not matter because every soul that was destined to be born would be born:

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id Al Khudri (Allah he pleased with him): O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (SAW) mentioning al-‘azl [coitus interruptus]? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (SAW) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq.  We took captive some excellent Arab women.  We desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl…But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (SAW), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.[5]

So Muhammad gave his approval to the rape of these “excellent Arab women.”  It is an interesting side note that coitus interruptus was one of the “ten characteristics” that Muhammad disliked.[6]

It should therefore come as no surprise that the founders of the four major Sunni schools of Islamic Sacred Law agreed that

…when a married woman becomes a prisoner of war without her husband, her contract of marriage with her husband ends, and her new master has the right to have sexual relations with her after the birth of a child if she is pregnant, or after waiting a while to confirm the status of her womb if she is not apparently pregnant.[7]

Has there been any change in the understanding of this verse over the centuries?  The answer is “No.”  The 20th century Koran commentary Tafsir Ahsanul-Bayan explained Koran 4:24 this way:

The historical background of the verse is that when pagan women were captured by Muslims in battles, they disliked having intercourse with them because they had husbands.  The Companions asked the Messenger of Allah about it.  Thereupon, this verse was revealed.  The verse allowed the Muslims to have intercourse with pagan women if they were captured in battles even if they had husbands, providing their wombs have been cleansed, that is, after one menses or, in case they are pregnant, after the delivery of the child.[8]

Although it is claimed that the Muslim warrior is not allowed to rape his captive until he has waited to make sure that she is not pregnant, as we saw above this was ignored even in Muhammad’s time.  Here are additional examples of Muhammad handing out newly captured non-Muslim women to his Muslim warriors:

  1. After the defeat of the Jewish Banu Qurayzah tribe, Muhammad divided up that tribe’s “property, wives, and children” among the Muslims, with the exception of some of the women that he sent to Najd and to Syria to be sold for horses and weapons.[9]
  2. After the defeat of the Jews at Khaybar, Muhammad had the women of Khaybar “distributed among the Muslims.”[10]
  3. After the non-Muslim Hawazin tribe was defeated, Muhammad gave Ali, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman (all later “Rightly Guided” Caliphs) each a woman from among those captured.  ‘Umar then gave his to his son.[11]  Muhammad gave other “slave girls” to some of his Muslim warriors, who, along with ‘Uthman, then had “intercourse” with their slaves.  It was reported that ‘Uthman’s slave-girl “detested him” after the “intercourse.”[12]

So we can see that the commands of Allah in the Koran and the teachings and example of Muhammad fully support the raping of non-Muslim women by the HAMAS jihadists.

Ibn Salih Al-Uthaymin, a 20th century Muslim scholar, summed it up well:

But if the dividing (of the Ghanimah) [spoils of war] takes place, and the woman from them ends up as a slave woman, then she becomes property of the right hand.  The person can have intercourse with her as a right hand possession, which is permissible and there is nothing wrong with this.[13]

On October 7th Hamas jihadists were committed to following those commands of Allah and those teachings and example of Muhammad.

Haim Outmezgine, commander of a special unit of Zaka, which collects the remains of the dead, told The Sunday Times it was clear Hamas terrorists aimed to sexually assault women.

“We collected 1,000 bodies in ten days from the festival site and kibbutzim,” he said.

“No one saw more than us. It was clear they were trying to spread as much horror as they could — to kill, to burn alive, to rape … it seemed their mission was to rape as many as possible.”[14]

Israeli officials pointed to a Hamas pamphlet discovered on Nov. 2 that gives detailed instructions about how to pronounce phrases in Hebrew including “raise your hands and open your legs” and “take off your pants.”

During interrogations, captured Hamas militants talked about raping women and children as a Hamas tactic of war. “To have our way with them, to dirty them, to rape them,” said one Hamas militant during a videotaped interrogation.[15]

Killing Women and Children

It is commonly claimed that Muhammad had issued a general prohibition against the killing of women and children, and that this was established Islamic Doctrine.  There are two popular hadiths that are often used to support this claim:

It has been reported from Sulaiman b. Buraid through his father that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him to fear Allah and to be good to the Muslims who were with him.  He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah.  Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah.  Make a holy war… do not kill the children.[16]


Ibn ‘Umar narrated that a woman was found killed in one of the expeditions of the Messenger of Allah, so the Messenger of Allah rebuked that, and he prohibited killing women and children.[17]

So according to the first hadith, whenever Muhammad appointed anyone to lead a Muslim army or detachment, he would issue an order that children were not to be killed.  And the second hadith states that Muhammad prohibited the general killing of women and children.

However, Muhammad never issued such sweeping prohibitions.

For example, when it came to women criticizing him, Muhammad had no problem with such women being killed:

  1. “Ibn ‘Abbas told us that a blind man had a female slave…who reviled the Prophet and disparaged him, and he told her not to do that, but she did not stop…One night she started to disparage and revile the Prophet, so he took a dagger and put it in her stomach and pressed on it and killed her…The next morning mention of that was made to the Prophet and he assembled the people and said: ‘By Allah, I adjure the man who did this, to stand up.’ The blind man stood up…and he came and sat before the Prophet.  He said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, I am the one who did it.  She used to revile you and disparage you, and I told her not to do it, but she did not stop…Last night she started to revile you and disparage you, and I took a dagger and placed it on her stomach and I pressed on it until I killed her.’  The Prophet said: ‘Bear witness that no retaliation is due for her blood.’”[18]
  2. It was narrated from ‘Ali that a Jewish woman used to revile and disparage the Prophet. A man strangled her until she died, and the Messenger of Allah declared that no recompense was payable for her blood.[19]

And when the actions of Muhammad are examined chronologically, one finds that instead of it being a general, all-encompassing prohibition issued by Muhammad, and therefore an established part of Islamic doctrine, the prohibition against the killing of women and children was a specific, situational prohibition based on Muhammad’s judgment at the time.  At other times he actually advocated for or allowed the killing of women and children.

For the details about this, see my article “Muhammad and the Killing of Women and Children.”[20]

On to Part 2

In Part 2 we will examine more of the atrocities committed by the HAMAS jihadists.


Dr. Stephen M. Kirby is the author of six books about Islam. His latest book is Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials.


[1]           “Interview: Building the Evidence for Crimes Committed in Israel on October 7,” Human Rights Watch, January 31, 2024, https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/01/31/interview-building-evidence-crimes-committed-israel-october-7.

[2]           Muhammad bin Yazeed ibn Majah al-Qazwini, Sunan Ibn Majah, trans. Nasiruddin al-Khattab (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 2007), Vol. 3, No. 2644, p. 521.

[3]           Muhammad bin Ismail bin Al-Mughirah al-Bukhari, Sahih Al-Bukhari, trans. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 1997), Vol. 4, Book 56, No. 2926,  p. 113.  In another hadith Muhammad said that the Jews would hide behind stones and trees, and these stones and trees would call out,

Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

Abu’l Hussain ‘Asakir-ud-Din Muslim bin Hajjaj al-Qushayri al-Naisaburi, Sahih Muslim, trans. ‘Abdul Hamid Siddiqi (New Delhi, India: Adam Publishers and Distributors, 2008),Vol. 8, No. 2922, p. 349.

[4]           Abu al-Fida’ ‘Imad Ad-Din Isma’il bin ‘Umar bin Kathir al-Qurashi Al-Busrawi, Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), abr. Shaykh Safiur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri, trans. Jalal Abualrub, et al. (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 2000), Vol. 2, p. 422.

[5]           Sahih Muslim, Vol. 4, No. 1438, p. 373.

[6]           Abu Dawud Sulaiman bin al-Ash’ath bin Ishaq, Sunan Abu Dawud, trans. Yaser Qadhi (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 2008),Vol. 4, No. 4222, p. 474.

[7]           Abu ‘Eisa Mohammad ibn ‘Eisa at-Tirmidhi, Jami’ At-Tirmidhi, trans. Abu Khaliyl (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 2007), Vol. 2, Comments to Hadith No. 1132, p. 503.

[8]           Salahuddin Yusuf, Tafsir Ahsanul-Bayan, trans. Mohammad Kamal Myshkat (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 2010, 2012 and 2013), Vol. 1, pp. 441-442.

[9]           Muhammad ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad (Sirat Rasul Allah), trans. Alfred Guillaume (Karachi, Pakistan: Oxford University Press, 2007),  p. 466.

[10]         Ibid., p. 511.

[11]         Ibid., p. 593.

[12]         Muhammad b. ‘Umar al-Waqidi, The Life of Muhammad: Al-Waqidi’s Kitab al-Maghazi, trans. Rizwi Faizer, Amal Ismail, and AbdulKader Tayob, ed. Rizwi Faizer (London and New York: Routledge, 2013), p. 462.

[13]         The Clarification Regarding Intentionally Targetting Women and Children, At-Tibyan Publications, October 31, 2004, p. 73.

[14]         “Hamas gang raped and beheaded women at rave massacre, fresh testimony reveals,” The Jewish Chronicle, December 3, 2023, https://www.thejc.com/news/israel/Hamas-gang-raped-and-beheaded-women-at-rave-massacre-fresh-testimony-reveals-blp0ghdl.

[15]         Anna Schecter, “Their bodies tell their stories. They’re not alive to speak for themselves.,” NBC News, December 5, 2023, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/Hamas-rape-israeli-women-oct-7-rcna128221.

[16]         Sahih Muslim, Vol. 5, No. 1731R1, pp. 162-163.

[17]         Jami’ At-Tirmidhi, Vol. 3, No. 1569, pp. 341-342.

[18]         Sunan Abu Dawud, Vol. 5, No. 4361, pp. 20-21.

[19]         Ibid., No. 4362, p. 21.

[20]         Stephen M. Kirby, “Muhammad and the Killing of Women and Children,” Jihad Watch, February 23, 2021, https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/02/muhammad-and-the-killing-of-women-and-children.

More Money for a Woke Pentagon? ‘No Sir, Not This Time. We’re Not Falling for That’: Senator

Hill leaders may have escaped another shutdown showdown, but there’ll be plenty of heavy-lifting when Congress comes back into session next week. It hasn’t been easy, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said, “trying to turn the aircraft carrier back to real budgeting and spending reform.” His analogy for getting back to real appropriations work was an interesting one, since Republicans seem to swing an ax at every budget but one: Defense. And maybe, one senator says, it’s time to rethink that.

The party of frugality has always had one big exception. No matter how deep America’s debt, Republicans have never minded funneling money to the military — and, in most cases, argued for more. With Gaza in flames, Russia on the move, and China ready to take over the world, beefing up our national security seems reasonable. But is that what this money is actually doing? Or are Republicans making billions of dollars sacrosanct without proof that our military is actually becoming stronger and more prepared because of it?

Right now, the U.S. Army is at its smallest size since 1940 — and getting smaller. Just this week, leaders announced a 24,000-person cut, because too many jobs remain empty. They’ve tried dropping standards — letting soldiers enlist without a high school degree in some branches, allowing retired officers to return, even telling men and women they can show up to boot camp with marijuana in their system. And still, the military is 41,000 recruits short — with no end to the struggles in sight.

Worse, the Pentagon we do have is falling woefully short of expectations. In last month’s edition of the Index of U.S. Military Strength, The Heritage Foundation rated America’s military as “weak” and “at significant risk of not being able to meet the demands of a single major regional conflict.” It was the second year in a row they’d earned such a dismal ranking. More specifically, they categorized the branches this way: Army: marginal; Navy: weak; Air Force: very weak; Marine Corps: strong; Space Force: marginal; and nuclear capabilities: marginal.

We’re spending more, but not smarter, Heritage’s Wilson Beaver warns. China, on the other hand, has become such a sophisticated force that their “increased capabilities” have put the U.S. on notice, raising questions about whether we could even counter a challenge from the communist regime.

Now, in this race to pass appropriations bills (one of which is Defense), Republicans have been fighting to protect their golden calf from cuts, which is a scenario Congress faces if it doesn’t pass all of its bills by April 30. But as Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) pointed out, would slashing part of the Pentagon’s budget be such a horrible thing? We’re throwing billions of dollars at the military, he pointed out, “and how’s that working out for us?” We can’t recruit, our readiness is negligible, and our leadership is more focused on pronouns than warfare.

Republicans have been “saluting the military industrial complex at every turn and saying year after year, ‘Well, I don’t want to spend this much, and we ought to be able to have some sort of policy win here. We’re not getting that. But, gosh, the troops and the Pentagon demand it. They’ve got more weapons to buy. We’ve got to give them whatever they want.’ And they rope-a-dope us into giving them whatever we want,” Lee vented to Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on “Washington Watch” Wednesday. “That is why we’re $34 trillion in debt.”

“That,” Lee went on, “is giving money to a Pentagon that is woke. It’s more focused on being politically correct than it is on actually protecting American national security. That, Tony, is giving hard-earned American taxpayer dollars to America’s enemies or those determined to assist America’s enemies,” he said with intensity. “We shouldn’t be facilitating any of that. Not with this administration, not with this Department of Defense, not with Secretary Lloyd Austin, who has betrayed the American people in so many ways. No, sir. Not this time. We’re not following. We’re not falling for that, and neither should any Republican.”

This is a problem, Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Robert Maginnis reminds people, that didn’t happen overnight. This “radical social engineering tainting the Pentagon,” he told The Washington Stand, “arguably began with Bill Clinton, continued under Barack Obama, and now is accelerated under Joe Biden.” Ultimately, the FRC senior fellow for National Defense, said, “This robs our ranks of readiness, wastes funding, and creates a recruiting shortfall by stiff-arming the traditional conservatives that would otherwise fill our ranks.”

Lee is right about the waste, fraud, and abuse, Maginnis agrees. The DOD “doesn’t know how it spends the taxpayer dollars.” And unfortunately, “the problem is … complicated because we face a phalanx of real adversaries equipped with very sophisticated weapons and platforms. We are trying to keep pace, which is incredibly expensive: space race, hypersonics, quantum computer, AI, drones and much, much more.”

The only way to fix this “is to divorce our Defense establishment from the radical political agendas and then focus like a laser on true national security.” That will be expensive, he conceded, “however, it can be done more efficiently, and we ought to cut out the nonsense like DEI training, wasteful investments, and much more.”

Until the president and his team gets “serious enough about our challenges and finding savings for the taxpayer,” Maginnis said, nothing will change. This spending debate is the Republican Party’s opportunity, Perkins insisted. “This is the moment to force them to choose between their woke DEI policies and actually doing what their mission calls for.”


Suzanne Bowdey

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

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

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

Illegal Immigrants Continue to Commit Violent Crimes as Sanctuary Cities Reassess Policies

Violent crimes committed by illegal immigrants continue to rise throughout the country, resulting in American citizens being attacked, raped, and murdered. Experts are noting that these are the same migrants who receive taxpayer-funded health care, housing, education, food, and more.

The most high-profile story making news is last week’s murder of 22-year-old Laken Riley. She was a young nursing student at Augusta University who never returned from her jog Thursday morning because she was brutally murdered by who police believe to be a man named Jose Antonio Ibarra, who is also an illegal immigrant.

Not only does Ibarra have a criminal record in the U.S. since arriving illegally, but his brother does as well. Ibarra has been charged with theft, child endangerment, and murder, among other crimes. And his brother, Diego Ibarra, along with stealing, was recently caught giving police a fake green card with two different birth dates on it. This happened after he was stopped by police for driving while drinking beer — which the migrant told the officer was his seventh since he’d been behind the wheel.

On Monday, police in Maryland charged Nilson Trejo-Granados, one of five suspects, for the first and second-degree murder of two-year-old Jeremy Poou Caceres. Before being arrested for murder, Trejo-Granados was charged with theft in March 2023.

On February 20, Angel Matias Castellanos-Orellana allegedly raped a 14-year-old girl at knifepoint, and on February 25, he repeatedly stabbed a man in the face and back, demanding the man give him his property. According to The Post Millennial, “He was arrested and booked on armed robbery, aggravated battery, first-degree rape, and aggravated assault and a federal ‘ICE’ detainer was also issued for him.”

In addition, last month a group of alleged illegal immigrants viciously attacked New York City police officers in Times Square. As crimes committed by illegal immigrants skyrocket, some sanctuary cities are starting to reassess their policies. In fact, it was this beating in NYC that caused Mayor Eric Adams (D) to say during a townhall meeting, “Those who are committing crimes, we need to modify the sanctuary city law. If you commit a felony, a violent act, we should be able to turn you over to [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] ICE and have you deported.”

And the Big Apple isn’t the only city backtracking. According to The Daily Wire, “The city council of Aurora, which sits just east of Denver, approved a resolution in a 7-3 vote on Monday demanding that large groups of migrants not be transported there since it is unable to fund new services for migrants or homeless people.”

In addition to a call to “secure our nation’s border,” the resolution said: “The City Council affirms remaining a Non-Sanctuary City and asserts the City does not currently have the financial capacity to fund new services related to this crisis and demands that other municipalities and entities do not systematically transport migrants or people experiencing homelessness to the City.”

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said on “Washington Watch” Wednesday that these harsh and dangerous circumstances only highlight “the damage inflicted by the Left’s public policy decisions [and] their open borders.” Congressman Rich McCormick (R-Ga.), who serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the House Armed Services Committee, agreed, noting that these policies have allowed “some nefarious people … across the border.”

McCormick pointed out that Venezuela currently has a record low crime rate. “Why do you think it is?” he asked. It’s because Venezuela is “getting rid of their criminals” by sending them to the U.S. through the open border, he said. “Bad people are crossing the border. … We have record numbers of deaths from fentanyl. We have record amount of child trafficking, rape, [and] murder. … I’ve been talking about it for years. This is a significant problem.”

He added, “If you’re coming to this country and committing crimes, and then you continue to commit crimes and have been released, what are we doing?” A major issue facing America, McCormick shared, is that these illegal immigrants and violent criminals are being released as if they’re “regular citizens.” But “they’re not,” he said. “They’re here illegally. … This should be an ICE issue,” because when an illegal immigrant gets arrested, “they get sent back to their country. That’s the way it’s supposed to be. That’s the law. Imagine following the law.”

Perkins noted that the Left is notorious for also making claims that we shouldn’t “politicize the murder of a 22-year-old student” like Laken Riley by connecting it to illegal immigration. But, he wondered, “How else do we look at this? This is their policies. This is the outcome that we’re seeing from their open border policies. How else can you look at it?”

“There’s so many ramifications for lawlessness that we’ve allowed to take place at our southern border,” Perkins stated. And that will only end, McCormick concluded, if we continue to “fight the good fight.”


Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.




EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

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

‘A Biden Invasion’: Trump and Biden’s Border Speeches Make ‘An Extraordinary Contrast’

President Donald Trump and Joe Biden offered dueling speeches at the nation’s southern border on Thursday, but geography proved all they had in common. Standing on Texas soil a mere 325 miles apart, their policies came from different political universes. President Trump promised the supportive people and Border Patrol agents of Eagle Pass he would reinstate the policies that undeniably gave the U.S. the most secure border in generations. Meanwhile in Brownsville, Biden and a collection of Democratic politicians sought to shift the blame for our open border to his Republican rivals.

“You’re in a war,” Trump told those gathered at the current epicenter of U.S. illegal immigration, a town where thousands of illegal border crossings take place every week. “This is a Biden invasion over the last three years.”

Biden “has destroyed our country,” said Trump before turning startlingly specific.

“Last year, almost half of all ICE arrests were criminal aliens charged for more than 33,000 assaults, 3,000 robberies, 6,900 burglaries, 7,500 weapons crimes — this is all migrant crime — 4,300 sex crimes, 1,600 kidnappings, and 1,700 homicides and murders.” Tellingly, the legacy media’s numerous “fact-checks” of Trump’s speech found no error in these grim statistics.

President Biden had nothing to offer but political finger-pointing, fastening the blame for his administration’s immigration crisis on Republicans who opposed full-blown amnesty. “On my first day as president,” Biden said, “I introduced a bill I sent to Congress, a comprehensive plan to fix the broken immigration system and to secure the border, but no action was taken.” The bill he sent — the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021, introduced by disgraced Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) — would have been the largest amnesty bill in U.S. history. Biden explained his bill would have put nearly all illegal immigrants on “a path to citizenship” or legal status within no more than eight years, spent billions in foreign aid to address supposed “root causes” of migration and expanded the visa lottery system. The American people have consistently rejected another amnesty program for two decades.

Biden then hailed a “bipartisan group of senators” on a new Ukraine funding bill, which he claims contains “the toughest set of border security reforms we’ve ever seen in our country.” In reality, the bill would simply supercharge the velocity at which the torrent of alleged “refugees” would be processed — and released — into the United States.

While Biden blamed the GOP (and, implicitly, the American people) for a crisis of his own making, he said nothing about the concrete actions he took that necessitated his PR stop.

How Joe Biden Destroyed U.S. Border Security

Joe Biden has proposed or enacted a panoply of policies opening America’s border, and enticing throngs of illegal immigrants to cross the U.S. border even before he took office. During the 2020 Democratic primaries, Biden promised illegal immigrants who could reach our soil would receive health care funded by the U.S. taxpayer. He campaigned on giving illegal immigrants amnesty. He even demanded a border “surge.”

“I would in fact make sure that we immediately surge to the border all those people who are seeking asylum,” said Biden at a Democratic primary debate. “You should come.” In a rare fulfilled political promise, throngs of illegals immediately arrived in Biden campaign t-shirts emblazoned with the message, “Biden please let us in.”

Candidate Biden vowed, “There will not be another foot of wall constructed” during his presidency. President Biden instantly halted construction and welded its gates open, only to modestly reverse himself last October. In the meantime, Biden forced U.S. taxpayers to pay at least $47 million — $130,000 a day — to store the unused parts of the border wall, which he proceeded to auction off for pennies on the dollar.

Biden signed 17 executive orders on his first day in office with a keen eye to opening the U.S. border. He reinstated catch-and-release. Most consequentially, Biden ended Trump’s successful Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), conventionally known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy on June 1, 2021. He then suspended Title 42, a Trump-era policy that allows rapid removal of illegal immigrants on the grounds of the COVID-19 pandemic at the same time he claimed the pandemic was still ravaging the U.S.

Biden effectively ended deportations, even of criminal aliens. In the entire Biden administration through last March, Biden deported less than 6,000 of the more than two million illegal aliens released onto U.S. streets, or just over zero percent, according to the House Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement. He further gutted protections last April, reducing the number of questions border enforcement officers may ask illegal immigrants, from 40 to five.

Biden proceeded to order federal agents to cut through barbed wire keeping illegal immigrants out of the southern border and literally sued the state of Texas to stop Governor Greg Abbott (R) from doing President Biden’s job.

The disastrous results of Biden’s policies are clear.

How Americans Are Paying for Biden’s Border Disaster

A record-breaking numbers of illegal immigrants have crossed the U.S. borders (northern and southern) every year of his presidency — each year worse than the last. U.S. Customs and Border Protection recorded:

  • 1,956,519 illegal border crossings in fiscal year 2021.
  • 2,766,582 in FY 2022.
  • 3,201,144 in FY 2023.
  • 1,231,213 since last October 1.

When Border Patrol agents add in “gotaways,” they safely estimate a total of 10 million illegal border crossings during the Biden administration — more than the population of 41 states. That ignores the fact that Yale University researchers estimated the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. at 16 to 29 millionbefore Biden took office.

These illegal immigrants were drawn like a magnet by Biden’s offers of taxpayer-subsidized benefits and U.S. citizenship for themselves or their “dreamer” children. “We weren’t promising free education, free medical, free everything,” said Trump on Thursday. “All the promises that are made, no wonder they come.” Even if Kamala Harris halfheartedly mouths the words, “Do not come,” the Biden-Harris administration has already laid out an enticing welfare welcome mat.

Illegal immigrants now hail from “every single country in the world.” Agents report a 5,000% increase in the number of illegal aliens entering the U.S. from China over a three-year period.

Biden’s border surge includes a small-but-significant number: Border Patrol agents have encountered 1,557 people on the U.S. terror watchlist (technically, the Terrorist Screening Dataset, or TSDS) since fiscal year 2021. The 59 suspected terrorists caught this fiscal year exceeds the total number than during the entire Trump administration. The number of terror-tied illegal immigrants intercepted during the Biden administration is 10 times higher than the number that used to give Obama-Biden terror official Tim Healy “sleepless nights.”

When illegal border-crossers do not commit acts of terrorism, their crime sprees prove just as deadly to native-born Americans. In just the last few days, the category of offenses Trump deemed “Biden migrant crimes” include:

  • Georgia nursing student Laken Riley, a nursing student whose skull was bashed in by an illegal immigrant.
  • An 11-year-old girl raped and murdered in Pasadena, Texas.
  • two-year-old boy killed in cold blood in Maryland;
  • Three police officers in Washington, D.C., shot by an illegal immigrant from Jamaica.

“Joe Biden will never say Laken Riley’s name. We will say it, and we will remember it,” said Trump on Thursday. Add the fact that the Biden administration admits it has simply lost 85,000 children, possibly to abusers or traffickers, and it is hardly surprising Trump said, “The blood of countless innocent victims” is on Biden’s hands.

Biden’s border policies cost Americans their blood and treasure. Illegal immigrants posed a net cost of $150.7 billion to U.S. taxpayers in 2023 alone, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). Leaving aside all other social costs, Biden spent as much money resettling purported “refugees” in his first two years in office as it would have cost to finish the border wall (approximately $20 billion). Biden chose insecurity, murder, and chaos over American lives.

While Biden’s border policies literally and figuratively bleed Americans, they have “generated historic profit margins” for the drug-and-human-smuggling cartels. The cartels that control the border earn $32 million a week smuggling illegals across the Del Rio sector of the border alone, the House Judiciary Committee revealed last month. The drug cartels to which Biden ceded authority over the border are now so deeply mired in human trafficking that it has “become central to their business model,” according to a report from the House Committee on Homeland Security.

No wonder the president of the Border Patrol union, National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd, said Thursday, “Border Patrol agents are upset that we cannot get the proper policy that is necessary to protect human life, to protect American citizens, to protect the people that are crossing the border illegally. We want to protect them, as well. And we can’t do that, because President Biden’s policies continue to invite people to cross here.” (Emphasis added.)

Surveying the two speeches, Governor Abbott declared, “Today is a day of an extraordinary contrast.” Biden made “an obligatory visit” to “some sanitized location in the Brownsville” area, because “Biden does not care about Texas or the border.”

Abbott recited a litany of actions he has taken — from declaring a border invasion, to erecting barbed wire fencing and orange buoys, to busing illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities, to calling in the Texas National Guard and appointing his own border czar.

In Thursday’s speeches, President Donald Trump hailed Abbott as he promised to return to the sanity of defending America’s borders, values, and laws. Meanwhile, Joe Biden dodged accountability and promoted policies that would worsen the problem.


Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.


Illegal Immigrants Continue to Commit Violent Crimes as Sanctuary Cities Reassess Policies


EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.

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

Is American Pork Ending Up In The Bellies Of Chinese Soldiers?

Communist China’s military could be reaping the benefits of the takeover of a U.S agricultural giant.

America’s largest pork producer was exporting massive quantities of pork to its Chinese “sister company” as it stockpiled food for the Chinese military, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation review of corporate records and Chinese state-run media reports.

Smithfield Foods, owner of roughly 150,000 acres of U.S. land and operator of dozens of feed mills and production plants, has shipped hundreds of thousands of tons of pork to its China-based parent company WH Group and sister company Shuanghui Investment and Development Co. (Shuanghui) since being acquired in 2013, according to corporate and Chinese government records as well as state-run media reports.

Shuanghui has extensive ties to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), which it touts on its website, and is responsible for developing food for China’s military to use on the battlefield, according to the PLA-sponsored China Military News.

Shuanghui also operates a food “mobilization center” for the PLA in Henan province, and has done so since 2009, according to a 2022 Shuanghui news release. Shuanghui’s mobilization center stockpiles food, including pork, to meet the PLA’s emergency response needs, and Chinese state-run reports indicate that Shuanghui has distributed food from this stockpile to Chinese soldiers on several occasions in recent years.

A December 2023 report from the Luohe municipal government in Henan province indicates the military stockpile is still active and under Shuanghui’s management.

While Shuanghui doesn’t disclose where the pork it supplies the PLA originates from, it’s very likely that at least some U.S. pork product is being supplied to the PLA, according to Brian O’Shea, a former military and intelligence analyst.

“My opinion would be that the Chinese government is giving this superior U.S. pork to their soldiers,” O’Shea told the DCNF based on his understanding of Smithfield’s central role in Shuanghui’s pork supply chain and Shuanghui’s extensive relationship with the PLA.

“At these mobilization centers, there’s going to be a Smithfield pile and a Chinese domestic pork pile, and the Chinese domestic pork is most likely going to the civilians, whereas the superior pork is going to the Chinese military,” O’Shea said.

Neither Smithfield nor Shuanghui responded to multiple requests for comment.

‘A Unified State’

WH Group acquired Smithfield in 2013 for $7.1 billion. At the time, WH Group Chairman Wan Long said the acquisition would allow his companies to “meet the growing demand in China for pork by importing high-quality meat products from the United States,” adding the merger “provided Smithfield the opportunity to expand its offering of products to China through Shuanghui’s distribution network.”

The DCNF recently reported that WH Group’s chairman and four other executives are Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members. WH Group’s chairman and several top executives also hold, or previously held, positions with the Chinese government, the DCNF found.

WH Group’s leadership includes both Shuanghui and Smithfield executives, according to Reuters.

In 2013, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission’s annual report characterized Smithfield’s acquisition by WH Group as “part of a broader trend of Chinese global investment in farm assets or food technologies.”

“China’s acquisitions in agriculture and other sectors are being driven by the desire to secure higher volumes of safe products and, in the long term, access to advanced production and processing technologies,” the commission wrote in its report.

“We’ve got to remember that China is a unified state,” Gordon Chang, distinguished senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute, told the DCNF. “It operates under the direction of the Communist Party, which demands absolute obedience from all individuals and all entities.”

Since 2013, Smithfield’s exports to China have exponentially increased. Shuanghui constructed a $110 million Smithfield-branded factory in China in 2015 that exclusively processes U.S.-raised Smithfield pork, and the company developed an e-commerce portal in 2017 that sells Smithfield products.

In the wake of these developments, Smithfield’s pork exports to China exploded from roughly 83,000 tons in 2018 to approximately 335,000 tons in 2020, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence data obtained by the DCNF.

Click here to view S&P Global Market Intelligence infographic U.S. Exports of Pork Linked to Smithfield (tons)

“There was an unusual increase in sales of entire swine carcasses to China during 2019,” according to a U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service report. “This increase reflects the retooling of at least one U.S. Smithfield Foods plant to produce carcasses for shipment to a plant in China that had excess processing capacity due to the shortage of hogs in the country.”

Shuanghui “used excess capacity in its Chinese plant to make processed products from the carcasses,” the report added.

Between 2015 and 2020, 80% of Shuanghui’s imported meat came from Smithfield, Chinese state-run media outlet The Paper reported. Shuanghui characterized Smithfield as its “primary” pork supplier that same year.

Since then, Smithfield has continued to export hundreds of thousands of tons of pork to China. S&P Global Market Intelligence’s data shows Smithfield sent 242,672 tons of pork to China in 2021 and 124,886 tons in 2022. Smithfield exports to China hit 101,791 tons in 2023, the data shows.

A November 2023 financial briefing published by Chinese state-run firm Guosen Securities, which used data from compliance reports, forecast that Shuanghui will continue to rely on Smithfield pork imports for the foreseeable future.

“Shuanghui Development’s meat product offerings are expected to rely on the importation of Smithfield Foods’ Western products, and the synergy of the two large platforms will increasingly arise,” Guosen Securities reported.

‘My Love Spills Into Every Army Base’

While Smithfield has been sending pork to Shuanghui, the Henan-based company was supplying the PLA, according to corporate records seen by the DCNF. In fact, Shuanghui’s relationship with the PLA predates WH Group’s acquisition of Smithfield.

In 2008, the Chinese government proposed that large enterprises assist in creating provincial military stockpiles for various goods like food at so-called “mobilization centers,” and, shortly thereafter, Shuanghui officials applied for the firm to establish a “Non-Staple Foods Mobilization Center,” according to a PLA Daily article that was reposted by Chinese news outlet Sina.

The PLA first called upon Shuanghui’s mobilization center in June 2009 while it was still under construction, asking for assistance in delivering 10 types of foods to Chinese soldiers approximately 125 miles away, PLA Daily reported.

Shuanghui’s mobilization center “integrates the military with the civilian” and “blends peacetime and wartime” in order to “guarantee an emergency response,” according to an archived December 2009 company news release.

That same month, Shuanghui head Wan Long, who also heads WH Group, presided over the opening ceremony of the firm’s mobilization center, which several high-ranking Chinese military personnel attended, according to the archived post.

By 2015, the mobilization center reportedly employed more than 2,200 veterans. These veterans routinely simulate emergency situations, such as delivering food goods to front-line positions in wartime, according to state-run China News.

Shuanghui President Ma Xiangjie, who sits on WH Group’s board and is a CCP member, serves as the mobilization center’s director, according to a company announcement from December 2022. In that same announcement, the company touted that the PLA had named Ma Xiangjie as one of Henan’s “Top 10 Military Supporters.”

Company and Chinese military records reviewed by the DCNF indicate that PLA officers have inspected Shuanghui’s mobilization center multiple times in recent years. During a December 2021 inspection, PLA officers presented Ma Xiangjie with a ceremonial banner that read: “My heart is bound to the Great Wall of steel, my love spills into every army base.”

A December 2022 Shuanghui announcement states the company’s mobilization center had at some point prior “successfully developed an ABC set meal series of military rations.” The U.S. Army describes A-rations as “perishable foods,” B-rations as “nonperishable foods” and C-rations as a “balanced meal in a can.”

Wan Long and Ma Xiangjie did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

‘Food Security’

Chinese social media posts show Shuanghui has on multiple occasions distributed pork from its mobilization center to Chinese military personnel.

In February 2020, for instance, Shuanghui announced it had donated meat to the PLA as well as Wuhan military medical staff working on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic. Shuanghui’s announcement featured photographs of the firm’s truck delivering boxes of pork sausages to PLA soldiers.

Smithfield exported at least 335,411 tons of pork to China in 2020, S&P data shows.

Chinese government documents show that Smithfield was sending pork directly to Shuanghui during the pandemic. China’s General Administration of Customs reporting it had rejected approximately 27 tons of Smithfield “frozen bone-in pork” sent to a Shuanghui subsidiary sometime before August 2020, citing an issue with the shipment’s certificate of goods.

Shuanghui has also bragged about donating medical supplies to the PLA during the pandemic.

In fact, People’s Daily, which is the CCP’s official media arm, reported in February 2020 that Shuanghui had launched a global campaign to procure medical supplies for the Chinese military. China’s State Council supported Shuanghui by helping medical supplies obtained abroad pass smoothly through customs, People’s Daily reported.

“In the early stages of the COVID-19 outbreak, WH Group’s subsidiary Shuanghui Development purchased anti-epidemic materials, including protective clothing, isolation gowns, masks and goggles overseas to support front-line medical staff in Hubei Province,” reads an English-language version of an April 2020 WH Group release. “Shuanghui also donated living materials and epidemic prevention materials to military medical workers at Wuhan Huoshenshan Hospital through the Luohe military sub-district.”

Moreover, the People’s Daily article also features a photo of a Smithfield truck outside a warehouse with a caption reading “overseas procurement” and credits Shuanghui for the picture.

Other images show what appears to be a Caucasian man moving rectangular boxes purportedly full of medical supplies with a forklift and a UPS plane on a tarmac beside pallets of boxes. Another photo appears to show workers and delivery trucks at Shuanghui’s headquarters preparing to deliver supplies to the Chinese military, as reported in a Shuanghui corporate release less than a week later.

“The Chinese Communist Party is increasingly focused on acquiring, illicitly or otherwise, agricultural technologies and supply chains,” Wisconsin Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher, chair of the House Select Committee on the CCP, told the DCNF. “We must strengthen our food security before it is too late.”

‘Chinese Communist Control’

Shuanghui also apparently agreed to supply a Chinese state-owned defense firm with Smithfield products, according to a 2022 Shuanghui Chinese social media post to which the company’s website also links.

During a November 2022 conference in Guangdong province, Shuanghui signed a strategic partnership agreement with the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) to manufacture customized products in order to “support the rapid development of China’s aviation industry,” according to a company social media post.

Photos from the November 2022 event appear to show Smithfield bacon alongside other Shuanghui products involved in the defense contractor deal. The U.S. government sanctioned AVIC in 2021 “for operating or having operated in the defense and related materiel sector of the economy of the PRC.”

“People are just now starting to understand the consequences of the naïve policymaking that dominated Washington for the past couple decades,” Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio told the DCNF. “Chinese communist control of American businesses is a challenge we have to confront before a crisis.”



Daily Caller News Foundation investigative reporter, political journalist, and China watcher. Twitter: @LenczyckiPhilip


EXCLUSIVE: Leadership Of Major US Landowner Chock-Full ‘Of Chinese Communist Party Members

James Biden: My Brother Gave Me $40K, $200K Loans For Chinese Company

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

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