Tag Archive for: Leftism

Communist ruler of New York City stands in solidarity with his Venezuelan comrade

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Meanwhile, Venezuelans are celebrating their freedom from Maduro’s tyranny.

Hey Mayor, what about the safety and security of New Yorkers whose lives have been destroyed by drugs coming in from Venezuela? Do their lives matter, Mr. Mayor, sir?

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

MADURO CAPTURED!

WATCH: Trump Speaks Live On Maduro Capture, Operation “Absolute Resolve”

Yes, Mamdani Is a Commie. Will the ‘News’ Outlets That Insisted He Wasn’t Apologize Now?

Russian Official Uses Simpsons Meme to Mock ‘Comrade Mamdani’

Hochul lights up New York landmarks in green to celebrate ‘contributions of Muslim communities’

Mamdani deletes social-media posts supporting Israel and opposing Jew-hatred from mayoral account

MAGA World Speaks Out On Donald Trump’s Maduro Operation

Jonathan Turley Predicts If Maduro Indictment Will Be ‘Accepted By The Courts’

Trump Teases Mexico As Next Potential Target For Military Intervention After Capture Of Venezuela Dictator

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

Understanding Democrats: The Angry, Un-American Party of Violence

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

This is not the Democratic Party of your grandfather…This is a new Democratic party. We’re bringing a knife to a knife fight. — Ken Martin, Chair of the Democrat National Committee, August 5, 2025.

Some folks might initially recoil at the harsh assessment the title of my article makes about one of the two major parties in the United States.  And there are undoubtedly some Democrats who will disagree with the title of this article and the attitudes and beliefs expressed by other Democrats throughout this article.  But I will let the surveys, polls, and quotes from Democrat leaders and elected officials speak for themselves.  This is the condition of the Democrat Party today.

Democrats are Angry

In an early 2025 poll, 81% of Democrats believed the Democrat Party needed to be Much/Somewhat More “combative” toward President Trump.[1]

House Democrats speak – July 2025: At town halls in their districts and in one-on-one meetings with constituents and activists, Democratic members of Congress are facing a growing thrum of demands to break the rules, fight dirty – and not be afraid to get hurt.  House Democrats told Axios they see a growing anger among their base that has, in some cases, morphed into a disregard for American institutions, political traditions and even the rule of law…Axios spoke to more than two dozen House Democrats for this story, with many requesting anonymity to offer candid insights about their interactions with constituents and activists…“Some of them have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot” when visiting ICE facilities or federal agencies, a third House Democrat told Axios.  “Our own base is telling us that what we’re doing is not good enough … [that] there needs to be blood to grab the attention of the press and the public,” the lawmaker said.  A fourth House Democrat said constituents have told them “civility isn’t working” and to prepare for “violence … to fight to protect our democracy” …A sixth House Democrat said that when they try to persuade voters to channel their frustration into a focus on winning back Congress in 2026, “people who are angry don’t accept that. They’re angry beyond things.”[2]

The Guardian Newspaper – September 2025: Democrats want your attention, and they’re done asking politely.  Several months into Donald Trump’s second term, presidential aspirants, members of Congress and party officials are abandoning carefully calibrated messaging in favor of gut-level rhetoric that is angrier, rawer and unapologetically more profane…[3]

A September 2025 Pew Research Center survey found that 44% of Democrat/Lean Democrat felt anger toward the federal government; the survey noted:

Democrats’ anger is higher now than during Republican President Donald Trump’s first term, when a peak of 34% expressed anger. It’s also the highest share expressed by members of either party in surveys dating back to 1997.[4]

Democrats Have Little Pride in the United States and Prefer Socialism

During President Trump’s March 5, 2025, speech before a joint session of Congress, Congressional Democrats refused to applaud for, among other things:

The capturing of an ISIS terrorist that masterminded the Abbey Gate attack

A young boy fighting brain cancer

A call to lower taxes for middle-class Americans

Americans joining the military in record numbers

Law and order

Protecting women’s sports

The United States of America

Working together to Make America Great Again

Recognizing only two sexes

Defeating inflation

Unleashing American energy

Ending waste, fraud, and abuse in government

Securing our border

Restoring American shipbuilding

Improving America’s defenses

Pursuing peace in Ukraine[5]

In June 2025, Gallup asked about being proud to be an American. 92% of Republicans were Extremely/Very Proud, only 36% of Democrats felt the same way. Gallup pointed out that this was a drop among Democrats from 62% in 2024.[6]  It is interesting to note that in 2015, during President Obama’s second term, 80% of Democrats were Extremely/Very Proud to be an American; the number for Republicans was 90%.[7]

Also in June 2025, Fox News asked about being proud of the United States. 85% of Republicans said they were proud of the United States; only 36% of Democrats said they were proud.[8]

A July 2025 YouGov report of various polls found that:[9]

  1. 22% of Democrats described themselves as “Not very patriotic”; 10% of Democrats described themselves as “Not at all patriotic.” Only 7% of Republicans had such views.
  2. About half of Americans (51%) have an American flag at home. This includes 68% of Republicans and 37% of Democrats.
  3. Around one-quarter (23%) of Americans say they display an American flag at their home every day, including far more Republicans (38%) than Democrats (11%).
  4. 57% of Americans correctly think that Republicans are more likely to display an American flag than are Democrats.
  5. 38% of Democrats do not believe President Trump legitimately won the 2024 election.

Socialism

In September 2025, Gallup asked about views of Capitalism and Socialism. 66% of Democrats had a positive view of Socialism; only 14% of Republicans had such a view.[10]

Democrats Support an Oppresive Government

In January 2022, during the Biden presidency, Rasmussen Reports conducted a COVID-related survey. The survey asked the respondents if they Strong Favor/Somewhat Favor the following:

  1. President Biden’s plan to impose a COVID-19 vaccine mandate on the employees of large companies and government agencies? Democrats – 78%, Republicans – 22%.
  2. Federal or state governments to fine Americans who choose not to get a COVID-19 vaccine? Democrats – 55%, Republicans – 19%.
  3. Limit the spread of the coronavirus by having federal or state governments require that citizens remain confined to their homes at all times, except for emergencies, if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine? Democrats – 59%, Republicans – 17%.
  4. Limit the spread of the coronavirus by having federal or state governments require that citizens temporarily live in designated facilities or locations if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine? Democrats – 45%, Republicans – 14%.
  5. Federal or state governments to fine or imprison individuals who publicly question the efficacy of the existing COVID-19 vaccines on social media, television, radio, or in online or digital publications? Democrats – 48%, Republicans – 14%.
  6. Federal or state governments to require unvaccinated citizens to use a smart phone app or wearable device that tracks unvaccinated people to ensure that they are quarantined or socially distancing from others? Democrats – 47%, Republicans – 13%.
  7. Temporarily remove parents’ custody of their children if parents refuse to take the COVID-19 vaccine? Democrats – 29%, Republicans – 7%.[11]

A disturbingly large percentage of Democrats appeared to have no problem with using federal and state governments to fine or imprison those engaging in free speech, remove people from their homes or confine them to their homes, and track those who refuse to get a COVID shot, among other things. This is reprising life in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe during the Cold War. And according to this poll, a lot of Democrats in the United States have no problem with that – apparently as long as they are in charge.

Democrats Support Political Murder and Violent Political Rhetoric

In a September 2024 poll, 55% of Democrats/Lean Democrats said that America would have been better off if Trump had been assassinated in Florida in September 2024; in contrast, GOP/Lean GOP was 8%. 46% of Democrats/Lean Democrats were not sure if America would have been better off; in contrast, GOP/Lean GOP was 9%.[12]

In an April 2025 poll, the National Contagion Research Institute at Rutgers University found that 50.2% of left-of-center voters stated “it would be at least somewhat justified to murder” Elon Musk; that number rose to 56% when asked about murdering Donald Trump. And 59.6% of left-of-center voters thought it was acceptable to destroy Tesla dealerships in protest.[13]

According to a September 2025 YouGov poll, 77% of Republicans think it is “always unacceptable” for a person to be happy about the death of a public figure they oppose. Only 38% of Democrats feel the same way.[14]

A Brookings survey found that support for political violence among the Left had increased from 17% in October 2024 to 26% in October 2025; the corresponding numbers among the Right were 29% and 17%.[15]

Violent Political Rhetoric

President Joe Biden:

  • Called President Trump’s supporters “garbage.”
  • Said he’d like to “smack” Republicans “in the ass.”
  • Told donors that “it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye.”
  • Said he wanted to “beat the hell out of” President Trump and “smack him in the mouth.”
  • Fantasized to a crowd about Trump being delivered a “coup de grace” or death blow.
  • Said “Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic…there is no question that the Republican Party today is dominated, driven, and intimidated by Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans, and that is a threat to this country.”

Vice President Kamala Harris:

  • Said “Donald Trump is a threat to our democracy and fundamental freedoms.”
  • Said “…what’s at stake this election and the clear threat the former president represents to our democracy.”
  • When asked about being stuck in an elevator with President Trump, Mike Pence, or Jeff Sessions, responded “does one of us have to come out alive?”

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) repeatedly talked and laughed about “punching” President Trump.

Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) said that President Trump must be “eliminated” to protect democracy.

Rep. Stacey Plaskett (D-VI) said Trump “needs to be shot.”

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) said “I will go and take out Trump tonight.”

State Sen. Maria Chapelle-Nadal (D-MO) posted on Facebook “I hope Trump is assassinated!”

State Rep. Scott Hamann (D-ME) suggested he would assassinate the President if he came within ten feet of him.

Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) stated “Donald Trump cannot be president again. He’s an existential threat to democracy … Republicans just flock in one line. That’s something that endangers democracy. That’s what happened in the 1930s. The Germans just walked in line with Hitler and Stalin.”

Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-TX) compared Hispanic Trump supporters to “Jews for Hitler.”[16]

California Governor Gavin Newsom (August 2025): “I’m sick of being weak.  We’re going to punch these sons of bitches in the mouth.”[17]

At the September 13, 2025, Polk County, Iowa, Democrats’ annual Steak Fry, Democrat congressional candidate Xavier Carrigan stated:

Some voices are already demanding we meet in the middle, to negotiate, to compromise, to tone down the fight,” he said. “They tell us that fighting won’t move us forward. So let me be very clear. Capitulation got us here. Weak spines and strongly worded letters got us here. Going high when they go low got us here. So I say when they go low, we drive our knee right into their face.

There were many Iowa Democrat leaders and elected officials at this event, including Rita Hart, the Chair of the Iowa Democrat Party, but there was no criticism of Carrigan’s comment.[18]

An October 2025 Gallup poll found that only 28% of Democrats thought their party had gone too far in using inflammatory language to criticize their political opponents; this was down from 45% in 2011.[19]

Politics War Room with James Carville and Al Hunt — “Collaborators”[20]

James Carville is a well-known Democrat Party strategist and political consultant.  Carville co-hosts “Politics War Room” with Al Hunt. During the October 22, 2025, episode (time mark of 8.0) Carville and Hunt start discussing President Trump’s “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education.” Hunt referred to the Compact as an “extortion racket.”  In reality, the Compact offers preferential access to federal funds to universities in exchange for adopting a set of specific policies. The Compact includes policies such as:

  1. Equality in admissions and standardized testing.
  2. Ensuring a marketplace of ideas with a broad spectrum of viewpoints among faculty, students, and staff.
  3. Nondiscrimination in faculty and administrative hiring.
  4. Capping international student enrollment to make more room for deserving American students.
  5. Student equality, with students treated as individuals and not on the basis of their immutable characteristics, with due exceptions for sex-based privacy, safety, and fairness. Women’s equality requires single-sex spaces, such as bathrooms and locker rooms, and fair competition, such as in sports.[21]

Hunt and Carville discuss which universities have agreed to the Compact and which have not.  Carville says that those who have agreed with the Compact are “collaborators.”  At this episode’s time mark of 10:50, Carville states:

But all of the people that, that, that bent a knee to this, I think history is gonna really, really [unintelligible]…You, you know what we do with collaborators. [my emphasis] And I, I, I, I think these corporations, something, my fantasy dream is that this nightmare ends in 2029 and I, I think we ought to have radical thing. They all ought to have their heads shaven, they should be put in orange pajamas, and just be marched down Pennsylvania Avenue, and the public should be invited to spit on them. The universities, the corporations, the law firms. All of these collaborators should be shaved, pajamaed and spit on [my emphasis]…I don’t know about Lockheed…but the people that, that unnecessarily bent a knee to this guy [Trump], no way. No way, and, and the idea is you have to pay more because you did this, because it is the only way that you’re going to discourage future collaborators in the United States…It’s a moral judgement. If you bend a knee to a, a criminal tyrant, and that’s what he [Trump] is.  Understand, he is a criminal…He is a tyrant.  He has no use for democracy.  He has no use for the values of this country.  And you are collaborating with this and it will bring eternal shame to your company.

No Democrat public official has criticized or disagreed with Carville about these remarks.

Trumps’s Severed Head — What Are These People?

In 2017, a photograph was displayed in which “comedian” Kathy Griffin was shown holding a replica of what appeared to be the severed head of then President Donald Trump. She received a lot of criticism and eventually apologized. However, displays of President Trump’s severed head have continued over the years. I have put together a collage of nine “severed head” appearances over the years at different events/locations across the United States. These include the University of Alaska Anchorage, the Fountain Hills, Arizona Democrats, and the June and October 2025 “No Kings” rallies. I titled the collage “Understanding Democrats: The Fixation with President Trump’s Severed Head.  What Are These People?” This collage is available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AzY2RbzSd2eWakpPcDuOpMoB-X2EIZLy/view?usp=sharing.

Here is an interesting side note about the “No Kings” rallies. A Brookings survey found that college educated women made up 59% of the participants at the June 2025 “No Kings” rallies; 88% of these women were white, 97% of the women were “Left Leaning” and had voted Democrat in the latest presidential election. At the October 2025 “No Kings” rallies college educated women made up 57% of the participants, 86% of these women were white, 90% of the women were “Left Leaning” and 92% had voted Democrat in the latest presidential election.[22]

Conclusion

What does the future hold for us? Unfortunately, I tend to agree with Byron York’s assessment:

Some Democrats are calling on their elected representatives to engage in violence against the policies of President Trump. At the same time, groups that might be characterized as militant allies of the progressive Democratic movement are resorting to violence in an effort to obstruct the president’s enforcement of federal immigration law. Some radicals have committed politically motivated murder, for which they received support in some far-left circles. And it is all happening in the context of one of the two major political parties experiencing a sharp drop in the most basic measure of civic devotion: pride in being an American. It’s a troubling picture, and nothing on the immediate horizon suggests it will improve any time soon.[23]

AUTHOR

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

SOURCES:

[1]           https://x.com/PatrickRuffini/status/1900538685017247984

[2]           https://www.axios.com/2025/07/07/democrats-trump-resistance-violence-congress

[3]           https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/27/democrats-anger-swearing

[4]           https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/12/04/as-democrats-anger-spikes-americans-feelings-about-the-federal-government-grow-more-polarized/

[5]           https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/03/democrats-showed-whose-side-theyre-on-and-its-not-the-american-people/

[6]           https://news.gallup.com/poll/692150/american-pride-slips-new-low.aspx

[7]           https://www.masslive.com/news/2025/07/new-polling-shows-these-american-voters-arent-proud-of-being-american.html

[8]           https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-6-10-proud-u-s-today-most-more-than-decade

[9]           https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/52474-unpopular-congressional-democrats-patriotism-july-4-democracy-political-violence-june-27-30-2025-economist-yougov-poll

[10]         https://news.gallup.com/poll/694835/image-capitalism-slips.aspx

[11]         https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/partner_surveys/jan_2022/crosstabs_heartland_covid_january_5_2022

[12]         https://napolitaninstitute.org/2024/09/18/17-say-america-would-be-better-off-if-trump-had-been-killed/  (Mini-crosstabs)

[13]         https://networkcontagion.us/reports/4-7-25-ncri-assassination-culture-brief/

[14]         https://x.com/YouGovAmerica/status/1966197576740515937

[15]         https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-the-no-kings-day-protest-reveals-about-support-for-political-violence-in-america/

[16]         More at https://www.donaldjtrump.com/news/582b2e3f-5e3a-43f0-a6ec-514f23c10fc4

[17]         https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/27/democrats-anger-swearing

[18]         https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2025/09/13/2026-democratic-hopefuls-court-support-at-polk-county-steak-fry/85960694007/

[19]         https://news.gallup.com/poll/699077/americans-say-political-rhetoric-gone-far.aspx

[20]         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5RYE4Mzp6M

[21]         https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Compact-for-Academic-Excellence-in-Higher-Education-10.1.pdf

[22]         https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-the-no-kings-day-protest-reveals-about-support-for-political-violence-in-america/

[23]         https://texasinsider.org/articles/disturbing-glimpses-of-democratic-anger

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

The Left is a Terrorist Movement

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

We are up against people who want to kill us. Not just Trump or Charlie Kirk. All of us.

Let’s be clear here, the murder of Charlie Kirk is not an aberration, no more than the near murder of President Trump was. Violence is not an aberration, it’s at the heart of what the Left is. The Left is a terrorist movement. Period.

The Left exists in two states.

  1. In power
  2. In terrorism

That’s it.

When the Left is in power, then it kills people legally, and when it’s out of power, it strives to take people by killing people ‘illegally’.

Charlie Kirk was murdered by a Left that is not currently in power. If the Left were fully in power, it could have done so legally as it did to so many in Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea and across so much of Latin America.

Charlie’s death, like Trump’s attempted assassination, reminds us of what the real stakes are.

We are up against people who want to kill us. Not just Trump or Charlie Kirk. All of us who defy them.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrats: The Party of the Assassins, by the Assassins and for the Assassins

Charlie Kirk’s Assassin Lived With Transgender Boyfriend

Armed Black Lives Matter Terrorist Repeatedly Shouted “F-ck Charlie Kirk” Before Sparking a Massive Vigil Brawl

We Cannot Coexist With Savages

Yes, the Left Wants Us All Dead

The World Pays Tribute to Charlie Kirk

RELATED VIDEO: Erika Kirk speaks for the first time since husband Charlie Kirk’s assassination

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

The Hatreds of Robin Westman, and the False Claim That He Was Jewish

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Robin né Robert Westman, the demented man who shot into the Annunciation Catholic Church School in Minneapolis, killing an eight-year-old and a ten-year-old, and wounding seventeen others, both children and teachers, has been widely reported as being an equal-opportunity “hater.” As the U.S. Attorney for the District of Minneapolis put it, “There appears to be only one group that the shooter didn’t hate, one group of people who the shooter admired — the group were the school shooters and mass murderers that are notorious in this country.”

Westman wrote on his rifle’s gunstock and on a holster all sorts of messages against Christians, Hindus, LGBTQ individuals, women, and — oh yes — Jews. But what the news stories almost never made clear was the fact that he bore a special animus for Jews that was on a different level from the hatred he bore others. Among the messages he wrote on his weapons were “Burn Israel,” “6 million wasn’t enough,” and “Extra Thicc! [sic] Jew Gas.”

He had only one comment that was apparently about Muslims written on a gun: “Remove kebab.” Yet he also wrote “Mashallah” (what Allah wills) and “Atta” on other weapons. There is more here  about his special hatred for Jews: “Trans Minneapolis shooter Robin Westman mused about slaughtering ‘filthy Zionist Jews’ in sick journal before deadly Catholic school massacre,” by Diana Nerozzi and Anthony Blair, New York Post, August 27, 2025:

Transgender Minneapolis shooter Robin Westman spoke of murdering “filthy Zionist Jews” and spewed other antisemitic bile in a twisted manifesto before he opened fire at a Catholic school Wednesday morning, killing two children.

Westman, 23, also wrote slogans such as “Free Palestine” in a journal he wrote in the Cyrillic alphabet, which The Post translated, after YouTube clips showing the diary pages were posted online on his since-deleted channel.

Robert Robin Westman has been identified as the shooter of the Annunciation Catholic School and Annunciation Church in Minneapolis, Minnesota with at least a dozen victims and two casualties. Obtained by NY Post

“If I will carry out a racially motivated attack, it would be most likely against filthy Zionist jews,” he wrote in one disgusting entry.

“I hate those entitled, penny-sniffing k-kes,” he wrote elsewhere in the journal, which was full of antisemitic slurs.

Westman also wrote “6 million wasn’t enough” — a reference to the number of Jewish Holocaust victims — on the side of ammunition magazines he filmed before the shooting at the Annunciation Catholic School and Church in Minneapolis that also left 17 people wounded.

Another message scrawled on one of his many magazines read “Destroy HIAS,” the Jewish refugee aid group, while one of his guns read “Israel must fall, release the files,” a possible reference to Jeffrey Epstein.

The deranged gunman mused about assassinating President Trump and Jews — but ultimately decided that killing “children of innocent civilians” would bring him “the most joy,” the translated journal entries read….

So here is my question: what prevented the BBC, CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the rest of the Great and Good in our media universe (the New York Post is not part of that exalted company) from pointing out that “while Robin Westman expressed his dislike or hatred of many different groups, he had a special hatred not just for Jews, but also for the state of Israel. He also expressed support for a ‘free Palestine.’”

While Westman’s fanatical antisemitism has been depicted in the mainstream media as being just one more of his hatreds, rather than what it was — his supreme hatred, different in kind from all the others — antisemites had an initial field day insisting, falsely, that Westman was “Jewish,” as here.

For example, one Lauren Witzke, who ran for the Senate from Delaware in 2020, describes herself as a “Christian nationalist,” and is a believer in the QAnon conspiracy, wrote on X that a “transgender Jewish man” had “ended the lives of Christian children.” Her post on X gained more than 530,000 views and 8,000 likes within a day of being posted. The claim appeared several times on X, including a post by someone identifying as “Six Million,” who wrote that “Robert Westman is ashkenazi jew.” Why has that story, of how the antisemites have rushed to claim on social media that Westman was Jewish, been completely ignored?

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israel Releases Shocking Never-Before-Seen Footage of Hamas Atrocities

Seattle Teacher Won’t Say the Pledge or National Anthem in Her Classroom But Will Sing “F*ck Trump, F*ck ICE, Free Palestine” Instead

Hamas-linked CAIR official asks for donations to ensure that ‘Islam is embraced by Americans’

A Billion-Dollar Somali Autism Fraud in Minnesota

Beverly Hills caves to pressure from Hamas-linked CAIR, won’t display Israeli flag

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

Salon Bolshevik Mamdani Taken to Task for Living In ‘Rent-Stabilized’ Apartment

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Zohran Mamdani is the son of millionaire parents. His mother, Mira Nair, is well-known movie director. His father is Mahmood Mamdani, is a Columbia University professor. His parents own property in New York City, as well as in a sprawling family compound in Buziga Hill, Kampala, the poshest neighborhood in all of Uganda, where their neighbors include one of Uganda’s richest men, the near-billionaire Godfrey Kirumira. Zohran Mamdani has for years been living in a rent-stabilized apartment. And though he now makes $142,000 a year as a New York State Assemblyman, he shamelessly continued to live in that apartment. More on this salon Bolshevik who is occupying a rent-stabilized apartment that ought to go instead to someone less wealthy and more deserving, can be found here: “Andrew Cuomo Calls on Socialist Zohran Mamdani to ‘Move Out’ of His Rent Stabilized Apartment,” by Elizabeth Weibel, Breitbart, August 8, 2025:

Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) called for wealthy New York City mayoral candidate Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani to “move out” of his rent stabilized apartment, noting that someone else probably needs it more.

In a post on X, Cuomo pointed out that Mamdani and his wife are wealthy, have had weddings on three continents, and that together they “likely make well over $200,000.” Cuomo added that although Mamdani is a “rich person,” he and his wife pay $2,300 a month for an apartment in Astoria, which “should be housing for someone who needs it.”

Cuomo’s post included a video from a Democrat mayoral primary debate in which Mamdani shared that he was paying $2,300 for a one bedroom in Astoria. During the debate, Cuomo, who has launched an independent run to be the next mayor of NYC, revealed that he paid $7,800.

“Somewhere last night in New York City, a single mother and her children slept at a homeless shelter because you, assemblyman @ZohranKMamdani are occupying her rent controlled apartment, Cuomo wrote. “You grew up rich and married an even wealthier woman. You’ve had weddings on 3 continents. You own property in LGTBQIA+ murderous Uganda. You make $142,000 a year plus stipends, and your wife works too, meaning you together likely make well over $200,000. No matter which way you cut it: Zohran Mamdani is a rich person. You are actually very rich.”

“Yet you and your wife pay $2,300 a month, as you have bragged, for a nice apartment in Astoria,” Cuomo continued. “That should be housing for someone who needs it. We are in the middle of a historic affordability crisis. Millions of low income New Yorkers need this apartment and an apartment like it. Yet your apartment remains rented to rich people who don’t need it.”

“Today, I am calling on you to move out immediately and give your affordable housing back to an unhoused family who need it,” Cuomo continued. “Leaders must show moral clarity. Time to move out.”

Mamdani has no intention of moving out, unless it be to Gracie Mansion, the Mayor’s house. He’s got a good deal going, having moved into his current apartment when he was earning only $47,000 a year, but then he failed to voluntarily move out from his rent-controlled apartment, as decency dictates, when he started earning $142,00 a year as a New York State Assemblyman.

Cuomo’s comments came in response to another post sharing comments Mamdani made during an interview in February with The New York Editorial Board. During the interview, Mamdani confirmed that he lived in “rent-stabilized housing.”

When asked if he needed a rent freeze, Mamdani stated that if he was “able to put in a rent freeze,” he would not be living in a rent-stabilized apartment, but rather “on the Upper East Side, in a new apartment.”

“I think what we should be fighting for is the vast majority of people who are living in those apartments,” Mamdani stated during the interview. “If I was able to put in a rent freeze, I wouldn’t be in a rent-stabilized apartment. I would actually be on the Upper East Side, in a new apartment.”

Mamdani continued to explain when he moved into his apartment, he was earning $47,000 a year and “working as a foreclosure prevention housing counselor for Chhaya CDC in Richmond Hill and Jackson Heights,” adding that he had been searching for an apartment he “could afford” on his own.

Really? He’s been looking all over or an apartment he “could afford” on his earnings and those of his wife, that surely amount to at least $200,000 a year,, with $142,000 going to Zohran alone, but can’t find anything anywhere in New York City that they can afford? Or is it that he’s pretending to search, while continuing to enjoy the benefit of living in a rent-controlled apartment at the rock-bottom price — for NYC — of $2,300 a month?

“I found that in this apartment,” Mamdani continued:”I didn’t know it was rent-stabilized. I found it through StreetEasy. In that time since, I’ve become an Assembly member and I’m now able to pay for that apartment and able to also move out of that apartment and I plan on doing so. I don’t plan on living in that apartment for perpetuity.”

Really? How plausible is his claim that he didn’t know the apartment he had found was “rent-stabilized” when every description of such properties must include that information? And he tells us that he is “now able to move out of that apartment,” and promises that “I plan on doing so.” Why not do it now? What’s holding him back? “I plan to do so” (move out of the apartment) is not an acceptable answer.

Could it be that he’s determined to hold onto that rent-controlled apartment for as long as he can get away with it? Where are all those democratic socialists who should be protesting this well-off man’s abuse of the rent-control system?

A self-proclaimed democratic socialist and paladin for the poor, this hypocrite with a six-figure income and millionaire parents, has refused long after he started to make his $142,000 salary to move out of his rent-controlled apartment. How many poor and middle-class people in New York City, who badly need such housing, will forgive this well-off grifter for holding onto this apartment, instead of doing the decent thing, and moving into an apartment where he and his wife will pay the market rate? Have you no shame, Zohran?

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Zohran Mamdani’s Democratic Socialists of America Push for ‘Abolition’ of Traditional Family

Marlene Engelkorn, Or All In The Family

Florida: Imam says 9/11 was false flag hoax to give impression that ‘Islam is violent. Islam equals terrorism.’

Lebanese Government Determined to Disarm Hezbollah by Year’s End

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

A Salon Bolshevik Celebrates His Lavish Wedding

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

New York City Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani celebrated his recent wedding with a three-day-long exclusive bash in his native Uganda that included masked military security and a cellphone jamming system. For a salon Bolshevik, who hopes to impose socialism in New York, the lavish wedding was hidden from the media, lest photographs of the over-the-top spending might annoy some of his followers. More on his wedding in Buziga, a wealthy area of Kampala, the capital of Uganda, can be found here: “Inside socialist Zohran Mamdani’s posh wedding bash at secluded Uganda compound — complete with phone jamming system, armed guards,” by Emma Bussey, New York Post, July 26, 2025:

Socialist NYC mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani celebrated his recent nuptials with a lavish, three-day affair at his family’s ritzy, secluded Ugandan compound — complete with masked security guards and a cellphone jamming system, The Post has learned.

The gates of the bustling, private compound, which sits in the wealthy Buziga Hill area outside the capital city of Kampala, were heavily guarded by military-style, masked men this week, with guests streaming in and partying until midnight, according to sources in the town who wished to remain anonymous for security reasons….

The Mamdani family compound just outside Kampala looks out on Lake Victoria. All the houses in the well-guarded neighborhood cost many millions of dollars. The just-deceased Chief Justice of Uganda’s Supreme Court, George Kanyeihamba, lived there. The richest man in Uganda, the billionaire Godfrey Kirumira, is a close neighbor of the Mamdani family.

Despite his family’s millions, and despite his own salary of $142,500 as a New York State Assemblyman, and despite whatever his bride earns, and despite the land he owns in Uganda, Zohran Mamdani continues to live in a rent-stabilized apartment in Queens, taking the place of someone who might desperately need to have a rent-stabilized apartment. Mamdani is shameless. Members of the media ought to ask him point-blank if he doesn’t think it only fair, given his income and his family’s wealth, that he vacate that apartment so that someone more deserving could take it. For god’s sake, doesn’t he call himself a socialist?

Security was extremely tight, sources said.

“Outside the Mamdani house were more than 20 special forces command unit guards, some in masks, and there was a phone-jamming system set up — and all for the strictly invite-only Mamdani event,” one witness confirmed to The Post.

“One gate had around nine guards stationed at it,” they added.

Think of that: 20 special forces were guarding the wedding ceremony of Zohran Mamdani, the man who wants to defund the police back in New York City. Hypocrisy, thy name is Mamdani.

On Sunday, July 20, Mamdani posted a video on X in which he said that he was “going back to Uganda. I’m heading there in a personal capacity to celebrate Rama and I’s marriage with our family and friends.”

“Celebrate Rama and I’s marriage”? A little work on your grammar, there, Zohran, would be welcome. You don’t want to set a bad example for the people of New York.

He then added, “But I do want to apologize to the haters, because I will be coming back.”

Meanwhile, at the Mamdani compound in Uganda, the good times were rolling:

This week, it was transformed into a party pad, with Christmas lights strung into the canopy of trees in the garden and music blaring, sources said. On Tuesday, buses, several Mercedes and a Range Rover 4 were seen driving to the compound.

One would love to have a guest list of the Great and Good who attended the lavish celebration, and a list, too, of the valuable gifts they brought to Zohran and his bride, which may take up so much space in their rent-stabilized apartment that they will have to move.

Together, Mamdani’s parents take in an estimated half-million dollars a year. Mamdan’s luxurious wedding — did he commission an epithalamium from one of his rap group friends? — shows his hypocrisy to good effect. His personal motto should be “socialism is for thee, and not for me.”

And another of his mottos could be “Question authority!”

To which one wants to ask in response: “Why should I?”

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mamdani, Who Wants to Defund Police, Had Wedding Protected by Armed Guards

If You Know the Media Lies About Everything, But You Believe the Media About Gaza…

USAID Ignores All the Evidence That Hamas Steals Aid

Lindsey Graham: ‘change in strategy’ coming to ‘take down Gaza,’ Trump in touch with Israeli officials

US Embassy in Norway Hired Guard Named Mohammed

Emmanuel Macron Has Pleased the Men of Hamas

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

Omar Fateh Would Be as Terrible a Mayor of Minneapolis as Zohran Mamdani Will Be as Mayor of New York

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The news from Minneapolis is not good. “Minneapolis Mayoral Candidate Omer Fatah Criticized Israel After Oct. 7, Accused Jewish State of ‘Genocide’ in Gaza,” by Corey Walker, Algemeiner, July 23, 2025:

Minneapolis mayoral candidate and Democratic Socialist Omar Fateh, who recently secured the Democratic–Farmer–Labor (DFL) Party’s endorsement for mayor of Minneapolis, is drawing scrutiny over his statements regarding Israel amid a heated mayoral campaign.

Fateh’s victory at the DFL convention shattered expectations when he amassed a majority of delegate votes, surpassing incumbent Mayor Jacob Frey, who is Jewish. Moreover, Fateh’s unexpected victory has also drawn fresh attention towards his views on Israel-Palestine.

Following the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attacks on Israel, Fateh published a letter that was broadly critical of the Jewish state and called for an “immediate ceasefire.” Fateh drew an equivalency between Israel’s defensive military operations and the Hamas slaughter of 1200 people and abduction of 250 others.

“I am overwhelmed with sorrow for the victims of this violence as well as anger towards both the Israeli Government and Hamas who have senselessly injured and killed thousands of people in a matter of days,” Fateh wrote.

Omar Fateh put on the same level Hamas’ orgy of rape, torture, mutilation, and murder and the IDF’s attack on Hamas, in response, to make sure that the terror group never again has the ability to harm Israelis. When he claims that “the Israel government” has “senselessly injured and killed thousands in a matter of days,” the adverb is misplaced. The IDF was not “senselessly,” but quite rationally, wounding and killing thousands of Hamas terrorists. The only reason civilians in Gaza have been wounded or killed is because of Hamas’ longstanding policy of hiding its combatants and weapons among the civilian population, hoping the latter will suffer, and that suffering can become a most effective propaganda tool against the Jewish state. Just as Hamas wants to maximize civilian casualties, the IDF tries to minimize them, chiefly by its tremendous campaign to warn civilians of areas or buildings about to be targeted, by dropping millions of leaflets, sending millions of text messages, and making millions of robocalls.

“In the aftermath of the most deadly Hamas attack in Israeli history, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Israeli civilians, we have seen Israel respond with horrifying acts of violence and deprivation against the Palestinians of Gaza as well as an uptick in settler violence in the West Bank. Since the Hamas attacks, Israel has cut off water, power, fuel, food, and medicine to over two million people,” Fateh continued….

For Omar Fateh, Hamas’ attack on Israel is merely described as “deadly” and resulted in the “death of hundreds of civilians.” He says nothing about the rapes, tortures, and mutilations of Hamas’ 1,200 Israeli victims, chooses to minimize their number by referring to them as “hundreds” instead of using the figure “1,200,” and wrongly accuses Israel of cutting off “water, power, fuel, food, and medicine.” Israel never cut off all the water it supplied to Gaza. It was only in March 2025, 18 months into the war, that Israel did cut not all, but 70% of the water supply. As for electricity, it, too, continued to be supplied to Gaza by the Israel Electric Corporation, though in reduced amounts. It was not until March 2025 that all electricity from Israel was cut off.

As for food aid, it continued to be supplied in the first eighteen months of the war, but there was a slowdown in deliveries because aid trucks, all of them, once inside Gaza, coming under Hamas’ control, had to be carefully checked for hidden weapons before entering the Strip. That slowdown ended in May 2025, when the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation took over the delivery of food and other humanitarian aid, as a way to ensure that Hamas could no longer seize so much of the aid for itself, both for doling out to its members, and for selling some of that aid that was meant to be delivered for free to the ordinary people of Gaza, a practice that has netted Hamas over the years hundreds of millions of dollars. As of right now, Israel makes food, fuel, water, and electricity available to Gazans. Does Omar Fateh not know that? The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) has already provided 60 million meals to people in Gaza. But Omar Fateh prefers that you not know about the aid being sent to Gaza, otherwise his narrative of those wicked Israelis trying to starve Gaza into submission falls apart. It is Hamas, shooting to kill Gazans waiting for food, that hopes to so disrupt the operations of the GHF that it will have to fold, and return food distribution back into the hands of Hamas.

Omar Fateh is on the same wavelength as Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Zohran Mamdani. For these people, Hamas is the “justified resistance.” Israel is a colonial-settler ethnic-cleansing genocidal state.

Omar Fateh would be as terrible a mayor of Minneapolis as Zohran Mamdani will be as mayor of New York. A win for both on November 4 will be hailed as symbolizing a “new age” in American politics, and would encourage the pro-Hamas protesters to keep up their campus disruptions, and their chants that have become even more ominous, including “globalize the Intifada” — a call for murdering Jews worldwide — and “death to the IDF.”

The left wing of the Democratic Party would lose any remaining reservations about embracing its brand-new Muslim wing, with its four horsemen of the Islamic Apocalypse, Mamdani, Fateh, Tlaib, and Omar. And if some Jewish Democrats are unhappy with the anti-Israel evolution in the party, that’s just too bad. They can join the Republicans.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Missouri lawmaker warns Mamdani’s expensive socialist plans already crashed and burned in his state

“I read all 16,100 tweets that Zohran Mamdani has ever posted”

Part of the territory of Gaza must inevitably be annexed by Israel

International Criminal Court Refers Hungary to Its Oversight Body for Failing to Arrest Netanyahu

Turkish columnist claims that Mamdani is being subjected to ‘Islamophobic, racist and xenophobic attacks’

Trump to Pull US Out of UNESCO in a Year and a Half

Pilot Who Kicked Jewish Kids Off Plane Also Trained 9/11 Hijackers

North Carolina: Non-Muslims are waging ‘a war on Islam in schoolbooks’

Mysterious Fires and Explosions Across Iran: ‘Too Many Random Things Are Happening’

Germany: 18-year-old Muslim migrant tortures 13-year-old victim for hours on film, gets probation

RELATED VIDEO: Debate: Did Muhammad Exist?

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

Zohran Mamdani Still Refuses to Express Support for the U.S. Constitution

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The 2019 elections saw an increase in the number of Muslims re-elected and newly elected to public office across the United States, and as part of their oaths of office they each had to swear to support the U.S. Constitution.  In the subsequent 2020 elections the number of Muslim candidates running for public office increased again.  Those winners would also have to take that same oath.

However, as I showed in my 2019 book Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials,[1] there are many core tenets of Islam that are in irreconcilable conflict with much of our U.S. Constitution.

It was only natural then to wonder how a Muslim running for office, or one currently in office, could resolve the irreconcilable conflict between laws in the U.S. Constitution and core tenets of Islamic Doctrine.  So, in December 2019 I decided to ask by sending four questions to 80 Muslim public officials across the United States.  Each question required a choice between the U.S. Constitution/American law or Islamic Doctrine.[2]  The results were that 74 of those Muslim public officials would not express support for the very Constitution they had sworn to uphold.[3]

In 2020 I continued sending those same questions to Muslim public officials, and even to Muslim candidates for public office, and created what I called “The Muslim Oath Project.”[4]  By December of 2020 I had sent those four questions to a total of 263 Muslim public officials and candidates in 30 different states and Washington DC.  246 would not express support for the U.S. Constitution.[5]

Zohran Mamdani was then a candidate for the New York State Assembly (later winning his election) and was one of those who would not express support for the U.S. Constitution.

However, in 2020 Mamdani was involved in an interesting Twitter (X) exchange with Shahana Hanif, a candidate for New York City Council and who also would not express support for the U.S. Constitution.[6]  On May 5, 2020, Hanif had posted on her Twitter account a portion of the email I sent her on April 30, 2020, with the four questions.  On her post she wrote, “Just in case you’re wondering what it’s like to be a Musim woman from Brooklyn running for office:”  Mamdani responded that same day, showing a portion of the email I had sent him on February 10, 2020, and writing, “lmk if you wanna compare answers, still working on my response over here.”  Hanif responded with tears of laughter emojis.  A male named Murad Awadeh forwarded Mamdani’s response to Tahanie Aboushi, who at that time was running (unsuccessfully) for Manhattan District Attorney.  Aboushi had also received my four questions and would not express support for the U.S. Constitution.  She replied to this Twitter chain, writing, “What did you guys put down for 4?  I was conflicted.”  There was no response to her in this chain.  Question 4 dealt with Islamic Doctrine allowing Muslim men to have more than one wife versus bigamy laws in the United States.  Mamdani, Hanif, and Aboushi were among the majority of Muslim public officials/candidates who never responded to the four questions.

Assemblyman Zorhan Mamdani is now the Democrat candidate for New York City Mayor.  On June 30, 2025, I emailed the four questions to him at the following email addresses: mamdaniz@nyassembly.gov, and press@zohranfornyc.com.  I received an automated response from his Assembly email advising me of a high volume of emails being received; it advised me of three individuals to contact: Mariela Ortiz at ortizmc@nyassembly.gov, Julia Simcoe at simcoej@nyassembly.gov, or Benjamin at lottob@nyassembly.gov.  So, I forwarded the email with the four questions to those three.

On July 10, 2025, having received nothing more than the automated response, I forwarded the June 30th email to all five of the above email addresses.  Later that day I received an automated response from Mamdani’s Assembly email advising me of high email volume and that they would “make every effort to respond in a timely manner.”  As of July 24, 2025, there have been no other responses.

Does it matter that the vast majority of Muslim public officials/candidates contacted wouldn’t express support for the U.S. Constitution?  Here are two comments to keep in mind:

Thomas Jefferson pointed out why it mattered in general: …in questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution.[7]

“Liberato” narrowed the focus down specifically to Muslim public officials/candidates when writing about the Muslim Oath Project:

…So far, only a handful of Muslim public officials and candidates surveyed are willing to go on record to support the Constitution, and some of these refused to give permission to publish their names.  Worst case scenario, this handful might be lying.

On the other hand, this handful is greatly outnumbered by those who would NOT express support for the Constitution.  Taqiya does not come into play for those Muslim candidates and officials who refused to express support for the Constitution; they are not trying to deceive anyone…we have over 200 Muslims officials and candidates who are not willing to express support for the Constitution they had already sworn to uphold or, if they win, will have to swear to support that Constitution to take office…

Why is it that these Muslim candidates and officials refuse to express support for the Constitution?… Could the reason possibly be because their true allegiance is to sharia law which claims supremacy over all man-made law, including constitutions?   Shouldn’t that worry citizens of these United States?  Why should people who refuse to express support for our founding documents get to lead us?…Where do these people want to take us, if not the realized vision of our Founders?

Instead of dismissing the Project with a wave of the hand, the critics should join others confronting Muslim candidates on the campaign trail and everywhere else with the fact they refused to express support for the Constitution when asked.  Their refusal can be publicized and used against them in campaigns.  As for the ones who did express support for the Constitution, if the occasion arises, they can be confronted with conflicting actions and statements that demonstrate lack of support for the Constitution.  These are just some of the ways the information presented here can be put to use.

Defending the Constitution is part and parcel of maintaining the Republic.  Republics don’t maintain themselves.  It takes work…Every citizen is obligated to do something to help maintain the Republic, and there is no better way than to ensure that our elected officials support the Constitution.[8]

There are five candidates in the race to become the Mayor of New York on November 4, 2025: Eric Adams, Andrew Cuomo, Zohran Mamdani, Curtis Sliwa, and Jim Walden.  We know that Mamdani will not express support for the U.S. Constitution.

Hey New Yorkers, how about asking those other four candidates the same four questions?

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

[1]           https://centerforsecuritypolicy.org/csp-press-releases-primer-on-islamic-doctrine-versus-the-u-s-constitution/

[2]           Here are those four questions:

No. 1:  Will you go on record now and state that our 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech gives the right to anyone in the United States to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and will you also go on record now and state that you support and defend anyone’s right to criticize or disagree with your prophet Muhammad, and that you condemn anyone who threatens death or physical harm to another person who is exercising that right?

No. 2:  Our 1st Amendment guarantees freedom of religion in the United States. As part of that freedom, anyone in the United States has the right to join or leave any religion, or have no religion at all. Will you go on record now and state that you support and defend the idea that in the United States a Muslim has not only the freedom to leave Islam, but to do so without fear of physical harm, and will you also go on record now and state that you condemn anyone who threatens physical harm to a Muslim who is exercising that freedom?

No. 3:  According to the words of Allah found in Koran 5:38 and the teachings of your prophet Muhammad, amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft. But our U.S. Constitution, which consists of man-made laws, has the 8th Amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment such as this. Do you agree with Allah and your prophet Muhammad that amputation of a hand is an acceptable punishment for theft in the United States, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting such punishments are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah and teaching of Muhammad?

No. 4:  According to the words of Allah found in Koran 4:3, Muslim men are allowed, but not required, to be married to up to four wives. Being married to more than one wife in the United States is illegal according to our man-made bigamy laws. Do you agree with Allah that it is legal for a Muslim man in the United States to be married to more than one woman, or do you believe that our man-made laws prohibiting bigamy are true laws and are to be followed instead of this 7th Century command of Allah?

[3]           See my article “93% of Muslim Public Officials Would Not Express Support for the Constitution They Swore to Uphold,” Jihad Watch, January 7, 2020, https://jihadwatch.org/2020/01/93-of-muslim-public-officials-would-not-express-support-for-the-constitution-they-swore-to-uphold.

[4]           For details, see The Muslim Oath Project at https://www.liberato.us/muslim-oath-project.html.

[5]           The Master List is also available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/10N0MODSxeUlrx5uHuNcphPhuIoQw0Ymr/view?usp=sharing.

[6]           See “Zohran Kwame Mamdani Twitter Post May 5, 2020,” https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oZP6DnPdVaXS0oYJ1M3ZSJeyIpTaMHqc/view?usp=sharing.  Hanif won her election, and in 2025 won re-election to the New York City Council.

[7]           Extract from Thomas Jefferson’s Fair Copy of the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 [before 4 Oct. 1798], https://tjrs.monticello.org/letter/177.

[8]           Liberato, http://www.liberato.us/take-action.html.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Netanyahu: France’s plan to recognize ‘Palestinian’ state ‘rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy’

Hunter Biden and the ‘Two-State Solution’

Iran’s Fatwa Against Trump a Declaration of War

Hunter Biden Lectures Prime Minister Netanyahu

UK Ex-Labour leader Corbyn launches new socialist, ‘free Palestine’ party

Germany drops veto, clears way for UK Typhoon jet sales to Turkey, ‘Eurofighter partner nations’ supportive

A New Middle East Expert Has Just Appeared on the World Stage: Hunter Biden

Islamic scholar on Druze: ‘Their women may be taken captive. They are to be killed wherever they are found.’

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

Trump 2028 Merchandise Appears in His Online Store, and the Left Goes Mad

/in , , , , , , , /by

Trump 2028 merchandise, including t-shirts, hats, and can coolers, are now available for sale in Trump’s official online store. The t-shirt says “TRUMP 2028 (Rewrite the Rules),” and the ad copy adds cheerfully: “The future looks bright! Rewrite the rules with the new Trump 2028 t-shirt.” As you may expect, heads are already exploding on the left.

A leftist who has over 41,000 followers on X and exhorts them to “Resist” summed up a common leftist response to Trump’s floating the idea of a third term by writing, “The ‘Trump 2028’ push is a calculated campaign to normalize authoritarianism in America. With 270 million followers, Musk is the most powerful political amplifier alive – and he’s using that reach to casually mainstream the idea of a dictatorship.” On ABC30 Action News’ post about the store offerings, one woman commented, “Hell no, please impeach this man already!” Ah, yes, the Democrats’ perennial fallback strategy.

The establishment media, meanwhile, hastened to remind the world that the 22nd Amendment says that “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.” The Guardian warns that “any serious effort to amend the founding document would send the United States into uncharted territory.” Yeah, who ever heard of the Constitution being amended? Uncharted territory, indeed.

And in late March, when Trump suggested that he was interested in a third term and that the 22nd Amendment wasn’t an insurmountable obstacle (although in all the excitement, it has been completely forgotten that he also said, “I’m not looking at that” and “I don’t even want to talk about a third term now”), New York Magazine stopped hyperventilating long enough to publish an article entitled: “If Trump Gets a 3rd Term, Democracy Will Have Already Ended.” Yeah, yeah, just like we have all died from COVID two or three times over by now.

Amid all the hysteria over Trump’s third term talk, one salient detail seems to have been widely forgotten: He would have to win the 2028 election to remain in the Oval Office after Jan. 20, 2029. The Trump 2028 merch in the Trump online store takes that for granted; otherwise, there would be no need to mention the next presidential election year. No one is talking about canceling elections and ruling as a dictator except leftists who are claiming that Trump wants to do that.

Also, the idea of a president serving a third term didn’t become a symptom of authoritarian dictatorship until Trump started talking about it. Barack Obama said in 2015, “I am in my second term. It has been an extraordinary privilege for me to serve as President of the United States. I cannot imagine a greater honor or a more interesting job. I love my work. But under our Constitution, I cannot run again. I can’t run again. I actually think I’m a pretty good President — I think if I ran, I could win. But I can’t.”

Obama also famously said in late 2020, “I used to say if I can make an arrangement where I had a stand-in or front-man or front-woman and they had an earpiece in and I was just in my basement in my sweats looking through the stuff and I could sort of deliver the lines while someone was doing all the talking and ceremony, I’d be fine with that because I found the work fascinating.” Hmm, could it be that exactly that plan was implemented from 2021 to 2025?

Whether it was or not, nobody was running around spreading the-sky-is-falling hysteria about Obama’s third term talk. And back when Franklin Delano Roosevelt broke a 150-year-old precedent and was elected not only to a third, but also to a fourth term, it was Republicans who pushed through the 22nd Amendment in the first place. Back then, Democrats were the ones assuring the world that the republic was not endangered if someone were elected to the presidency three or more times.

But this is Trump, and so it’s a vastly different story. And while the president himself has remained resolutely mum about how exactly he could run in 2028, the online store offerings prompted a new flurry of speculation. Eric Trump was photographed wearing the Trump 2028 hat; could he be thinking of a 2028 run? Or Donald Trump Jr., who has already been rumored to be considering a run?

Or is the whole thing a joke, another instance of Trump’s masterful trolling of the left? Elon Musk seems to think so, as he reposted the photo of Eric Trump wearing a Trump 2028 hat with fire and laughing emojis. The left’s hysteria over a Trump third term certainly shows up its hypocrisy and Trump derangement, and keeps it in the perpetual limbo of hating Trump rather than formulating a positive policy program that might actually appeal to Americans.

And so, in response to the Trump online store offerings, the best course of action is clear: grab some popcorn and watch the show, as the master troll drives those who would destroy him crazy once again.

This column orignially appeared in PJMedia.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump to Obama: Do not speak on authority of the USA

Adam Schiff admits that Democrats have a ‘a major problem’

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

JK Rowling: ‘There are no trans kids’ and ‘no child is born in the wrong body’

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

JK Rowling is back in the news over her continuing opposition to the far-left trans agenda. This time, she posted on X:

Rowling also praised an article by Kara Dansky — a “feminist fighting for the sex-based rights of women and girls.”

Dansky makes the compelling argument:

In order to justify the enshrinement of “gender identity” in the law, its proponents need for it to be real; if it’s real, it’s also innate; if it’s innate, kids must have it. Ergo, there are “trans kids.”

The truth is that youngsters often go through an identity crisis as they grow into adolescence and adulthood. But agenda-driven leftist ideologues have hijacked this natural process. By creating a whole new category under the DEI banner, these kids are coerced by trans activists and are made to feel exceptional and accepted. In the immediate, they may feel better as part of a community, but in the long run, they end up with much bigger problems, since they were too young to make such a decision in the first place.

Rowling has stood admirably as a determined leader against the radical trans agenda, in the face of substantial antagonism, as LGBTQ++ activists try to bully their opponents into surrender — which Rowling has shown no sign of doing.

“JK Rowling says there are ‘no trans kids’ and says NO child is born in the wrong body in response to online critic who accused her of ‘hateful focus,’” by Noor Qurasi, Daily Mail, December 29, 2024:

JK Rowling has come under fire again after stating there are ‘no trans kids’ and people cannot be born in the wrong body.

Rowling has been the focus of controversy over the last few years for her views on women’s rights and transgender issues.

And in a post shared to X – formerly Twitter – the Harry Potter author appeared to go a step further, suggesting transgender children do not exist.

She was responding to a critic who accused her of ‘hateful focus on trans kids’.

But Rowling hit back: ‘There are no trans kids. No child is “born in the wrong body”. There are only adults like you, prepared to sacrifice the health of minors to bolster your belief in an ideology that will end up wreaking more harm than lobotomies and false memory syndrome combined.’

The post elicited an array of strong comments, most supportive of the 59-year-old.

One person said ‘J.K. Is a hero’ while another added ‘as far as I’m concerned, you ARE using your immense power for good’.…

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: J.K. Rowling is right about “gender-affirming” surgery

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

Donald Trump Jr. distressed explaining to his 5 kids ‘about radical leftists trying to kill their grandfather’

/in , , , , , , , , /by

In a powerfully significant post on X by Donald Trump Jr. that should put America on alert if Donald Trump wins the election:

Radical leftists are the greatest perpetrators of violence, despite the establishment left making out the right to be a threat. The left is infamous for lip service about opposing “hatred” and incitement, yet it is leftists who perpetuate division, hatred and violence:

Musk also “wondered in a tweet why ‘no one is even trying to assassinate’ Biden and Harris — a post that Musk later said was a joke and deleted.” Answer: the right isn’t inherently violent.

Even after the second attempt on Trump’s life, left-leaning NBC slammed Trump, saying “Trump and his allies are fanning political flames.”

58-year old Ryan Routh, who has an “extensive criminal history dating back to the 1990s,” was taken into custody for the second attempt on Trump’s life. His son, Oran Routh, stated that his father hates Trump as “every reasonable person does.“

AUTHOR

Christine Douglass-Williams

RELATED ARTICLES:

Are you still wondering why there has been, so far, two assassination attempts on President Donald J. Trump? Well here’s your answer!

Florida Sheriff Suggests Trump Assassin Part of Bigger Conspiracy

Trump Assassin’s Ties to Deep State

RELATED VIDEO: Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) publically calls for President Donald J. Trump to be assassinated

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

Betrayal

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The entire policy of Israel’s elite after October 7 boils down to twisting the government’s arm and preventing victory over Hamas. Before October 7, it threatened to destroy the country from within. And what about October 7 itself?

According to Hegel’s dialectics, at a certain stage of development “quantity inevitably turns into quality.” This is what happened to the ruling class of Israel.

For 30 years, the Israeli establishment (judicial, military, political, Academy and media) played with the destinies and lives of its people cynically and unceremoniously in favor of its interests and ideological preferences. The Shamir-Arens government was the last one allowed to be guided by the responsibility for the country’s future. Then the games began: gambling and blood.

Here they are — the elite “Hunger Games”:

Oslo Accords

The “deal” with the head of a terrorist group cost lives of hundreds of people. Peres and Rabin called them “sacrifices on the altar of peace.” It was a new pseudo-religious cult with mass human sacrifices.

Ehud Barak’s flight from Lebanon in 2000

The South Lebanon Army was abandoned to its own fate (like the Arabs who collaborated with Israel before them), and Hezbollah became a powerful force here.

Ehud Barak and Camp David

The offer to Arafat to transfer to him 91-95% of the territory of Judea, Samaria, part of the Negev (as part of a “territory exchange”), the Arab areas of East Jerusalem and most of the Old City was rejected by the PLO leader. He didn’t want to share the fate of Anwar Sadat. He gave carte blanche to the militants. During the four years of the Al-Aqsa Intifada, also known as the Oslo War, more than 1000 Israelis were killed and more than 5500 were wounded.

The “Disengagement”

In 2005, Ariel Sharon, who proudly declared: “The fate of Netzarim is the fate of Tel Aviv,” wiped out the thriving Jewish communities of Gaza. The Zionist, mostly Religious Zionist, residents were thrown into the trash heap. The elite triumphed. Some of the youth of Gush Katif lost themselves into drinking and taking drugs, and some emigrated. It was literally an expulsion from paradise. Two years later, Hamas came to power in Gaza.

Kadima party, Annapolis, and the planned disengagement in Judea and Samaria.

The opportunist Kadima party of Sharon, Olmert and Tzipi Livni was ready to liquidate more than 90% of the Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria. However, Mahmoud Abbas, like Arafat before him, refused to accept the idea of “conflict is over.” In return, Kadima decided to carry out a second “unilateral disengagement” — this time on Judea and Samaria. Luckily, it failed to be implemented due to the second Lebanese war.

These projects were not buried by the elite, who aspired after three strategic things:

  • Ending the falsely termed “occupation” (“the apartheid regime” according to the former head of the Mossad, Tamir Pardo).
  • Transformation of Israel from a Jewish state into a state for “all its citizens” (de facto, one more Arab state).
  • Elimination of the settler movement (peopled by those called “subhumans” by Meretz party head Yair Golan).

Netanyahu’s stubbornness caused fury. He would not give in to the elite establishment nor would he fulfill its goals. He was seen by the world as a statesman and by a majority of Israelis as the leader they wanted. So the elite were prepared to jeopardize the country to get rid of him.

Meanwhile, the rot kept growing. We observed shocking manifestations of it. Some examples: fictitious court cases against the head of government, Netanyahu; the Shin Bet’s use of female soldiers as sex toys for terrorists in prisons; the deadly Jewish pogroms in Lod and Acre in 2021, which took the Shin Bet and the police by surprise (as they always do); the humiliating concession of gas fields to Hezbollah in 2022; the Supreme Courts decisions to abrogate powers of every part of government and be the judge of the legitimacy of its own powers.

After the right-wing government won the elections by a large margin, the elite resorted to open sabotage. Their worst nightmares seemed to be coming true: Avi Maoz’s (“Noam”) call for the restoration of Jewish identity and family values; Ben Gvir’s “national guard” project; finally, an attempt to define the unlimited powers of the judicial caste (the “priestly corps” of the elite) and have checks and balances – all these became a pretext for starting a de facto coup.

Even if the judicial reform’s first steps were half-baked, it certainly did not pose a threat to democracy. Prof. Alan Dershowitz suggested that with the reform implemented, Israel would be much more like “Canada or New Zealand or Australia, or many European countries,” still a far cry from the USA.

The defense establishment led this crusade. Not a day passed without some former chief of the General Staff, ex-head of Shin Bet, Mossad or AMAN declaring that “democracy is under threat” or the country is “on the verge of dictatorship.”

The elite threatened to refuse to serve when called up, and pilots did not report for reserve duty necessary for maintenance of their operative level. The elite threatened to take their money, grown exponentially due to government encouragement and tax breaks to strengthen the economy, out of the country. They set fires on main roads, blocked them and were treated with kid gloves by law enforcement, whose then heads identified with them.

Hamas was watching.

Ominous prophecies about an impending “dictatorship”, threats of civil war, allusions to the collapse of two Temples, pogroms, and Ehud Barak’s “wishes” to fill Yarkon with corpses created an atmosphere of hysteria and fear.

Yet all of this was not enough. Something bigger was needed that would plunge the entire country into chaos.

This would allow:

  • to create a government of national unity by introducing people loyal to the establishment.
  • to push out the so-called “Kakhanists” of Otzma Yehudit and “Noam” parties
  • to remove the judicial reform from the agenda.
  • to weaken Likud as much as possible. Same for the Religious Zionists.
  • eventually, to remove Bibi from the big politics once and for all.

And after that, they could move on to the strategic tasks mentioned above.

Stalin wrote: “The forest is cut — the chips fly.” Why wouldn’t these principles be still relevant today? Perhaps all means seemed acceptable.

A Hamas attack would make it possible to objectively achieve the assigned tasks in the shortest possible time.

Maybe they thought the scale of the attack would be limited. Maybe they couldn’t imagine that Hamas would decide to carry out massacres because the enemy they hated was Bibi, not the terrorists. Maybe they didn’t consider that a music festival with the participation of left-wing youth would take place nearby. Maybe…

But remember that Ehud Barak said that “the corpses had to float along the Yarkon.”

I have not the slightest doubt that the conditions for the massacre were prepared. Warnings by observers were ignored, the border was unguarded (by tacit agreement? or worse?), and the predator was allowed into the territory of defenseless Negev settlements. It took hours for defense establishment help to arrive. Israel was saved by the initiative of its heroic sons and daughters.

And the massacre plunged the entire country into horror, chaos, and mourning.

So a betrayal turned into a crime, and it not only continues, but reaches a new level.

The entire policy of the ruling class after October 7 boils down to twisting the government’s arm and preventing victory over Hamas.

The country must be brought to its knees before the Islamic jihadists, so that our elite will be able then declare: Netanyahu lost the war, he is responsible to the hostages’ deaths and we must hold elections now.

“Elections NOW!”, “Rak Lo Bibi – anything but Bibi.” That’s all that matters.

All means at their disposal are used for this:

  • Mass hysteria and playing on the suffering and emotions of the families of hostages. The goal is to force the government to return the hostages NOW at any cost: that is, to give up control over Gaza, the Philadelphi Corridor won with the blood of IDF soldiers, and return Sinwar and his thugs to power. It will be clear and unconditional capitulation, but doesn’t matter.
  • Blaming Netanyahu for the deaths of hostages in Gaza instead of Hamas, using the mantra “bring them home” instead of “set them free”, while knowing full well that the repeated demonstrations made Israel seem divided and raised the price for freeing the hostages.
  • The assertion that Hamas cannot be defeated because “it is an ideology”.
  • Coordination of actions with White house. In fact, the entire military establishment, as well as former generals, including Galant, Gantz, Eisenkot, and media are on a short leash of the Democratic Party and systematically voice its demands to wind down the operation and hand Gaza over to the PA.
  • Blocking an independent investigation of October 7.
  • Sowing confusion and disarray in society by pursuit of soldiers and reservists for “mistreatment of the Nukhba terrorists” while not bringing one terrorist to trial.
  • Hounding (in unison with the US administration) of right-wing politicians like Ben-Gvir and Smotrich.
  • The desire to drag the country into a war of attrition with Hezbollah NOW, before the Hamas regime in Gaza is destroyed.

Israel must be sacrificed on the “altar of peace.” In framework of this “peace” there will be no place for Israel, but it doesn’t matter.

The result of this unscrupulous manipulation is ambiguous. The ruling class has won the battle, but probably has lost the war. The left is traditionally strong at intrigue, but weak at strategy. The ordinary people are making their voices heard. The IDF rank and file, reservists and medium level echelons are loyal and dedicated to saving the country.

In truth, the left camp is demoralized.

These were its most consistent adherents who became tragic victims of the massacre, and the consequences of this will have far-reaching results. The veil of great-heartedness fell from the eyes of many: it became obvious that Jews were tortured, raped, killed, roasted in ovens not because they were “right-wing extremists” and “colonists,” but only because they were Jews. And this can happen not only in Israel, but everywhere: from New York and Toronto to Berlin, London, and Paris.

What also became obvious is that the Middle East remains the same Middle East and will not turn into Iceland or New Zealand. The entire society is traumatized, but the left is traumatized much more, because until now they lived in the world of illusions.

The war awakened the country to the dedication of the Religious Zionists and aroused national consciousness to the need to involve the haredi population, start a process where they eventually join military service and contribute economically. And clearly, they won’t be on the side of the elite either.

Thus a tactical victory will turn into a strategical defeat.

AUTHOR

Alexander Maistrovoy

RELATED ARTICLES:

How the US State Department Helped Jihad Come to Power in Bangladesh

Islamic scholar: ‘After Palestine is liberated, not even a single grave of a Jew will remain in Palestine’

Goodnight, Vienna

Islamic State calls for jihad massacres in Europe to avenge deaths of Muslims in Gaza

The IDF’s Operation Summer Camps

Germany: Muslim migrant who tried to run over pedestrians says he did it ‘on behalf of Allah’

France: Muslim migrant screaming ‘Allahu akbar’ and ‘There is only one god’ threatens to slit woman’s throat

Belgium: School makes Arabic compulsory for sixth graders

Another Week, Another Muslim Stabbing In Germany

Imam Khalil Adem: From Kidnapping to Threatening the End of Jews—Why Is He Still Employed at a New Jersey Hospital?

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

VIDEO: Winston Marshall on the history of evil of the New York Times, Zuckerberg, YouTube, Google and the political establishment

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

In the aftermath of Mark Zuckerberg’s open letter to Jim Jordan and the arrest of Telegram’s Pavel Durov, renowned investigative journalist Ashley Rindsberg exposes the troubling history of media and social media bias and censorship at the highest levels.

In this interview, Ashley reveals how the New York Times has shilled for authoritarian regimes from Stalin to Hitler and again today in America.

He unpacks the troubling capture of Wikipedia by progressive interests and it’s relationship with YouTube, Google and the political establishment.

The conversation explores the broader “digital civil war” as alternative voices challenge the establishment’s grip on information control.

RELATED VIDEO: Senator Tom Cotton exposes NBC’s fake news Arlington hoax

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with video posted by Eeyore is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

D.C. Swamp-Dwellers Say It Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the Presidency, They’ll Do What They Want

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

If he is reelected this November, will Donald Trump manage to drain the swamp this time? The swamp-dwellers are saying no.

Ever since he began his first run for president, Trump has famously vowed to drain the swamp, that is, clear out the far-left bureaucracy in Washington that bears so much responsibility for the leftward drift of the nation over the last decade and a half.

In his inaugural address on Jan. 20, 2017, Trump announced:

Today we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another, or from one party to another—but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C., and giving it back to you, the American People. For too long, a small group in our nation’s Capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost. Washington flourished — but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered — but the jobs left, and the factories closed. The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country…. That all changes — starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you.

Unlike numerous other presidents who had spoken in the past about taking the government from the oligarchs who controlled it and giving it back to the people, Trump’s words didn’t herald a push to expand government power under the guise of working for the people. On the contrary, he was determined to expand the freedom Americans enjoyed and roll back government power.

The swamp, however, struck back hard, and Trump’s promise that power would be transferred back to the people remains unfulfilled. Trump has been criticized for failing to follow through on his promise, but at that time, no one knew just how entrenched and determined the swamp dwellers were.

In fact, before Trump was elected and the Washington bureaucracy rose against him, few people, if any, knew that there was a swamp at all. One of the most important results of the Trump presidency was not one anyone intended: it revealed the deep corruption and politicization of the civil service. Now, a more experienced Trump is again vowing to destroy the swamp, but the swamp-dwellers are insisting that they’re not going anywhere and will continue to run things. The gauntlet has been thrown down.

The Washington Examiner reported Thursday that the will of the people just doesn’t matter to Beltway bureaucrats: “Washington’s bureaucracy, expanded and emboldened by the Biden-Harris administration, feels so secure that most managers would impose new regulations even if voters ‘overwhelmingly’ rejected their plans.”

According to a new survey, fully 54% of “federal government managers would defy voters to do what they want.” The Napolitan Institute, which states that “we recognize that the only legitimate authority for government comes from the consent of the governed,” and that “our mission is to amplify and magnify the voice of the American people so clearly and powerfully that it becomes the driving, framing and shaping force for the crucial conversations of our nation,” conducted a survey of 500 swamp denizens, aka federal bureaucrats.

One of the questions these arrogant usurpers were asked was this: “Imagine that you work for a government agency and have the ability to draft new regulations. After carefully researching an important issue, you determine that a new regulation is needed. If voters overwhelmingly oppose that regulation, what should you do?” The Examiner notes that “just 35% would follow the wishes of voters and trash their regulation while 54% would ‘follow your research and issue the regulation.’ The rest were unsure.”

Nor was this a one-off. Another recent poll showed that a majority of swamp denizens think we peasants are getting out of line: “51% of federal managers believe that people have ‘too much individual freedom.’ Just 31% said they have ‘too little.’” Who do these people think they are? Like all leftists, they think they possess superior knowledge and wisdom, and thus should be entrusted with political power at the expense of the ordinary Americans for whom they have so much contempt.

If he wins the election, will Trump defeat the swamp this time? It shouldn’t be solely up to him. Both parties should see it as being in their interest to destroy this massive and unaccountable federal bureaucracy. The deep state’s coup attempts against Trump should lead to civil service reform that makes it possible for a president to remove various officers and appoint people in their place who will implement his agenda. Democrats should support this as well as Republicans: no elected president of either party should be impeded by unelected bureaucrats. But it is likely that the Democrats have too much to lose if the full story of the deep state were revealed to support such a move.

The article originally appeared on PJ Media.

AUTHOR

RELATED VIDEOS:

Trump says he’s looking to put both Elon Musk AND RFK Jr. in his cabinet when elected

Elon Musk, “Moderation is a propaganda word for censorship.”

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

J.K. Rowling: ‘If calling me ‘transphobe’ and ‘fascist’ was going to scare me, it would have happened years ago’

/in , , , , , , /by

J.K. Rowling has referred to rabid trans activists as the “gender Taliban.”

Rowling is a rarity in a society where far too many are sheep-like, going along to get along no matter what the cost.

Most people retreat at the thought of being called a “transphobe”, “Islamophobe” and any other bully label conjured up by the Left to shut down free speech and debate, which are critical elements to protect free societies from subversion by the worst fascists. The extreme hatred spewed at Rowling on Twitter over her stance on the aggressive trans agenda shows how desperate and lunatic these folks are in the face of mere disagreement. Yet, she remains courageously unfazed.

Last week Rowling criticized the UK’s new women and equalities minister over previous remarks she made on gender.

AUTHOR

CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

RELATED ARTICLES:

J.K. Rowling Slams Trans Activists After UK Bans Use of Puberty Blockers on Minors, Citing Safety Concerns

J.K. Rowling: ‘There is something dangerous’ about transgender movement ‘and it must be challenged’

J.K. Rowling Compares Demand to Accept Transgender Wokeness to the Drive for Conformity in the Soviet Union

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