Tag Archive for: propaganda

Murdering Thug Karmelo Anthony

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

I wrote this only because it illustrates, once again, the idiocy of the Marxists who are part of the Black Lives Matter, Critical Race Theory movement who frame every event or activity that they don’t like in the form of racism.

This was murder and a knife with a 5″ blade was used by thug Karmelo Anthony to  penetrate the sternum and pierce the heart of  unarmed white teenager Austin Metcalf at a track meet.

This was hardly self-defense and the excuse by Anthony’s defenders that it was only a “multi-tool” is ridiculous or that someone tapping someone on shoulder is grounds for being murdered.

Karmelo Anthony was found guilty of murder by a jury of his peers.

DEADLY PHOTO: We Now Know What Karmelo Anthony’s Knife Looked Like, and It Was No Quaint Leatherman Multitool

By Samantha Chang

Race-hustling apologists for convicted murderer Karmelo Anthony beclowned themselves by insisting that the knife Anthony used to kill high school track star Austin Metcalf was not a “deadly weapon” because it looked like a Swiss Army Knife multitool.

The harebrained gaslighting unfolded Wednesday during a virtual panel discussion hosted by Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas.

Crockett — whom President Donald Trump called a “very low-IQ person — try to downplay the lethality of the murder weapon by claiming it was too small to be deadly.

‘So it was small,” the congresswoman said.

“Well, I would have argued the size of it alone, you wouldn’t even think it’s a deadly weapon.’”

Crockett‘s brain-dead reasoning ignited a social media backlash, with numerous X commenters underscoring that anything can be a deadly weapon if you repeatedly stab someone with it.

Continue reading.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

The Unholy Alliance Between Islam and the Left

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

The progressive establishment in the United States maintains a transactional syndicate with radical Islamist factions to lock down institutional power. This structural cartel sacrifices Western secular principles, democratic consistency, and basic human rights on the altar of raw electoral survival.

The political left and Islamist organizers operate a highly coordinated machine built on mutual opportunism. Progressivism delivers mainstream legitimacy, legal defense, and institutional cover to fundamentalist groups. In return, the Islamist infrastructure guarantees monolithic voter turnout and massive financial injections into progressive campaign chests. This transaction abandons core progressive principles – including secularism, gender equality, and LGBTQ safety – to shield orthodox religious systems from public scrutiny.

An extensive analysis published by the Policy Exchange Research Group on Islamism and the Left details the deep ideological affinity and historical roots of this epistemic alliance against the liberal democratic order. The investigation demonstrates how both factions actively weaponize identical narratives of Western oppression to close down open debate and dismantle standard legal equality.

The human and societal costs of this alliance manifest through specific, systemic points of failure inside American institutions:

  • The Voting Bloc Extortion: Progressive strategists systematically map and court orthodox religious districts, offering total legislative silence on radical fundamentalism in exchange for block-voting guarantees. Data compiled by the Pew Research Center on American Muslim Political Behavior confirms that fully two-thirds of this constituency operates as a consolidated voting apparatus for a single political party, creating a capture mechanism over local municipalities.
  • The Municipal Capture and Fiscal Subversion: This municipal capture triggers immediate structural decay. Once these coalitions secure local executive offices, they systematically divert taxpayer funds into sectarian religious fronts disguised as community outreach initiatives. The document describes how domestic radical hubs exploit these loosened local oversight mechanisms to embed fundamentalist actors into regional governance boards, effectively hijacking public school boards, city councils, and municipal law enforcement oversight committees.
  • The Academic Erasure of Human Rights: Left-wing departments inside American universities systematically erase fundamentalist atrocities from curricula to protect their domestic political allies. Secular critics, ex-Muslims, and authentic human rights defenders face aggressive censorship, blacklisting, and professional ruin on campuses when they expose the systemic abuse of women and minorities under Islamist control.
  • The Orchestrated Media Blackout: The syndicate maintains a rigid information gatekeeping operation across dominant media conglomerates to sanitize public perception. Newsrooms systematically bury domestic intelligence briefings regarding homegrown radicalization cells to protect the political reputation of their Islamist partners. This deliberate suppression of truth isolates the American public from reality; major outlets completely omit verified indicators of rising fundamentalist militancy. Concrete data compiled confirms that shielding toxic ideologies from journalistic investigation directly accelerates the spread of clandestine recruitment networks inside urban centers, converting domestic media into an active accomplice of institutional subversion.
  • The Weaponization of Civil Rights Bureaucracy: Radical legal networks leverage progressive anti-discrimination frameworks to insulate extremist individuals from federal surveillance and criminal investigation. Law enforcement agencies face immediate, coordinated public character assassination campaigns whenever they target fundamentalist terror finance cells operating under the guise of domestic non-profit organizations.
  • The Illicit Financial Pipeline: The progressive apparatus deliberately blinds financial regulatory bodies to ensure the unhindered flow of dark money into joint political action committees. Wealthy foreign donors and fundamentalist non-governmental organizations funnel millions through shell networks to bankroll progressive primary challengers. Official findings detailed in the European Union Journal on Terror Finance and Money Laundering expose how these transnational financial networks exploit domestic political loopholes, using Western campaign apparatuses as laundry operations to legitimize illicit capital while buying direct veto power over Western foreign policy decisions.

The internal subversion of American politics directly cripples foreign policy, causing immediate devastation on the global stage. When Western political actors validate fundamentalist rhetoric domestically, they undermine vital international crackdowns on radical networks.

This domestic collusion paralyzed the federal apparatus during critical geopolitical flashpoints. Progressive lawmakers, beholden to their fundamentalist ground operations, actively sabotage sanctions regimes and defund defensive alliances to appease their domestic voting blocs. This legislative betrayal leaves democratic allies entirely vulnerable to asymmetrical warfare, as the domestic cartel prioritizes precinct-level vote tallies over international stability and treaty obligations.

Official documentation from Human Rights Watch on Armed Conflicts exposes the catastrophic reality of unchecked Islamist insurgencies, where fundamentalist networks slaughter civilians, execute local leaders, and enforce total totalitarian control. The American progressive machine routinely downplays or ignores these harsh global realities to avoid fracturing its fragile domestic electoral coalition.

The progressive machine in the United States must face complete political dismantling. A system that trades fundamental liberties for short-term precinct victories acts as an existential threat to constitutional governance. True national security demands the complete severance of this syndicate.

For a deeper look into how these dynamics unfold on the international stage, this Debate on Left-Wing and Islamist Alliances analyzes the broader geopolitical consequences and regional shifts caused by these controversial political frameworks.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

The Sneaky Way Corporate America Blacklists Conservatives, and How More of Them Are Fighting Back

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

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—More nonprofits are urging the software company Benevity—which hundreds of companies use to allow employees to donate their time and money to charities—to stop systematically blacklisting conservative nonprofits.

Twelve organizations first sent a letter to Benevity in October following the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. The new letter, sent Monday and exclusively provided first to the Daily Signal, will feature three new signatories: Turning Point USA, PragerU, and Focus on the Family.

“Charitable giving programs should empower generosity, not enforce political conformity,” Douglas Napier, executive chairman and CEO of 1792 Exchange, which helped organize the letter, told the Daily Signal in a statement Friday.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ “Benevity must immediately end its use of Southern Poverty Law Center’s defamatory ‘Hate List’ and ‘Hate Map’ to block mainstream charitable organizations like Turning Point USA and Focus on the Family.”

“1792 Exchange’s research found that hundreds of major corporations rely on Benevity’s platform, making this a critical moment for corporate leadership to reject ideological gatekeeping,” Napier added. “Benevity must completely remove any use of the SPLC filter, adopt a viewpoint-neutral process, and restore full access to the organizations it has unjustly excluded.”

“For far too long, major corporations have been relying on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s nefarious ‘Hate List’ to decide what organizations and charities their employees may give to as part of their corporate giving programs,” Paul Batura, vice president of communications at Focus on the Family, told the Daily Signal. “These entities have been relying on a distorted definition of ‘goodness.’”

“In fact, citing and sourcing the SPLC is the equivalent of a company promising clean water drawing their water from a polluted or toxic aquifer,” Batura added. “It’s our privilege to join the 1792 Exchange’s growing coalition in urging companies to stop making decisions and recommendations based on information from the SPLC.”

Benevity Keeps Using SPLC

The issue gained renewed salience after a federal grand jury handed down 11 criminal charges against the SPLC for allegedly funding the very hate groups it tells donors it exists to “dismantle.”

The Daily Signal reached out to Benevity last month to see if the company would disavow the SPLC in light of the indictment.

“Benevity is not directly affiliated with the SPLC,” the company’s spokesperson told the Daily Signal. “Benevity clients have the option to use the list of nonprofit organizations included on the SPLC’s annual Hate Map to determine nonprofit eligibility within their programs. The use of this option is not a default setting and is at the sole discretion of clients.”

According to its website, Benevity connects “nearly 1,000 enterprise companies” to a network of 513,000 nonprofits after vetting 2.2 million of them. It says it has managed $16 billion in grants and 99 million employee volunteer hours. In 2023, more than 2.3 million people donated through the Benevity platform, representing $3.2 billion.

“Benevity’s denial that it defaults to the SPLC filter is hard to square with its own history,” Greg Scott, executive vice president at 1792 Exchange, told the Daily Signal in response to the Benevity statement.

Benevity’s former CEO, Kelly Schmitt, delivered a PowerPoint presentation in 2021 explicitly stating that the company had “vetted” almost “2 million nonprofits,” adding that it used the “Southern Poverty Law Center Hate List.”

Scott added, however, that “the real issue isn’t how the SPLC filter is used, it’s why this list is used at all.”

Critics have said the SPLC trades on its history of suing Ku Klux Klan groups into bankruptcy to smear conservatives. The center publishes a “hate map” that plots parental rights groups like Moms for Liberty, conservative groups like Turning Point USA, and Christian groups like Focus on the Family alongside chapters of the Klan.

In 2012, a convicted terrorist told the FBI he targeted a conservative Christian nonprofit in Washington, D.C., the Family Research Council, for a mass shooting. Four months after the SPLC added Turning Point USA to the “hate map” last year, Tyler Robinson allegedly murdered Turning Point founder Charlie Kirk, aiming to silence his “hate.”

According to 1792 Exchange, 252 companies using the Benevity platform exclude conservative groups by using the SPLC list as a screening tool.

The Letter

“We, the undersigned organizations, urge Benevity to immediately end the use of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s ‘Hate Map’ and ‘Hate List’ in determining which nonprofits are eligible for corporate charitable giving and employee matching programs,” reads the letter, now signed by 15 groups.

“By relying on these partisan designations, Benevity legitimizes a severely biased blacklist that inspires violence, urges discrimination against mainstream organizations, and undermines the spirit of charitable giving,” the letter adds.

The list of signatories includes Alliance Defending Freedom, the American Family Association, the Center for Christian Virtue, the David Horowitz Freedom Center, Do No Harm, the Family Policy Alliance, the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, GenSpect, Moms for Liberty, Partners for Ethical Care, PragerU, Turning Point USA, 1792 Exchange, and Them Before Us.

Benevity Open Letter v2Download

AUTHOR

Tyler O’Neil 

Tyler O’Neil is senior investigative reporter at the Daily Signal and the author of two books, “Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center” and “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government.” Follow on X Tyler2ONeil

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

A Whole Lotta People Aren’t Buying Axios’ Report On Trump’s F-Bomb-Laced, Bibi-Bashing Phone Call

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

Social media users across the political spectrum are casting serious doubts on a new Axios report claiming President Donald Trump cursed out Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Axios reported Monday that Trump “lashed out” at Netanyahu during a phone call concerning Israel’s threat to bomb Beirut, Lebanon, and the Israel Defense Force’s invasion of Southern Lebanon amid a fragile U.S.-Iran ceasefire. One anonymous official, “summarizing” the phone call, claimed Trump told Netanyahu, “You’re fucking crazy. You’d be in prison if it weren’t for me. I’m saving your ass. Everybody hates you now. Everybody hates Israel because of this.” Axios also reported that Trump “reined in” Netanyahu and convinced him to scrap the plans to bomb Beirut and Hezbollah targets.

However, many people aren’t buying it.

Progressive “Breaking Points” host Krystal Ball compared the new Axios story to nearly identical stories leaked during former President Joe Biden’s administration. Biden had reportedly described Netanyahu as a “bad f*cking guy” and an “asshole,” all while his administration continued to green-light U.S. weapons sales to Israel. 

Fox News host Mark Levin claimed the story was “largely fabricated” and called for one of its authors, Barak Ravid, to be fired.

Amit Segal, a correspondent for Israel news outlet N12, reported that the Axios story was “inaccurate.”

Independent journalist Caitlin Johnstone accused Ravid of making a “whole career” out of Biden-era leaks suggesting the former president was fed up with Netanyahu or on the verge of making an ultimatum to the Israeli prime minister.

Dave DeCamp, news editor at antiwar.com, pointed to a report that the U.S. had coordinated with Israel in its threat to attack Beirut.

Progressive journalist Mark Ames joked that Trump was “Brandonmaxxing,” a reference to Biden’s nickname coined by conservatives early in his term.

For his part, Trump claimed that he acted as an intermediary between Israel and Hezbollah and prevented further attacks from happening Monday.

“I had a very productive call with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, of Israel, and there will be no Troops going to Beirut, and any Troops that are on their way, have already been turned back,” he said in a Truth Social post. “Likewise, through highly placed Representatives, I had a very good call with Hezbollah, and they agreed that all shooting will stop — That Israel will not attack them, and they will not attack Israel.”

AUTHOR

John Loftus

Editor at Large

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘This Conversation Is Over’: Biden Reportedly Hung Up On Netanyahu After Heated Phone Call

Congress Discreetly Moves To Merge US Military Even Closer To Israel’s

Why Trump Demanded That Netanyahu Stop IDF Attack on Hezbollah Sites in Beirut

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

Inside Russia’s Propaganda War In NATO’s Eastern most City

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

NARVA, Estonia — Residents of Narva, NATO’s easternmost city, gathered along a promenade beneath a medieval Estonian castle May 9. But with their backs turned toward the European Union — Ukrainian and Estonian flags hanging from the fortress walls — the crowd’s attention was fixed across the river border on a bright display of Russian spectacle.

Just 101 meters away, a stage sat below an opposing 15th-century Russian fort in celebration of “Victory Day,” commemorating the Soviet Union’s defeat of Nazi Germany.

As in years past, the stage and loudspeakers were positioned toward the Estonian city, broadcasting cultural performances, a speech by Russian President Vladimir Putin, and additional displays of Russian grandeur. But unlike previous years, the pageantry appeared to capture more of Narva’s attention than ever before.

In his nationally broadcast speech, and moments after describing how past Soviets fought and died to defeat the Nazi threat, Putin said Russian forces are now actively “confronting an aggressive force armed and supported by the entire NATO bloc.”

In response, Maria Smorževskihh-Smirnova, the head of the Narva Museum and its fort, had lowered a large poster along the fortress wall referring to Putin as a war criminal and comparing him to Adolf Hitler. But with most eyes turned toward the stage across the river, the Estonian’s yearly act of rebellion appeared to do little more than earn her a conviction and a 10-year prison sentence from Russia — that is, if Russian authorities can ever get hold of her.

Days after Victory Day, the Daily Caller visited Narva’s Castle, the border, and met with officials in the nation’s Capitol as part of a multiday tour of NATO countries that share a border with Russia. Transportation and lodging for the trip were sponsored by a group of those states.

During the visit, Smirnova told the Caller that Putin’s regime has been using other forms of soft power and messaging since it first attacked Ukraine with the intent of showing that Russian borders can extend well into Estonia.

“Russia’s borders do not end anywhere,” a billboard erected in 2023 said, placed to be the last thing travelers see crossing the border from Russia into Estonia and, therefore, NATO.

The following year, Russian border guards were seen taking boats into the middle of the river and cutting border buoys.

Cautionary actions have since been taken, with border crossings now limited to foot traffic. Yet the Caller found hundreds standing in line to cross the country’s connecting point — the ironically named “Friendship Bridge.”

As one resident told the Caller, “Friendship is on a break.”

Following Estonia’s occupation by the Soviets, many Russians had been relocated into Estonia in an attempt to maintain long-term control over the region and embed Russian culture and way of life into the northernmost Baltic nation, Smirnova told the Caller.

And it appeared to have worked. Narva, the nation’s third-largest city with just over 52,000 people, is currently composed of 96 percent Russian speakers, with one-third of residents being Russian citizens. Another 12.5 percent do not have citizenship and instead are issued “gray passports,” allowing holders to travel between the nations as they please, Smirnova said.

And Narva is not alone. Throughout Estonia, a nation 100 times smaller than Russia, 29 percent of residents speak Russian as a first language, and another 38 percent speak it as a foreign language, Statistics Estonia found.

While communicating among countrymen is key in nation-building, the lack of Estonian speakers may suggest a more serious threat, as Estonia is first and foremost a uniquely “language-based” identity, according to Secretary General for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Jonatan Vseviov.

Vseviov, whose department has started to outgrow the now occupied old Communist Party headquarters, with its lobby still decorated in pink Cuban granite, told the Caller that Estonia does not have a strong sense of culture nor a strong claim to religion, blaming in part its history of being held under the thumb of other nations or existing as a collection of “oftentimes disputing villages and counties.”

Now, with fears of being ruled again, Estonia has resorted to taking often drastic measures in an attempt to build up its language-based culture, sometimes at the expense of Russian-speaking Estonians.

Efforts for an Estonian-speaking Estonia began after the Soviet Union collapsed, but perhaps reached their zenith after Russia’s attack on Ukraine. In 2024, all of the nation’s schools were required to begin teaching only in Estonian in kindergarten, first grade, and fourth grade, according to Estonian World.

Since then, multiple cases have been raised before the European Court of Human Rights, as several human rights groups have characterized the policy as a violation of freedom or forced assimilation, according to Eurac Research.

In 2024, a landmark constitutional amendment was passed, removing the ability of Russian and Belarusian residents of Narva to vote in local elections, the Russian media outlet Interfax reported.

The retaliation continued, with a 2025 law requiring that the Estonian Orthodox Church sever its connection with the Moscow Patriarchate, according to Kyiv Independent, in a move that echoes a Ukrainian policy that has been used by Russia to justify their agression.

Although many Estonians justify such actions as an existential necessity for self-preservation, Putin views these policy changes as direct attacks on Russians under his protection.

The Russian Constitution explicitly states that the Kremlin provides “compatriots” — ethnic Russians and Russian speakers — “living abroad in exercising their rights, ensuring the protection of their interests, and preserving their shared Russian cultural identity.”

Putin had previously cited the protection of Donbas compatriots as fuel for his war machine, sending soldiers in their parade uniforms across the Ukrainian border in the name of liberation. However, a diverse array of Ukrainian religious leaders told the Caller in August that Russia has spent the last four years dishing out Soviet-style persecution against the very compatriots they have come to emancipate.

Having watched this tactic play out from afar, many Estonians now fear similar talking points are being raised against their nation to justify more direct displays of power from Moscow, with the largest difference between Ukraine and Estonia being that the smaller of the two is backed by the united power of NATO, under Article 5 of the alliance’s founding treaty.

Despite these tensions, one initiative has decided to embrace Narva’s unique connection to the Russian border by exploring the dynamic between the two nations and the varying nationalities within the city.

In May, international participants at the Narva Art Residency shared works examining nature and borders, with one group introducing 7,000 new female workers into the abandoned Soviet textile factories of the Kreenholm Manufactory in the form of two transnational beehives. T

The residents of this “living monument” now freely commute between the Free World and the Eastern Bloc to produce honey derived from both Estonian and Russian wildflowers, demonstrating that borders, though negotiated and tested, remain only the problem of man.

AUTHOR

Derek VanBuskirk

Reporter

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: European Officials Warn Trump Against Leaving NATO As US Weighs Its Own Priorities

New Bill Brings Light To All But One Church Under Russian Persecution

Two More Sentenced As Hundreds Of Jehovah’s Witnesses Face Persecution, Church Says

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

Here’s What Democrats Chose to Do This Memorial Day Instead of Honoring Our Fallen Heroes

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

Memorial Day is a special time on the American calendar when we take a moment to think about and pay tribute to those who gave their lives for this wonderful country we call home.

It’s a wonderful and venerated tradition.

But the Left isn’t too interested in that. It has higher priorities.

Whatever it is you decided to do this Memorial Day, it was almost certainly time better spent than what the typical Democrat official was doing over the weekend.

If they just said, “Have a nice day, enjoy the weather,” as former Vice President Kamala Harris did in 2021, it would have been better than what a whole host of them decided to do this year.

This Memorial Day, they didn’t just ignore the occasion; many focused their energy on making cheap partisan talking points, joining mobs on behalf of illegal aliens, and showing how generally disconnected they are from the traditional values of this country.

It was a perfectly Democrat way to kick off the summer.

Let’s have a quick roundup.

The Partisan Cheap Shot at the Expense of Fallen Soldiers

The first and maybe the most egregious example of bad behavior this Memorial Day came from the Democratic National Committee.

“Today, we honor the American heroes who made the ultimate sacrifice in [President Donald] Trump’s war with Iran,” the official Democrat X account said on Monday.

Using the deaths of these soldiers to take a shot at the president didn’t go over very well on social media. Some commentators called it “repulsive” and “appalling.”

The post was bad enough that one Democrat rightly spoke up. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, a veteran who represents Illinois, chimed in to denounce the post.

“It is incredibly distasteful to use our heroic dead for a political attack on Memorial Day,” she wrote on X. “I’m a Democrat and I condemn this post by the DNC.”

The DNC then deleted the post and added a generic tribute to fallen troops.

Skipping the Parade, Joining the Mob

Instead of honoring Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice for this country, top New Jersey Democrats decided to fight for criminal illegal aliens who’ve broken our laws.

New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill and Sen. Andy Kim, both Democrats, showed up at the Delaney Hall Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Newark on Monday to protest on behalf of those detained there.

They claimed that the illegal aliens being detained had been mistreated and were on a hunger strike. Both these claims have been denied by the Department of Homeland Security. Whatever the accusation, this ended up being more of a riot than a mere protest as the mob tried to block the ICE facility and threw bottles at the employees.

Federal agents eventually deployed pepper spray to disperse the crowd. Sam Stein at the Bulwark threw a completely out-of-context post up on X, saying merely that “ICE pepper sprayed a US Senator today.”

In journalism that’s called burying the lede.

DHS said in a statement that nobody had been struck by the pepper spray balls and that it had been used because “rioters refused to follow law enforcement commands and continue to obstruct the exit route.”

In a video of the incident, Kim appeared to be dissuading the crowd from attacking the facility, but he was jeered and clearly ignored.

ICE later posted a quick roundup of occupants in the Newark detention center.

“Jose De La O Lainez, a criminal illegal alien from El Salvador, arrested in Plainfield, New Jersey. His criminal history includes homicide.”

“Jhan Martinez-Valverde, a criminal illegal alien from Peru, arrested in Elizabeth, New Jersey. His criminal history includes sex offense against a child.”

“Sergio Marques Abrantes, a criminal illegal alien from Portugal, arrested in Newark, New Jersey. His criminal history includes enticement of a minor for indecent purposes.”

I’ve got an idea. Here me out, New Jersey Democrats.

Instead of rushing to the aid of murderers, rapists, and pedophiles, I have a list of names they may want to consider taking a small moment of their precious time to honor next year.

Here’s a local boy they may want to consider. Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant John Basilone grew up in Raritan, New Jersey, and earned the Medal of Honor for valiant action at the Battle of Guadalcanal when he held off a Japanese attack with his pistol. He saved the lives of many men and continued to serve with distinction through the Pacific War.

Basilone was later killed at the Battle of Iwo Jima.

Just a suggestion for next year.

Grumbling About Military Spending

Among the pettier moments this Memorial Day weekend were the barbs aimed at military displays.

Fake Somali-run “daycares” siphoned off billions of dollars from state and federal treasuries, and it hardly registered a shrug on the Left. But briefly flying a military helicopter over a car race to pay homage to the troops? *Gasp* Waste!

Here’s California Gov. Gavin Newsom telling Secretary of War Pete Hegseth that all we want is “lower gas prices.”

Keep in mind, if the governor cared about the highest-in-nation gas prices in his state, he could have done something about them years ago. Newsom clearly doesn’t mind using astronomical amounts of taxpayer dollars on projects to appease and enrich the state’s social justice warrior class. Or himself.

George Floyd

Finally, we come to another true “hero” Democrats spent time honoring this Memorial Day: George Floyd.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey decided to pay special tribute to Floyd.

We are committed to honoring this place both as a memorial with global significance and as a neighborhood where people live, work, gather, and heal,” Frey said of George Floyd Square. “The work ahead is bigger than any one moment or administration.”

Fox News host Lisa Boothe called it a “disgrace” to honor a “criminal” on Memorial Day.

“Patriotic Americans spend today remembering those heroes of our armed forces who gave their lives in service of this country, not praying at the altar of a felon druggy who died of a fentanyl overdose, you moronic sniveling coward,” radio host Buck Sexton wrote on X.

Here’s Waltz dancing at the George Floyd Square ceremony instead of attending Memorial Day ceremonies.

If there was any doubt about how Democrats and the Left will respond to this year’s 250th anniversary celebrations on the Fourth of July, I’d say this has been an enlightening preview of what’s to come.

AUTHOR

Jarrett Stepman

Jarrett Stepman is a columnist for The Daily Signal. He is also the author of “The War on History: The Conspiracy to Rewrite America’s Past.” Send an email to Jarrett. Follow on X JarrettStepman

RELATED VIDEO: GOP Rep EXPLODES On Liberal Witness On Why Billions to Illegals (The Biden Years)

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

The Indictment Beneath the Indictment: SPLC’s Strategy for Silencing Americans

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

When federal prosecutors finally brought down Al Capone, it wasn’t for murder, extortion, racketeering, or the violence that defined his criminal empire. It was for tax evasion. The charge was real. The conviction was legitimate. But no serious student of history believes tax evasion told the whole story of Capone’s criminal empire. It was simply the charge prosecutors believed they could most readily prove. Today, the Southern Poverty Law Center stands federally indicted on charges involving bank fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering.

Those charges are serious. But for those familiar with the SPLC’s destructive path, the indictment is just the tip of the iceberg of what appears to have been a much broader system of coordinated influence and institutional coercion.

First, I want to commend the FBI and the Department of Justice for their investigation and indictment. I am sure there are some here today who spent time with the FBI during this investigation. I spent considerable time with them explaining SPLC’s work and how their influence in the financial world impacted us as a Christian nonprofit.

With the indictment of SPLC, which has been the Left’s vanguard in their attack on conservative organizations who stood in their way, cowardly corporate figures who kowtowed to SPLC are starting to talk. So, we are learning more.

But there are several realities we need to understand.

Recognizing that traditional hate organizations like the Ku Klux Klan were drying up, the SPLC adjusted its business model by appointing itself as the national arbiter of “hate.” Leveraging its storied reputation from the civil rights era, it expanded its targets far beyond violent extremist groups.

The first reality we need to understand is this: although the indictment focused on SPLC’s money-raising scheme, SPLC’s real focus was its institutional influence on government, media, and corporate America.

Over time, SPLC hate and extremist classifications evolved into far more than media narratives. Their labels increasingly became a form of reputational risk assessment used by banks, payment processors, technology companies, financial compliance systems, law enforcement, media organizations, and even elements of the federal government.

The jewel of the SPLC operation was its Intelligence Project, which became deeply influential as the government, media, and finally financial institutions used their biased data in determining which organizations were viewed as acceptable participants in the financial and digital marketplace.

In November of 2010, the first wave of Christian organizations was placed on the SPLC hate map and hate list, with Family Research Council being among the most prominent.

In August of 2012, a gunman entered our headquarters in DC intending to carry out a mass shooting. He shot our building manager before he was disarmed. He carried 100 rounds of ammunition and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches, which he intended to stuff into the mouths of his victims. Why FRC? The gunman, Floyd Corkins, later confessed to federal agents that he selected FRC after using the SPLC website and hate map.

That, unfortunately, was not the last shooting related to individuals publicly targeted by SPLC. In 2017, then-Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), and Charlie Kirk last year.

Following the shooting at FRC, we appealed to SPLC to remove organizations like ours because it resulted in an act that was officially deemed domestic terrorism. They did not respond.

It is clear they did not want to remove the labels because of the institutional influence that had grown around them. The ability to silence the left’s opponents.

Around 2016, the SPLC led an ad hoc coalition of left-wing activist groups that began pressuring technology companies and financial institutions to deplatform and defund conservative organizations. PayPal was among the early targets, although its initial success was limited.

Then came Charlottesville.

Charlottesville was a catalytic event that rapidly accelerated SPLC’s efforts. It was a game-changer for them in terms of their efforts to bully corporations.

With that in mind, let me insert information directly from the federal indictment, which identified one of the many extremist group members allegedly funded by the SPLC: the individual identified as F-37. According to the indictment:

“A member of the online leadership of the chat group that planned [PLANNED] the 2017 ‘Unite the Right’ event in Charlottesville, Virginia, and attended the event at the direction of the SPLC. F-37 made racist postings under the supervision of the SPLC and helped coordinate transportation to the event for several attendees. Between 2015 and 2023, the SPLC secretly paid F-37 more than $270,000.”

Following Charlottesville, major corporations publicly aligned themselves with the SPLC. Apple donated $1 million. JPMorgan Chase and others followed.

Was Charlottesville designed to be a catalytic event to further SPLC’s efforts to move reluctant corporations?

Post Charlottesville in August of 2017, the ad hoc coalition formally organized into what became known as Change the Terms, led by the SPLC and the Center for American Progress.

The timeline of Change the Terms closely parallels the rapid acceleration of debanking and deplatforming directed at conservative and Christian organizations. BB&T, now Truist, notified us that, in accordance with our services agreement, they can, “at any time, close an account at our discretion.”

It’s a bit ironic that SPLC’s bank let them operate known fraudulent accounts for over a decade, according to the indictment.

Change the Terms sought to establish standards for technology and financial companies that would deny digital access and funding mechanisms to organizations deemed extremist by the SPLC’s definition.

SPLC officials were explicit about this strategy.

In congressional testimony delivered on January 15, 2020, SPLC official Lecia Brooks stated:

“For decades, the SPLC has been fighting hate and exposing how hate groups use the internet. We have lobbied internet companies, one by one, to comply with their own rules to prohibit their services from being used to foster hate or discrimination. A key part of this strategy has been to target these organizations’ funding.”

Brooks continued:

“On Oct. 25, 2018, the Change the Terms coalition, including the SPLC and other civil rights groups, released a suite of recommended policies for technology companies that would take away the online microphone that hate groups use to recruit members, raise funds and organize violence. In response to Change the Terms’ advocacy, several Silicon Valley leaders have made promising changes that align with the coalition’s vision for a safer online world.”

But Brooks went further, openly describing the pressure campaign:

“The public exposure was half the battle. We conducted the other part of the campaign privately. SPLC officials held dozens of meetings with top Silicon Valley executives. Some companies acted. Some took half steps. Others did little or nothing. But eventually, the far-right extremists who depended on Silicon Valley were beginning to feel the pain.”

What SPLC appears to have done, according to reports, is bully the cowardly corporations, leveraging their political connections, including regulators.

And finally, she said:

“Hate groups have clearly been damaged by the efforts of the SPLC and its allied organizations, including the Change the Terms coalition, to fight them and their funding sources online. But the fight is far from over.”

The fight is far from over.

This brings me to the second reality.

The indictment paints a picture that SPLC was propping up some of the very extremist entities it publicly claimed to be dismantling.

And the indictment makes clear these were not undercover informants or “snitches,” as we used to call them when I was a police officer. In some cases, these were individuals allegedly running or helping run operations.

The evidence appears to suggest that these extremist organizations served a larger purpose: providing potent imagery that immediately marginalized legitimate conservative and Christian organizations that were listed alongside these groups.

We need to be clear: this was not about SPLC’s financial survival.

For anyone tempted to feel sorry for the SPLC and start a GoFundMe account for its legal defense, SPLC’s 2024 audited financial statement shows an endowment fund of approximately $734 million.

Nor should anyone assume this indictment marks the end of the SPLC. They have more lives and tentacles than the Iranian regime.

While many financial institutions that partnered with or relied upon SPLC classifications beginning around 2017 have begun distancing themselves from the organization, the SPLC still maintains enormous institutional reach.

Its school-based program, Learning for Justice, formerly Teaching Tolerance, still reportedly reaches roughly 500,000 educators. Every public school system in America should be asked whether SPLC curriculum materials are being used in their schools.

SPLC’s public labeling system became far more than a public list. Whether by design or evolution, it functioned as a strategic weapon against conservatives who stood in the way of the Left’s agenda. Behind it, SPLC designations were increasingly used by media organizations to marginalize or exclude targeted individuals and groups, while also influencing banking access, digital platforms, fundraising capacity, and overall public legitimacy.

The indictment may focus on bank fraud and wire fraud. But like Al Capone’s tax evasion case, there is much beneath the surface: a sophisticated system of influence designed not merely to oppose ideas, but to marginalize and economically punish those who hold them.

These entities that collaborated with SPLC and did real harm to individuals and organizations should be held accountable as well.

And if America is to remain a nation where freedom of speech, religious liberty, and political dissent truly survive, then the broader conspiracy facilitated and directed by the SPLC must be confronted, exposed, and, where illegal conduct occurred, those responsible held accountable. Just as importantly, safeguards must be established to ensure such a system is never allowed to operate again.

AUTHOR

Tony Perkins

Tony Perkins is president of Family Research Council and executive editor of The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 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.

Rep. Seth Moulton, (Dem-MA) insults Admiral Cooper, CENTCOM Commander at Hearing on Iran

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

Unfortunatley, we have Democrat former service members in Congress from every branch who have or are undermining our military using their own service as cover for their preposterous actions/statements often bordering on treason. One such is Massachusetts Rep Seth Moulton; who served as a Marine Capatain with duty in Iraq but uses his military service to run to the leftist media criticizing America for the war in Iraq and is now doing so about Iran. He even went so far as to criticize VP Vance for his Marine Service because he wan’t in a combat arms position. This is disingenuous because every Marine is a rifleman.

Shades of former stolen valor Navy swiftboater John Kerry, look at what Mouton had to say to CENTCOM Commander Admiral Brad Cooper at a recent hearing.

Watch the full hearing:

CENTCOM chief unloads after Dem asks ‘how many more Americans’ must die in Iran war

Adm Cooper called reports that Iran rebuilt key missile sites ‘inaccurate’ during hours of contentious exchanges Tuesday

By Morgan Phillips • Fox News

Central Command Commander Adm. Brad Cooper sharply rebuked Democratic Rep. Seth Moulton during a tense House Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday after the Massachusetts Democrat questioned “how many more Americans” would die because of what he called a failed Iran strategy.

“It doesn’t seem to be going well,” Moulton, D-Mass., said of the Iran war. “And I would like to know how many more Americans we have to ask to die for this mistake.”

“I think it’s an entirely inappropriate statement from you, sir,” Cooper responded.

Moulton shot back: “It’s not a statement, it’s a question.”

Fourteen U.S. service members have died in combat since the U.S. launched Operation Epic Fury Feb. 28.

Moulton, a Marine Corps Iraq War veteran and frequent critic of the Trump administration’s Iran strategy, pressed Cooper repeatedly on what he described as the widening consequences of the conflict, including instability in the Strait of Hormuz, rising oil prices and reports that Iran had rebuilt parts of its missile infrastructure.

Cooper pushed back on several of the claims, calling reports that Iran had reconstituted key missile sites “inaccurate” and repeatedly emphasizing that U.S. forces had achieved their assigned military objectives.

The hearing came just after Trump said he directed the military to pause planned operations against Iran for Tuesday at the request of Gulf allies who wanted negotiations with Tehran to continue. The U.S. has been adhering to a ceasefire since April 7.

Gulf leaders asked Trump to pause strikes because “serious negotiations are now taking place, and that, in their opinion, as Great Leaders and Allies, a Deal will be made, which will be very acceptable to the United States of America, as well as all Countries in the Middle East, and beyond,” he wrote on Truth Social Monday.

Continue reading.

©2026 . All rights reserved.

Leaked DNC 2024 Autopsy Is A Case Study In Stunning Incompetence

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

An autopsy of the 2024 election commissioned by the Democratic National Committee leaked Thursday. It is, in a word, “garbage.”

The post-mortem, first published by CNN, elides honest self-evaluation for sloppy conclusions and self-congratulation.

“At times, it seems Democrats are trying to win arguments while Republicans are focused on winning elections. Democrats operate in an ecosystem defined by reason even in cycles when the electorate is defined by rage. This highlights a fundamental and necessary truth — a brutal and efficiently delivered message will frame the choice for voters and help actually win the election,” the report reads.

Yes, Democrats are the Party of Reason. Recall former Vice President Kamala Harris’ insight into the significance of the passage of time in 2022.

“The governor and I and we were all doing a tour of the library here, and um, talking about the significance of the passage of time. Right? The significance of the passage of time. So when you think about it, there is great significance to the passage of time in terms of what we need to do to lay these wires, what we need to do to create these jobs, and there is such great significance to the passage of time when we think about a day in the life of our children.”

The author of the DNC autopsy believes Democrats were too hesitant to put President Donald Trump in prison.

“The retrospective evaluation of Donald Trump’s presidency was too positive. Given the ability of right-wing entities to slash and smear the Vice President, it was essential to prosecute a more effective case as to why Trump should have been disqualified from ever again taking office. The grounds were there, but the messaging did not make sense.”

Never mind that Trump’s mug shot proved one of the defining images of his campaign. The photo appeared on Trump merchandise almost immediately after Trump was released from Fulton County Jail in August 2023. The mug shot now hangs outside the Oval Office.

The author also alludes to Americans being too lazy to show up to the polls.

“Pulling people in is one of the hardest things to do in elections, especially in a modern information and cultural ecosystem where a lot of people are content to sit on their couch and be on the phone, as opposed to being out in their communities and engaging and learning about what’s going on in the world around them.”

What else is missing from the autopsy? Daily Caller Editor-in-Chief Amber Duke provides a breakdown:

The author’s analysis of male voting habits is weak. He notes that Democratic North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein performed better with male voters than did Harris, which “suggests his campaign found ways to connect with male voters.”

Well, yes.

“The national campaign appeared to struggle with male voter engagement; Stein’s results suggest a different approach is needed.”

It would be helpful if the author explained what that approach should be.

The author elsewhere notes that the “national campaign had a specific problem with male voters” and that “Harris saw dramatic drops in support among young Latino men and young Black men compared to Biden’s 2020 performance. However, Stein recovered significant ground with both groups, suggesting his campaign found effective ways to reach these voters.”

The report advises that male voters “require direct engagement. The gender gap can be narrowed. Deploy male messengers, address economic concerns, and don’t assume identity politics will hold male voters of color.”

The author does not provide a substantive guide to winning male voters. There is no mention of podcasts, for instance, which formed a great part of Trump’s strategy in reaching young male voters.

There is no mention of “pronouns,” “bathrooms,” or “sports,” all of which were significant culture war issues in the 2024 election. There is one mention of “transgendered Americans.”

The autopsy claims “pollsters concurred” that Trump’s “attack ad focused on the Vice President’s prior statements on transgendered Americans” was “very effective.”

“[T]he ad was a video of her saying what she said, and it was framed as an attack on her economic priorities.”

The DNC notes, in an annotation, that the report does not provide “source material or data” to back up this claim. The autopsy is littered with annotations from the DNC noting a lack of sourcing, internally inconsistent methodology, methodological errors, mathematical errors, incorrect facts asserted by the author, logical contradictions, and entire sections of the report that are missing.

Several subtitles appear, but have no content directly below them. Under the “Introduction” and “National Overview” section of “WHAT HAPPENED (ELECTORAL REVIEW),” the author simply wrote,  “PENDING.”

By far the funniest correction appears in the section, “It’s The Future, Stupid.” In it, the author asserts that endorsements by Trump and Republican Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell in the 2022 Georgia Senate election constituted a “blatant attempt by the Republican power base to take advantage of name recognition and tough economic conditions to push through an unqualified candidate whose job would have been little more than rubber dstamping the president’s agenda.”

The DNC rightly notes: “In 2022, Joe Biden was president.”

In that section, the DNC also notes that the author “[a]ppears to conflate family and sick leave.”

The word “working-class” appears once, when the author praises Democratic Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin’s “working-class credentials and presence in manufacturing communities.” The report is oddly focused on the 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014 elections.

The final leg of the report focuses on the influence of American billionaires Charles and the late David Koch on conservative politics.

You may be detecting a certain artificial intelligence-flavored tone to these excerpts. AI-detection platform GPTZero flagged the document as likely AI-generated.

DNC Chairman Ken Martin announced in December 2025 he would not release the report, eliciting criticism from Democrats and Republicans.

“When I received the report late last year, it wasn’t ready for primetime. Not even close. And because no source material was provided, fixing it would have meant starting over, from the beginning – every conversation, every interview, every data set,” Martin wrote in a statement Thursday.

“I am not proud of this product; it does not meet my standards, and it won’t meet your standards. I don’t endorse what’s in this report, or what’s left out of it. I could not in good faith put the DNC’s stamp of approval on it. But transparency is paramount. So, today I am releasing the report as I received it – in its entirety, unedited and unabridged – with annotations for claims that couldn’t be verified,” Martin wrote, linking to the report.

One wonders how much money the DNC paid for this mess.

The Daily Caller has contacted the DNC press office for comment.

AUTHOR

Natalie Sandoval

Patriots Writer

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrat Candidate Spoke At Mosque Event Where Imam Prayed For Infidels To Be Killed

Democratic Voters Want Their Party To Move Even Farther Left On Healthcare, New Poll Shows

‘Lost To The Couch’: Democrats Seek To Use Very Strategy That Helped Trump Win White House

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

Indicted SPLC in Congressional Hot Seat over Funding KKK and Other Groups

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

Congressional scrutiny into the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) continued Wednesday with a hearing of the full House Judiciary Committee focused on “The Southern Poverty Law Center: Manufacturing Hate.” The SPLC faced initial scrutiny in December from the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government, but the hearing before the full committee came weeks after the U.S. Department of Justice indicted the SPLC for fraud, related to its paying $3 million to the leaders of white supremacist organizations.

The witnesses focused on the SPLC’s mission creep from bankrupting the Ku Klux Klan to smearing mainstream conservative organizations, including Family Research Council, Alliance Defending Freedom, Turning Point USA, and Focus on the Family. “Americans once associated the Southern Poverty Law Center with fighting the Ku Klux Klan during the civil rights era. That reputation gave the SPLC enormous moral credibility,” insisted FRC president Tony Perkins.

“But, in November 2010, SPLC shifted its focus beyond violent groups and began targeting Christian organizations opposing efforts to redefine marriage and human sexuality,” Perkins testified. “Family Research Council was among the most prominent of that first wave.”

SPLC-Inspired Attack on FRC Headquarters

Perkins related how, on August 15, 2012, “LGBT activist Floyd Corkins entered FRC headquarters here in Washington carrying a 9mm pistol, 50 rounds of ammunition, and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches. According to his later confession, his intent was to kill as many as possible and stuff the sandwiches in our mouths.”

In surveillance video played in the hearing, an FBI interrogator asked Corkins the next day, “How did you find it? Did you like, look it up online, or how did you know about—?” Corkins answered readily, “The Southern Poverty Law [Center] lists anti-gay groups. I found them online.”

“There’s no speculation here,” responded Rep. Mark Harris (R-N.C.). “The convicted shooter specifically cited SPLC as his source for finding out about Family Research Council. It speaks for itself.”

“Following the attack,” continued Perkins, “FRC appealed to the SPLC to remove mainstream Christian organizations from its inflammatory classifications. Those requests were rejected.”

Leo the Hero

But Corkins’s murderous rampage was stopped almost before it began by the courageous actions of FRC’s building manager, “Leo the Hero.”

“The gunman — who is now serving [in] prison for domestic terrorism — came into the building with a gun. Leo, who was the building manager, was actually standing at the front asking what he needed,” Perkins narrated. “He pulled the semiautomatic pistol out of the backpack. He began shooting. The first round hit Leo in the arm, shattering his arm. He was still able to take him down.”

“More shots were fired. The bullet holes remained in the walls of our building,” Perkins continued. “Leo was able to disarm him and take him down and even recover the weapon.” Leo the Hero then kept the gun trained on Corkins until help arrived.

“Leo the hero, thank you for your courage,” Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) acknowledged. Leo the Hero attended the hearing right behind Perkins. “After multiple surgeries and months of rehabilitation, Leo returned to work and remains today affectionately known as ‘Leo the Hero,’” Perkins explained.

Afterward, FBI agents who watched surveillance footage of the incident asked Perkins, “He [Leo] was bleeding out. Why didn’t he fire the round into Corkins, to make sure that he could not come back at him?” Perkins didn’t know the answer at first. “As a former police officer, I would have, just as the FBI said. I would have defended myself, not knowing if I was going to pass out.”

“So, I asked Leo. When he came out of surgery that night … my first question was, ‘Leo, why didn’t you shoot him?’ And he said, ‘because God told me not to,’” Perkins testified. Lest the point would be lost, Perkins reiterated, “We’re not here for revenge. We’re here for justice.”

SPLC’s Open Malice

By contrast, the SPLC openly boasts about its ambition to completely platform its political opponents, including by targeting their access to financial institutions. “SPLC officials openly acknowledged this strategy before Congress in January 2020,” Perkins pressed. “SPLC official Lecia Brooks stated: ‘We have lobbied internet companies, one by one. … A key part of this strategy has been to target these organizations’ funding.’”

Just from his own experience, Perkins said, “FRC experienced this from Truist, Financial, Fidelity Investments, GuideStar, Mobile Cause, and other technology-related companies.” The attack and its aftermath also “cost FRC more than $6 million in security-related costs.”

“They want to silence us,” Perkins summarized. But “we will not be silent. We will not shrink back. We will not apologize for biblical truth. We will continue to stand for it.”

When asked by Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) why FRC never sued the SPLC over the harm it caused, Perkins answered, “Partly because information was not available as is now coming forth. … We did talk to some attorneys initially … but their image was so strong until now that it was very difficult. We [that is, other conservative groups] had suits that were brought in court, that did not succeed.”

Beyond the SPLC

However, the “conspiracy … goes way beyond just money. This was about trying to demonize silence and completely eliminate any opposition to the Left when it came to their agenda,” Perkins warned. “In America, citizens should not lose access to banking services, digital platforms, public credibility, or physical safety because they believe in biblical teaching on marriage and human sexuality.”

In fact, he argued that the issue goes beyond even the disgraced organization at the center of Wednesday’s hearing. “SPLC was the hub, but there were many spokes that made up this wheel designed to crush Christians and conservatives — the congressional inquiry should not stop with SPLC,” Perkins said. “Over time, SPLC’s ‘hate’ labels and Intelligence Project became deeply influential as banks, payment processors, and technology companies increasingly relied on SPLC classifications to decide which organizations could maintain accounts, process transactions, or operate online.”

Even the government got involved, as the SPLC got involved in government. “There are members of this committee that were endorsed by SPLC,” said Perkins.

Response from the Left

Progressive members of the committee did not enjoy the hearing’s focus on the misdeeds of the SPLC. They repeatedly tried to change the subject, bringing up decades-old lynchings, the Charlottesville alt-right rally (where an SPLC-funded “informant” was one of the organizers), the January 6 riot, and the Trump administration’s $1.776 billion fund to repay victims of government weaponization. They occasionally disparaged the DOJ’s lawsuit against the SPLC and very rarely got around to defending the organization.

In fact, Rep. Deborah Ross (D-N.C.) exclaimed, “I kind of hope this lawsuit, the specious lawsuit, results in more contributions to the SPLC. [It] might be a silver lining to the lawsuit and this ridiculous hearing.” The word “ridiculous” came out with a snarl.

However, Chairman Jordan had a ready response, “I’m not sure Leo thinks the hearings are ridiculous. Actually, I’m pretty sure he thinks it isn’t.”

Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) made perhaps the best argument, not in defense of the SPLC’s behavior but against the lawsuit. “The DOJ says that the SPLC defrauded its donors by paying undercover informants to infiltrate and collect intelligence on these racist groups,” he said. “But where are all the donors complaining about having been defrauded?” President Trump made the same argument when New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) sued him for real estate fraud in a victimless case.

The simple answer to Raskin is that SPLC’s (left-leaning) donors probably never found out what the SPLC has done, because the mainstream media has worked so hard to cover up their offenses.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) advanced another argument. “The Southern Poverty Law Center is on the front lines fighting anti-Semitism.” But so is Family Research Council, and the SPLC has smeared FRC by placing it on its infamous “hate map,” right alongside anti-Semitic groups.

SPLC’s Absence

In every committee hearing, the minority party is entitled to call a witness of their choosing. As Rep. Bob Onder (R-Mo.) noted, the Democrats did not call a representative from the SPLC to defend the organization’s indefensible hate group listings. Instead, they called Maya Wiley, president and CEO of Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. At the December hearing, the Democrats’ witness did not represent the SPLC either.

The reason for this choice was quickly made apparent. When asked to comment on the SPLC’s “hate” group designations of groups like ADF, Wiley evaded the questions, saying she didn’t “do designations” and didn’t know enough about the entities involved. She was only there to talk about civil rights.

Wiley even declined to say whether it was appropriate for the SPLC to label one of their paid informants as “extremist of the month,” then fundraise off of the fear this incited. After repeated attempts by Chairman Jordan to nail her down, Wiley’s only defense was, “As I said, the donors have spoken. And, in fact, they’re trying to send more money now, and their financial institutions [are] refusing to send the money.”

FRC has never called for the SPLC to be debanked — justice, not revenge — but Perkins did comment, “It’s funny, they’re crying now that they’re getting their own medicine, that Fidelity is not giving money to them. How about the thousands of conservative groups that were denied donor-driven funds because of SPLC’s labeling? Is there fairness in that? I think not.”

In numerous exchanges, Wiley was able to avoid defending the SPLC’s behavior simply because she was not affiliated with the SPLC. If an SPLC witness had been present, defending the organization’s misdeeds would have been impossible.

The U.S. Congress’s system for committee hearings offers legislators on both sides of the aisle equal opportunities to make their points and cross-examine opposing witnesses. The takeaway from the hearing — which lasted almost four hours — was that the SPLC’s behavior — from targeting conservatives to propping up racist extremists — is so disgraceful that neither Democrats nor their chosen witness was able to defend it.

In fact, as Rep. Mark Harris (R-N.C.) said, “It’s disgraceful that FRC has [been] put [on] such a hate map to begin with.”

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: SPLC’s Tactics to Silence Put Freedom at Risk

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2026 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.

Rape Dogs Claim Lands NYT in Defamation Lawsuit

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

Israel announced it will pursue a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times following the publication of an opinion piece by columnist Nicholas Kristof that alleged Israeli forces trained dogs to rape Palestinian women.

“Today I instructed my legal advisers to consider the harshest legal action against The New York Times and Nicholas Kristof,” Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wrote on X. “They defamed the soldiers of Israel and perpetuated a blood libel about rape, trying to create a false symmetry between the genocidal terrorists of Hamas and Israel’s valiant soldiers. Under my leadership, Israel will not be silent.”

“We will fight these lies in the court of public opinion and in the court of law, truth will prevail,” the head of state continued.

Critics have said Hamas has engaged in a propaganda war intended to “provoke outrage, shift public opinion, and pressure Israel through foreign governments and media.”

Danger of Defamation in Media Reporting

The Israeli Foreign Ministry did not respond to The Daily Signal’s requests for comment.

The dispute comes amid heightened tensions following Israel’s military campaign against Hamas and Hezbollah after Hamas terrorists killed, raped, and or tortured over 1,000 Israeli civilians on Oct. 7, 2023.

The American Jewish Committee has reported a 400% increase in antisemitic incidents in the United States since the attacks.

While The New York Times has not directly responded to Israel’s legal threat, the newspaper defended Kristof’s column on X after Israeli officials described the essay as “blood libel.”

In a statement, the outlet said the op-ed “draws together on-the-record accounts and cites several analyses documenting the practice of sexual violence and abuse conducted by various parts of Israel’s security forces and settlers.”

The paper added that the “deeply reported piece of opinion journalism” begins with Kristof’s assertion that “whatever our views of the Middle East conflict, we should be able to unite in condemning rape.”

“The accounts of the 14 men and women he interviewed were corroborated with other witnesses, whenever possible, and with people the victims confided in—including family members and lawyers,” the statement said. “Details were extensively fact-checked, with accounts further cross-referenced with news reporting, independent research from human-rights groups, surveys, and in one case, with U.N. testimony.”

The United Nations has acknowledged that Hamas committed acts of sexual violence during the Oct. 7 attack and released a report describing bodies with “genital injuries” found near the Nova Music Festival, which was overrun by Hamas terrorists. The U.N. has not formally condemned Hamas for those acts.

American politicians and commentators have sharply criticized the op-ed.

“Claiming Israel trains dogs to rape Palestinians is modern-day blood libel—propaganda pushed as more horrific details emerge about Hamas’ systematic torture on Oct. 7,” former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley wrote on X. “Distracting from these atrocities and smearing Israel while victims still fight for acknowledgment is sickening.”

Political commentator David Collier, who has more than 270,000 followers on X, accused major news outlets of amplifying Hamas propaganda.

“Since Oct. 7, Western media sources like @nytimes have become Hamas propaganda agents—dressing up Hamas lies as ‘investigative pieces’—and helping to fuel hatred of Israel and violent antisemitism around the world,” Collier wrote. “Seems like Israel has had enough.”

Who Is Nicholas Kristof?

Nicholas Kristof is a longtime New York Times columnist and self-described liberal or progressive commentator known for his focus on human rights, poverty, and social justice. A frequent CNN contributor, Kristof has won two Pulitzer Prizes for commentary.

In 2022, Kristof attempted to run for governor of Oregon as a Democrat but was disqualified by the state Supreme Court, which ruled he did not meet the state’s three-year residency requirement.

Following the ruling, Kristof said he planned to remain politically engaged, writing that he would “keep fighting” on issues, including homelessness and mental health.

“I want to be clear that I’m not going anywhere,” Kristof said.

New York Times’ Rebuttal

A spokesperson for the New York Times told the Daily Signal that “the Israeli Prime Minister has threatened to file a libel lawsuit against The New York Times regarding Nicholas Kristof’s deeply reported opinion column on sexual abuse by Israel’s prison guards, soldiers, settlers, and interrogators.”

“This threat, similar to one made last year, is part of a well-worn political playbook that aims to undermine independent reporting and stifle journalism that does not fit a specific narrative. Any such legal claim would be without merit,” she continued.

The spokeswoman pointed out that “Nick’s column starts with a proposition to readers: ‘Whatever our views of the Middle East conflict, we should be able to unite in condemning rape.’ Nick writes about the brutal sexual assaults against Israeli women during the Hamas-led attack on Israel.”

“He then chronicles 14 on-the-record victim accounts and cites eight independent human rights reports documenting the practice of sexual violence and abuse conducted by various parts of Israel’s security forces and settlers,” she added. “Nick has covered sexual violence for decades, and is widely regarded as one of the world’s best on-the-ground journalists in documenting and bearing witness to sexual abuse experienced by women and men in war and conflict zones.”

The NYT spokesperson concluded: “The accounts of the men and women he interviewed were corroborated with witnesses, whenever possible, and with people the victims confided in, including family members and lawyers. Details were extensively fact-checked, with accounts further cross-referenced with news reporting, independent research from human-rights groups, surveys and in one case, with U.N. testimony. Independent experts were consulted on the assertions in the piece throughout reporting and fact-checking.”

AUTHOR

Pedro Rodriguez

Pedro Boccalato Rodriguez-Aparicio is a journalism fellow at the Daily Signal. Follow on X pedrobrodrigue7.

RELATED ARTICLE: The FBI is offering a $200,000 reward for information leading to the apprehension and prosecution of Monica Witt

RELATED VIDEO: NYC’s Targeted Antisemitic Marches, Open Borders Fallout, and the Four Horsemen of Antisemitism

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

Israel to Sue New York Times for Defamation

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

The just-published New York Times piece by Nicholas Kristof, accusing Israel of horrific crimes, including the sexual abuse of “Palestinians” in Israeli prisons, with victims said to include men, women, and children, and of “training dogs” to rape “Palestinians” as well, has quite properly enraged the government and the people of Israel. The Office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced in a Thursday, May 14 statement that Israel will take legal action against the Times over Kristof’s column.

More on this welcome news can be found here: “Israel to take legal action against ‘New York Times’ over claims of ‘dog rape’ of Palestinians,” by Shir Perets, Jerusalem Post, May 14, 2026:

Israel will take legal action against The New York Times over a column penned by Nicholas Kristof, which included allegations of serious sexual abuse of Palestinians in Israeli prisons, the Prime Minister’s Office said in a Thursday statement.

The PMO, which referred to the accusation as “one of the most hideous and distorted lies ever published against the State of Israel,” said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar instructed officials to begin preparing a defamation lawsuit against the publication.

“They defamed the soldiers of Israel and perpetuated a blood libel about rape, trying to create a false symmetry between the genocidal terrorists of Hamas and Israel’s valiant soldiers,” Netanyahu wrote on X/Twitter….

The planned lawsuit would focus on whether statements in the article crossed the legal threshold from opinion or criticism into actionable defamation. It was not immediately clear where the lawsuit would be filed, what damages would be sought, or whether Israeli state institutions or individual officials would be listed as plaintiffs.

On Wednesday, the New York Times issued a statement affirming its support for Kristof’s controversial op-ed, saying he “draws together on-the-record accounts and cites several analyses documenting the practice of sexual violence and abuse conducted by various parts of Israel’s security forces and settlers.”

His “deeply reported piece of opinion journalism starts with a proposition to readers: ‘Whatever our views of the Middle East conflict, we should be able to unite in condemning rape,’” the news outlet stated.

“The accounts of the 14 men and women he interviewed were corroborated with other witnesses, whenever possible, and with people the victims confided in – that includes family members and lawyers,” the outlet said.

Kristof’s sensationalist charges, including the charge that the IDF deliberately has trained dogs to “rape” “Palestinian” prisoners, has spread around the world, causing untold harm to Israel’s image. Kristof relied on “Palestinians” for this malignant misinformation, apparently unaware that “Palestinians” have a long history of lying, and he never bothered, prior to publication, to obtain a comment, and rebuttal, from Israel that he might at least have included in his piece; he might even have checked with canine trainers who, to a man, have now publicly spoken about the impossibility of training dogs to rape humans.

This isn’t the only part of Kristof’s hit piece that is blatantly false, but it is the most outrageous and unbelievable of his many outrageous and unbelievable claims. When Israel did respond to the piece, and denounced its wild fabrications, the NYT doubled down, claiming that it stood by Kristof’s piece, and by the “Palestinians” upon whose testimony he relied.

This was too much for the government of Israel to let pass with just a denunciation of the New York Times and Kristof. It knew his piece damages Israel’s reputation around the world, and not just among those who are always prepared to believe the worst of the Jewish state. That preposterous charge about that canine corps of doggy rapists, and other bizarre charges, too, which Kristof made, will now become the stuff of approving comments from Hamas, CAIR, the Iranian government, and of course wsuch people as Francesca Albanese, Roger Waters, Susan Sarandon, Rashida Tlaib, Wally Shawn, Zohran Mamdani, and others of that silly-sinister ilk, whose name, alas, is legion, will pick them up and repeat them.

Now the New York Times will be sued for defamation by the State of Israel. How much will it ask for? Let it be Trumpian in size — a billion dollars, or two, or more. How do you measure the cost of such lies being made and disseminated across the globe, to the reputation of the Jewish state? How many more attacks on Israelis or Jews will be the result of those baseless kristovian charges?

Israel thinks that the New York Times will rue the day it published Kristof’s hit piece, not because it will have come to its senses, morally — the New York Times long ago lost that sense when it comes to its reporting on Israel — but because having to pay a billion or two for having published Kristof’s calumny, which is a kind of updated version, applied to the Jewish state, of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, will be painful. Does anyone doubt that the State of Israel will be able to call on the best defamation lawyers in the world, no matter where the suit is brought?

But here is another question. Why should Israel limit itself to suing the Grey Lady? Shouldn’t the onlie begetter of this defamation, the egregious Nicholas Kristof, with his long history of anti-Israel animus, also be sued? Let his days be full of exhausting testimony, both his own and that of others, and of withering cross-examinations, as lawyers for the plaintiff make mincemeat of him, and when the verdict comes down, he who is morally bankrupt will now be personally bankrupt as well.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Antisemitic Violence in Europe and North America

Enraged Qatari officials bash Trump: ‘The world’s greatest and most dangerous criminal’

Signs of Creeping Islamization in France

Hamas-linked CAIR lashes out at Sharia-Free America congressional hearings scrutinizing it 

UK: Muslim independents take over 100 councillor seats in England

Spain: Police fear jihadis will exploit leftist prime minister’s decision to open door to 500,000 unvetted migrants

Italy: Head of Islamic Community of Rome makes mosque speech that sparks fear of ‘political Islam’

8 in 10 Germans believe that Germany has failed to solve its crisis of mass Muslim migration

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

How Did This Leftist Group Smuggle Its Divisive Ideas Into 169 School Districts, Without Parents Knowing?

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

The Southern Poverty Law Center has spread its woke activist agenda in education to at least 169 school districts in 42 states, according to a new report, and the impact of teachers unions helps explain this expansive influence.

Learning for Justice, the SPLC’s education arm, promotes “social justice” activism, pushes racially divisive messaging, and advocates transgender ideology. The program, launched as “Teaching Tolerance” in the 1990s, dropped the emphasis on “tolerance” amid the Great Awokening in February 2021. Around that same time, the program removed its own impact statement from the website, which had previously bragged that “more than 500,000 educators” read its magazine, screened its films, visited its website, and used its curricula.

The parental rights group Defending Education exposed Learning for Justice’s broad influence in an exhaustive report Tuesday.

“Unbeknownst to parents, the Southern Poverty Law Center has been poisoning pupils’ minds around the country for years with its toxic curriculum,” Nicole Neily, the group’s president, told The Daily Signal. “SPLC lesson plans on issues such as queer theory, white privilege, and anti-racism have supplanted traditional coursework in history, social studies, and other core classes—teaching children to view themselves and others through the lens of identity politics, and that America is forever stained by its original sin.”

How did the SPLC spread its tentacles this far? America’s two largest teachers unions—the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers—help explain it, as does the American School Counselor Association.

“By promoting and integrating Learning for Justice content and standards into mental health programming and curricula, the teachers unions and ASCA are giving the far-left organization credibility,” Rhyen Staley, director of research at Defending Education, told The Daily Signal. “This is deeply troubling for a variety of reasons, especially since the SPLC has put parents on its ‘hate map’ for simply raising concerns with their local school districts.”

The SPLC gained its reputation by suing Ku Klux Klan groups into bankruptcy, but weaponized that history to smear conservatives and raise money. In 2023, it added Moms for Liberty, Defending Education, and other parental rights groups to the “hate map,” placing them alongside Klan chapters and calling them part of “the infrastructure upholding white supremacy.”

Last month, a federal grand jury indicted the SPLC on wire fraud, bank fraud, and conspiracy charges for sending $3 million to KKK members. While the SPLC claimed it was paying “informants” to prevent violent attacks, the Justice Department says it was using donor cash to prop up the very “hate” it claims it exists to “dismantle.” The SPLC has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

The SPLC enjoys undue influence in the media, in corporate America, and with a vast network of donors, so it stands to reason that Learning for Justice might achieve a broad impact. Even so, the boost from teachers unions and the American School Counselor Association can’t have hurt.

The Teachers Unions

The Defending Education report cites the National Education Association’s January 2021 “Racial Justice in Education” resource guide, which touts Teaching Tolerance as a “partner” and notes that the NEA partnered with Teaching Tolerance to “create a three-part webinar series” to help “address the climate issues.” The National Education Association claims 3 million members.

The association’s President Becky Pringle condemned the SPLC indictment.

“Civil rights organizations work to ensure we can live free from discrimination,” she wrote on Bluesky. “By indicting a group that fights bias and tracks extremists, Trump’s Department of Justice is abusing its power, making us less safe. They will stop at nothing to crush free speech and further hate.”

The National Education Association did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment by publication time.

The American Federation of Teachers has promoted the SPLC program as far back as 2016, listing “Teaching Tolerance” as a resource on “school discipline.”

In a social media post, the federation’s President Randi Weingarten also condemned the indictment.

“It’s absurd but predictable [the SPLC] is being wrongfully targeted, an org that has documented hate & extremist groups for 50+ years,” she posted on Bluesky. She called the indictment “part of a coordinated attack on civil rights and an escalation of the campaign against those with whom this admin disagrees.”

The American Federation of Teachers has approximately 1.6 million members.

These unions, which have a well-documented leftist slant, enjoyed tremendous influence in the Biden administration.

The American Federation of Teachers did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment by publication time.

The School Counselors

The Defending Education report also noted that the American School Counselor Association, which claimed in 2023 to have over 43,000 members across the country, incorporated the “Social Justice Standards” into its key documents.

The association modeled its Student Standards: Mindsets & Behaviors for Student Success and Student Standards Crosswalk on the SPLC materials.

Neither the NEA nor the AFT nor the ASCA nor the SPLC responded to The Daily Signal’s request for comment by publication time.

The American School Counselor Association did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment by publication time.

A Rising Movement

Moms and dads across the country are taking a stand against the SPLC.

Republicans in Maryland have openly condemned the state’s “implicit bias training” that incorporated Learning for Justice materials. Courage is a Habit has exposed ASCA’s reliance on the SPLC. Lake Havasu Unified School District in Arizona has rooted out an education resource that directed students to avoid the websites of SPLC-smeared “hate groups.”

Last week, Moms for Liberty leader Rosalind Hanson spoke out at Montgomery County Public Schools, condemning MCPS’ use of the Social Justice Standards.

This Defending Education report will hopefully inspire more moms and dads to ask school boards to stop relying on the SPLC. They may find my book, “Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center,” a resource in this effort.

AUTHOR

Tyler O’Neil

Tyler O’Neil is senior editor at the Daily Signal and the author of two books, “Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center” and “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government.” Follow on X Tyler2ONeil.

RELATED ARTICLE: Here’s How You Can Fight Back Against TV Shows Pushing the Transgender Woke Agenda on Your Kids

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

The Jew-Hatred Pandemic No Longer a Mystery

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

No matter how bizarre or puzzling or impossibly complex crime scenes seemed to be, the detective Sherlock Holmes, accompanied by his friend Dr. John Watson — both fictional characters created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in the late 1800s — never failed to solve them.

Using keen observation — actually noting teeny, tiny, sometimes microscopic details that eluded even the sleuths at Scotland Yard — as well as the forensic science of the day, Holmes astounded the experts and ultimately became one of the most popular figures in all of literature…to this day!

Holmes may lie in the realm of fiction, but every now and then, a real-life character comes along who reinforces the concept of exceptionalism, who demonstrates that there are still highly original thinkers among us who can shed light where only darkness once prevailed.

And that Would Be?

That would be Warren Kinsella, a native Canadian with an impressive résumé and a long list of accomplishments.  In this riveting interview, featured on Israpundit.org, he relates how in his experience in running political campaigns — and being the campaign manager for Prime Minister Jean Chrétien (1993–2003) — he instantly recognized that the virtual explosion of worldwide anti-Semitism after October 7, 2023 was significantly similar to…yes, political campaigns, in which those who run them are primarily concerned with (1) Volunteers, (2) Leadership, (3) Messaging, (4) Money, (5) Advertising, and (6) Social Media.

The campaign against Israel, Mr. Kinsella said, was “ready to go” and “kicked off” with 2,500 anti-Israel protests around the world — “even before Israel started to fight back!  They were using professional signs, professional organizers, a professional global campaign, and that’s hard to do, but they pulled it off.”

Additionally, Mr. Kinsella said that this pro-Hamas, anti-Israel campaign targeted young people who were more “susceptible to conspiracy theories, more susceptible to accept antisemitic tropes — the Holocaust didn’t happen, Jews control the world, et al. — all of that nonsense. Young people, unfortunately, in Canada and the U.S. and Europe, were much more willing to accept those types of lies.”

Mr. Kinsella explained that in this global eruption of Jew- and Israel-hatred, the campaign manager was Iran, Qatar was the banker, China and Russia acted as campaign co-chairs, Hamas and Hezb’allah were on the front lines, and also that “the alphabet soup of NGOs (non-governmental organizations), nonprofits, and charities pushing these hateful messages were ready to move … while October 7 was happening … which was either a hell of a coincidence, or they knew in advance what was going to happen.”

This is among hundreds of facts that he documents scrupulously in his new book, The Hidden Hand: The Information War and the Rise of Antisemitic Propaganda.

I remember watching the returns of the 2000 presidential election, when the Republican governor of Texas, George W. Bush, ran against the Democrat senator from Tennessee, Al Gore.  In the hotly contested race, the vote was so close that it ended up in the Supreme Court, which declared the recount dispute in favor of Gov. Bush and pronounced him the winner.

But what puzzled me at the time and raised some red flags in my mind was that the very next day, instantaneously it seemed, there appeared professionally produced protest signs and placards and enormous crowds of protesters — fueled by the efforts of the late Rev. Jesse Jackson — to fight the Supreme Court decision.

How could they produce those signs and all those people overnight? I wondered.

And that is not to omit Black Lives Matter, the Marxist terrorist group that rampaged across the U.S. in 2021 to protest the death of George Floyd and was responsible for about $2 billion in property damage, devastating arson, widespread theft, the injuries of more than 240 police officers and destruction of hundreds of police precincts, upward of 30 murders, and the defacement and vandalism of synagogues, at which they screamed “F— the Jews and Kill the Police.”  That BLM! The group that was magically able to mobilize huge crowds of like-minded thugs overnight!  How did they do that?

Oh, and you cannot make this up: While Black Lives Matter raked in $90 billion, guess what they did with some of that money!  They imitated the white people and the capitalists they claimed to detest — but actually envy with blazing green-eyed jealousy — by purchasing a $6-million-dollar mansion in lily-white Belair, one of the toniest residential enclaves of California.

Even before that, the same questions occurred to me when the protesters from Antifa — the so-called anti-fascist group — so reviled the election of Donald J. Trump in 2016 that they decided to storm through America, committing unspeakably violent crimes.  And then we learned that on various street corners, there were neatly piled mounds of bricks, placed strategically so that they had plenty of ammunition to hurl these missiles through the windows of various businesses, thereby telling the world of their hatred of our electoral system and of capitalism.

Where did those brick piles come from? I wondered.

The Money Angle

Many of these seditious and, I think, treasonous organization are funded by none other than white, leftist, America-hating — and envious — billionaires.

According to writer Vanessa Berg, “most people who participate in anti-Jewish discourse do not wake up thinking, ‘How can I be antisemitic today?’  That’s not how systems work.  They respond to incentives.  Today, hostility toward Jews is not just expressed; it is incentivized — not everywhere, not by everyone — but enough to matter, enough to shape behavior, enough to create a system in which attacking Jews … can be profitable.”

“In previous eras,” Berg continues, “antisemitism spread through institutions like churches, governments, and political movements.  Today, it spreads through markets: attention markets, media markets, political markets.  That shift matters because markets don’t ask whether something is true or just.  They ask whether it works.  And right now, in too many cases, attacking Jews works.”

Words

After the catastrophic terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, when 1,200 Jewish men, women, children, and infants were savagely set on fire, raped, violently tortured, and then murdered, and 251 were taken hostage — also to be tortured and raped in the elaborate tunnels the terrorists constructed underground, with the help of massive international donations of money — untold numbers of passionate pro-Israel commentators and journalists throughout the world expended multimillions of words in Israel’s defense.  Just to mention some of my own: here and here and here and here.

Many of these articles attempted to explain the international volcanic eruption of Jew- and Israel-hatred and the embrace of the terrorists by traditional American conservatives such as the execrable Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens, as well as their incomprehensible, bizarre, and equally passionate support for the murderers, rapists, and torturers of Hamas — those ferocious genocidal terrorists who were acting on the mandates of not only their public statements over decades, but also their written charter and, of course, the non-negotiable dictates of their bosses and sponsors, the murderous mullahs in Iran.

I certainly missed many of these articles, but of the ones I read, none succeeded in explaining this “spontaneous” worldwide explosion of in-your-face racism, lawlessness, and deep hatred.

Except for…

Kinsella succeeds in spelling out the elaborate planning — indeed, orchestration — that has gone into the constant drumbeat of anti-Jew and anti-Israel demonstrations worldwide, of huge crowds blaming Israel for being attacked, of equally “spontaneous” demonstrations on campuses, on street corners, in major cities throughout the world, with demonstrators all decked out in keffiyehs and holding up professionally created placards, all condemning “genocidal” and “apartheid” Israel.

Not only that, but vicious videos like this, with so-called journalists like Megyn Kelly asking quite sneeringly, “Who are they?” — the Jews and Israelis, that is — and Israel-loathing obsessives like Carlson and Owens and Fuentes sharing their vomitus and bile with anyone who has the stomach to watch or listen, and to like-minded racists.

These kinds of demonstrations, Kinsella says, have been going on for years, actually for decades on end.

Indeed, recent headlines attest to this hatred’s pandemic nature.  Here is but a minuscule example:

Is There a Solution?

Author Kinsella suggests a number of strategies, all of which involve significantly more accountability and punishment than now exists for the purveyors of antisemitism.  Among them:

  • Defeating anonymity so that the thugs who wear masks and use fake names online are subject to new laws that level serious consequences.
  • Penalizing the haters to the full extent of the law instead of deporting the non-citizens or allowing turnstile so-called justice.
  • Targeting online antisemitism, including all the fake accounts, and using regulatory powers, including imprisonment.
  • Forcing social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, X, Instagram, and TikTok to be much stricter in moderating content or else facing serious consequences themselves.
  • Funding bias crime units, and if they don’t exist, creating them.

The Pushback

By the same benevolent mercy and justice described in the Hebrew Bible, God blessed Israel by vanquishing from history the immensely powerful empires that sought to extinguish the Jews — the Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Assyrians, et al., all of them extinct for centuries.

And when He observed the psychotic October 7 attack on his “chosen people” as so sinful, so craven, so immoral, so bestial, he sent President Donald J. Trump to aid our closest ally and to instruct a largely racist world about the difference between right and wrong and good and bad, and also what is worthy of defending and fighting for at this fraught time in world history.

Copyright 2026 . All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Intifada Comes to Brooklyn Under New York’s Socialist Mayor

RELATED VIDEOS:

Victor Davis Hanson: What’s Behind the Demonization of Israel?

Muslims Tried To Open an Islamic University in Texas, Then THIS HAPPENED…

Is Islam Misrepresented?

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

Decades ago Marshall Mcluhan observed, “The medium is the message.” As the print and electronic media penetrate more and more every aspect of life; their influence increases greatly in shaping views and behavior of the public. The power of the media is a mixed blessing. On one hand it can serve to expose injustices, wrongdoings, and flaws. On the other it is able to propagate misinformation and outright disinformation.

Manipulation and control of the media is of critical importance to the rule of totalitarian states. Free societies, although less subject to laundered information, are still at considerable risk of being selectively informed or misinformed outright. The public can be deceived more easily by the overlords of the media when political correctness is used as subterfuge for promotion of certain ideas.

A case in point is the media’s portrayal of Islam, articulated by politicians and pundits—the talking heads on television and radio, as well as the analysts who write for newspapers and magazines. Time and again we hear and read that Islam is religion of peace, in spite of the fact that Islam has been a religion of violence from its inception to the present. This mantra, “Islam is religion of peace” is repeated so often that it has become an undisputable statement of fact in the mind of many.

Even President George W. Bush on several occasions has repeated the mantra and attributed the horrific violence committed under the banner of Islam to a small band of extremists. The President’s assertion is either based on ignorance of the facts about Islam or his attempt at political correctness. Perhaps the President’s reticence to speak on the true nature of Islam was due to his desire to avoid inflaming the already charged feelings of many about Islam. In any event, truth is sacrificed and the public continues to cling to the false notion that Islam is a peaceful religion. People who dare to disclose the true nature of Islam run the risk of being castigated as bigot and hatemonger.

Even a cursory examination of Islam’s history and Islamic texts conclusively proves the exact opposite of peacefulness. Islam was and continues to be a movement of unbridled violence.

The Arabs who sallied out of the Arabian deserts did not fan out to the outside world with the Quran in one hand and flowers in the other, preaching love and peace from street corner to street corner, thereby capturing the hearts and minds of the people. Islam was forced on every people at the point of the sword and the imposition of backbreaking jazyyeh (special taxes) levied on those who were spared death and allowed to retain their religious beliefs. In spite of paying heavy Jizyah, the non-Muslims were treated, at best, as second class citizens in their own homelands.

The abominable persecution of non-Muslims in Islamic countries is a standard operating procedure. In many Islamic countries non-Muslim marriages are not recognized as legal unions and the children of the couples are stigmatized as bastards. Never mind Saudi Arabia, the cradle of barbarism, even Egypt, the more civilized Islamic country and recipient of billions of dollars in U.S. aid, treats non-Muslims as second class citizens and deprives them of their legitimate human rights.

The pundits, the analysts and the politicians are doing a great disservice to the public, each segment for its own expedient reasons, by parroting the mantra regarding the peaceful nature of Islam. As a matter of fact, the so called small band of Islamic extremists is the true face of Islam. Admittedly, from time to time and place to place, Muslims have shown a degree of tolerance for the non-Muslims. This tolerance dates back to the very early years of Muhammad himself. Early on Muhammad was meek and proclaimed, “For you, your religion, and for me my religion.” This assertion lasted but a few years until Muhammad’s movement gathered strength and Islam became the only alternative to death or heavy taxation. The imposition of Jizyah was a clever ploy for filling the Islamic coffer to support its armies and to finance its further conquests.

A longstanding Islamic practice is to be meek while weak and assume despotic intolerant power as it gains strength. Recent migration of Muslims to non-Islamic lands began as seemingly harmless, even useful, trickle of cheap needed labor. Before long, greater and greater number of Muslims deluged the new territories and as they gained in numbers—by high birth rate as well as new arrivals—Muslims began reverting to their intolerant ways by, for instance, demanding legal status for shariah (Islamic laws). The type of draconian laws that for most parts resemble those of humanity’s barbaric past.

Islam is indeed misrepresented. Islam is not misrepresented by its “detractors.” It is misrepresented by Islamic mercenaries: organizations and individuals generously funded by states as well as wealthy believers who are making billions of dollars pumping and selling oil at astronomical prices. Prestigious universities in the West, are always looking for handouts, are tripping over one another to establish Islamic study programs staffed by professors who sing the praise of Islam. Newspapers are routinely intimidated by Islamic association if they dare to print the truth about Islam. Legions of lawyers, both Muslims as well as hired guns are in the look out to intimidate and silence any voice speaking the truth about Islam. The media that fall in line may receive generous advertising and other incentives from Islamic lobbyists.

Hence, it is a fact that Islam is misrepresented. It is misrepresented very effectively by non-Muslim individuals and institutions who are generously rewarded by the modern day Islamic conquerors. This time around the Muslims are using the immense petrodollar they extract from the addicted non-Muslims. The sword is temporarily replaced by just as deadly a weapon—petrodollar. Before long, the Muslims aim to add a more deadly modern version of the sword—the Islamic bomb. With the bomb on one hand and the other hand on the oil spigot, the non-Muslim world will be brought to its knees by the religion of peace and brotherhood.

©2026 . All rights reserved.