radical Islam Archives - Page 2 of 4

House GOPers Flock to New Sharia-Free America Caucus as Politicos’ Awareness of Islamization Problem Grows

February 27, 2026/in America 250, Culture War, Elections, Featured, Immigration, Iranian influence, National Security, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Terrorism, The Truth, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

Three more House Republicans have joined the newly organized Sharia-Free America Caucus in the lower chamber of Congress, bringing the total membership to 43 after a mere two months since the legislative group’s formation was announced by GOP Representatives Keith Self and Chip Roy of Texas.

Rep. Michael Rulli (R) of Ohio, Rep. August Pfluger (R) of Texas, and Rep. Buddy Carter (R) of Georgia are the latest additions to the caucus that was first made public on Christmas Day 2025. Twenty-four House Republicans joined the caucus within its first month of existence, and it has continued adding members throughout the month of February.

Asked by The Washington Stand if he expects more House Members to join the new caucus, Self said, “Oh, absolutely. I haven’t even made a complete pitch. I’ve tried a couple of times, but things intervened. Just with the Texas delegation, we’ve got 25 Republicans, so I absolutely expect it to grow.”

The caucus was formed in response to growing concerns in Congress and elsewhere about the recent surge in efforts by Muslim activists around the country to establish developments offered exclusively to followers of Islam and to replace America’s local, state, and federal laws with Sharia law.

Sharia law is the civil and religious commands prescribed by the Quran to regulate public and private life. Among much else, Sharia sanctions Muslim husbands treating wives as slaves, justifies Islamic men who rape non-Islamic women, requires the death penalty for those who identify as homosexual, death by stoning for adulterers, and forces non-Muslims to convert or face death by beheading.

“Under Sharia law, there is no freedom of speech, religion, or women’s rights. Europe should be a wake-up call to America, showing what the spread of Sharia law looks like. America’s immigration system must brace to take on this battle, not only to preserve our constitutional republic but to take charge in the spiritual warfare and defend our Judeo-Christian values,” Roy declared recently.

In recent years, the Lone Star State has become a focal point for the growing Muslim presence. Developers of a massive Muslim-only combined residential and commercial complex near Dallas, initially known as EPIC City, recently opted to change the project’s name to “The Meadows” following public backlash in response to reports that Sharia law would exclusively govern residents there.

When asked by TWS why he joined the caucus, Carter replied, “Sharia law is a direct threat to freedom and the American way of life. This radical, Third-World ideology is poisonous and has no place in the United States. If we import the Third World, we become the Third World. Immigrants who are welcomed into our country must assimilate, not bring their toxic and violent beliefs with them. Georgians want to preserve our nation’s values, not destroy them.”

Rep. Josh Brecheen (R) of Oklahoma, who was among the earliest members of the caucus, told TWS he joined because “we must not allow Oklahoma to be lulled to sleep by a people who, under the deceitful guise of peace and tolerance, have infiltrated our nation. Americans must be made aware that, in strict adherence to the Quran, its extremist followers are directed to kill all infidels and apostates, meaning anyone who doesn’t believe as they do. In tandem, extremist followers advocate for Sharia law to be implemented in our nation.”

Brecheen added that he is “grateful to the group of Oklahoma state lawmakers who are introducing bills to ban Sharia at the state level and to curb foreign influence in our state. For my part, I am committed to preventing Sharia from being spread in our federal jurisdictions, as this code of law is inherently at odds with the American way of life.”

Despite its short existence, the caucus has been unusually active since being announced. In addition to a February 5 news conference, Roy chaired a February 11 hearing of the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government that heard from four witnesses explaining why “Political Islam and Sharia Law are Incompatible with the U.S. Constitution.”

One of the witnesses, Krista Shields, Texas State Director for the RAIR Foundation, told the hearing that the rapid growth today of efforts to establish Muslim-only communities in America, in which Sharia law takes precedence over every other legal system, is a direct result of planning by radical Islamic extremist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. Shields cited two documents as being of particular importance.

“First, a document titled ‘Towards a Global Strategy for Islamic Policy,’ largely known as ‘The Project,’ was a 12-point master plan detailing the ‘westward expansion’ of the Muslim Brotherhood. The document was seized by Swiss authorities shortly after 9/11 as the ‘formalized output’ of a 1977 meeting of exiled Muslim Brotherhood leaders. The document details a strategy of ‘institutional action’ designed to ‘penetrate’ social services and ‘control’ local centers of power, explicitly rejecting assimilation in favor of a ‘parallel’ existence governed by an ‘Islamic Constitution’ and ‘Islamic laws.’”

The second document cited by Shield was the 1991 Explanatory Memorandum, which she told the subcommittee was “entered [as] evidence in U.S. federal courts, [and] declares their mission in America: ‘The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process.’… The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.’ Groups like ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and their many proxies — including those operating in America — aim to impose Sharia worldwide and establish a global Caliphate.”

Another witness — veteran Islamic terrorism expert Robert Spencer — explained to subcommittee members that “immigration to a new land to bring Sharia to it is also an Islamic imperative. The Quran promises a reward from Allah to those who ‘emigrate for the sake of Allah,’ which means for the purpose of bringing Sharia to a non-Muslim land. Thus, the conflict between Sharia and the U.S. Constitution will only grow as the Muslim population in the U.S. grows, for among that population will always be some Muslims who take these imperatives with the utmost seriousness.”

Rep. Mary Scanlon (D-Pa.), the subcommittee’s ranking member, dismissed the hearing, accusing Roy and other Republicans of “stoking fear and suspicion of fellow Americans or anyone else on the explicit basis of their religious beliefs” and described GOP warnings about the suppression by Sharia law of all other beliefs as merely “hysterical rhetoric.”

AUTHOR

Mark Tapscott

Mark Tapscott is senior congressional analyst at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

US Evacuates Embassy Amid Rising Tensions With Iran

Iranian Students’ Renewed Anti-Regime And Anti-Khamenei Protests At Universities: Burning The Regime Flag And Khamenei’s Portrait, Chanting Praise For Reza Pahlavi

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.

Fear of Islamization of U.S. Sparks a Sharia-Free America Caucus in Congress

February 26, 2026/in Anti-Semitism, Culture War, Elections, Hot Topics, Immigration, Iranian influence, Must Read, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Social Issues, Terrorism, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

Forty Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives are joining forces in a new congressional caucus to combat what they view as a rapidly growing movement pushing for the Islamization of America as is happening in Great Britain and elsewhere in Europe.

Rep. Keith Self and Rep. Chip Roy, both of Texas, are co-founders of the Sharia-Free America Caucus that seeks to focus public and official attention and action on the multiple ways that the Islamization movement is making rapid progress in establishing large city-scaled developments exclusively available to Muslims transplanted to the U.S. from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia.

“The American way of life is under siege by radicals from a culture waging war against our Constitution and Western values. We’ve seen what happens when nations allow this infiltration: countries like France and England are on the verge of losing their identity and sovereignty. The same forces are at play here in America today, and if we don’t stop them, they will conquer our country too,” Self said in announcing the formation of the new caucus.

“America is facing a threat that directly attacks our Constitution and our Western values: the spread of Sharia law. From Texas to every state in this constitutional republic, instances of Sharia adherents masquerading as ‘refugees’ — and in many cases, sleeper cells connected to terrorist organizations — are threatening the American way of life. Those who succumb to this political ideology seek to replace our legal system and Constitution,” Roy said in the same announcement.

“Under Sharia law, there is no freedom of speech, religion, or women’s rights. Europe should be a wake-up call to America, showing what the spread of Sharia law looks like. America’s immigration system must brace to take on this battle, not only to preserve our constitutional republic but to take charge in the spiritual warfare and defend our Judeo-Christian values,” Roy continued.

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R) of Minnesota is among the members joining the caucus. Emmer’s decision to join the caucus came amid growing national attention focused on the likelihood that Somali Muslims living in Minnesota were involved in a systematic defrauding of state and federal social service and other taxpayer programs at a cost of $9 billion or more.

“Sharia is completely incompatible with the American way of life and threatens the very fabric of our society. It is radical, oppressive, and must never be allowed to gain a foothold in America. I’m thankful to Congressmen Roy and Self for leading this noble charge in the House and looking forward to working together to combat this danger,” Emmer said in a January statement.

Members of the new caucus have introduced legislation designed to halt and reverse the current momentum of Islamization efforts in this country. Rep. Randy Fine (R) of Florida’s H.R. 5512, the No Sharia Act, insists the bill “would restrict courts from enforcing any judgment, decree, or arbitration that relies on Islamic law or any foreign system that violates constitutional rights,” according to Self’s initial announcement of the group’s formation.

Roy’s H.R. 5722, the Preserving a Sharia-Free America Act, is written to “prevent foreign nationals who adhere to Sharia from entering or staying in the U.S.” The Texas Republican’s H.R. 6225, the PAUSE Act, would freeze the immigration system until major reforms can be enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president.

Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville’s (R) S. 3008 and S. 3009 are the Senate versions of the No Sharia Act and the Preserving Sharia-Free America Act.

Representatives from 19 states have flocked to join the caucus, while both co-founders and eight other GOP members of the Texas congressional delegation are members of the caucus, thanks in great part because the Lone Star State has become in recent years a focal point for the growing Muslim presence.

Developers of a massive Muslim-only combined residential and commercial complex near Dallas, initially known as EPIC City, recently opted to change the project’s name to “The Meadows” following public backlash in response to reports that Sharia law would exclusively govern residents there.

Sharia law is the civil and religious law prescribed by the Koran to regulate public and private life. Among much else, Sharia sanctions husbands treating wives as slaves, justifies Islamic men who rape non-Islamic women, requires the death penalty for those who identify as homosexual and death by stoning for adulterers, and forces non-Muslims to convert or face death by beheading.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) signed into law last year a measure designed to prevent housing developments with religion-based segregation of acceptable buyers.

“One of the issues at stake is the freedom of religion,” Abbott said. “Another issue at stake is what’s called the right to contract. The fact is, religious freedom is a central part of the Texas Constitution. But bad actors like EPIC and EPIC City tried to use religion as a form of segregation. We will ensure that we have the laws and law enforcement in place to prevent attempts to build such discriminatory compounds in the state of Texas.”

But critics of the Abbott measure point out that projects like The Meadows continue moving forward.

Independent investigative journalist Amy Mek, for example, describes Texas as “ground zero” in the Islamization process and “Islam’s top U.S. target and epicenter for settlement, enclaves, and long-term dominance.” As evidence for her description, Mek claims there are “over 330 mosques expanding rapidly” across the state, more than 650 “Islamic nonprofits operating here — more than any other state,” and a proliferation within the financial community of “Sharia-compliant finance” policies.

AUTHOR

Mark Tapscott

Mark Tapscott is senior congressional analyst at The Washington Stand.

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.

Iran’s Ayatollah Is Facing Defeat instead of Admitting Failure

February 15, 2026/in Elections, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, Must Read, National Security, News, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Terrorism, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

Time is running out for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his repressive regime in the Islamic Republic of Iran. In fact, a unique window of opportunity for the Iranian people opens next week, and the Trump administration is likely preparing to lend support this time before the window closes yet again.

Like he did in early 2025, President Donald Trump is giving Iran a limited opportunity to negotiate a satisfactory solution. As in 2025, however, Iran has shown no signs of negotiating in good faith, indicating its reluctance to fully surrender their nuclear program and refusal to discuss a ballistic missile program that is an existential threat to Israel and a malign proxy network that has destabilized the region for decades.

The strategy of suppressing at home and threatening abroad has been an abject failure. Yet despite their weakness, the ayatollah and his loyalists appear more willing to face defeat than admit failure.

The United States and its allies and partners in the region have had a month to marshal offensive resources and array defensive measures. Meanwhile, the Iranian regime is using the same negotiating playbook of stalling, threatening, and avoiding while the possibility of strikes against them looms large.

Trading away their nuclear program would be to admit failure, and that is a bridge too far for a regime whose pride may be the only thing more motivating than its own survival. The Iranian nuclear program has been the centerpiece of the conceit of Iran’s leaders, worthy of up to a half trillion dollars of investment and opportunity cost. Even though the program was largely turned to rubble in one night last June by seven American B-2s, trading it away would acknowledge that the ayatollah and his loyalists have wasted the well-being of the Iranian people and squandered their future.

Next week, the 17th and the 18th of February specifically, mark the end of the 40-day mourning period for the thousands — if not tens of thousands — of protestors who were ruthlessly slaughtered by the Iranian regime in early January. Reports indicate that there is a surge of dissatisfaction simmering among the Iranian people, and these mourning people will uniquely combine large crowds with powerful passion. The United States is properly postured to support the protestors this time around and may see strikes as a catalyst to allow the bubbling frustration to burst forth yet again.

The preparations by the United States for such a situation are made even more evident by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the White House this week. A visit that had been scheduled for next week has been accelerated, indicating that preparations made next week may be too late. That the prime minister is bringing along his incoming air chief, an atypical plus-one for such a strategic meeting, is a telling indication of operational planning. Thus, the United States and Israel are telegraphing strategic steps that indicate a looming military operation.

Finally, President Trump’s credibility is on the line. After claims that the United States is “locked and loaded” — on top of presidential promises to protestors that “HELP IS ON ITS WAY” — Iran has blatantly exceeded Trump’s red lines. Without an active response that supports his claims, Trump realizes that his legacy will include a condemning asterisk of weakness. He is unlikely to allow such a blemish on his record.

Next week offers an opportunity where geopolitical pretext meets military preparation. Meanwhile, the Iranian regime negotiates in bad faith, creating a situation where they would rather face defeat instead of admitting failure. By using the same failed negotiating tactics, the repressive regime in Iran should expect the same ruinous outcome from a year ago, this time accompanied by a defeat that may allow the Iranian people to finally shed their repressive regime.

AUTHOR

John Teichert

United States Air Force Brig. General (Ret.) John Teichert is a leading expert on foreign affairs and military strategy. He served as commander of Joint Base Andrews and Edwards Air Force Base, was the U.S. senior defense official to Iraq, and recently retired as the assistant deputy undersecretary of the Air Force for international affairs.

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.

U.S. Expands Footprint in Nigeria, Sends 200 Troops for Anti-Terror Training

February 14, 2026/in Assassination, Culture War, Elections, National Security, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Social Issues, Terrorism, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

The U.S. military announced Tuesday that it would send 200 servicemembers to the embattled African nation of Nigeria to help train Nigerian troops to fight Islamist terrorists, who have murdered tens of thousands of Christians and other religious practitioners in the country over the last two decades.

According to a Wall Street Journal report, the troops will join several U.S. servicemen already stationed in Nigeria to “help local forces use intelligence to identify targets for military strikes.” Specifically, the U.S. troops will reportedly train Nigerian forces to coordinate the risky military tactic of “simultaneous air and infantry operations.” However, a spokesman for Nigeria’s armed forces made it clear that the U.S. forces will not be involved in any direct combat operations. He went on to say that the Nigerian government had requested America’s assistance.

The announcement came seven weeks after the U.S. fired over a dozen missiles from an offshore warship at two alleged jihadist camps in Nigeria run by the Islamic State. While it was never confirmed how many terrorists were killed in the attack, a Nigerian military spokesman stated, “I can confirm the intent was achieved.” The strike was likewise launched at the request of Nigeria’s government.

The surge in U.S. military activity in Nigeria has come amid burgeoning genocidal violence against the Christian population of the country by several Islamist jihadi groups, including Boko Haram, Islamic State in West Africa Province, Fulani, and others. As noted recently by Across Nigeria Founder Brad Brandon during “Washington Watch,” 72% of all Christians killed across the globe in 2025 took place in northern Nigeria. Experts estimate that upwards of 60,000 Christians have been murdered in the country since 2009, far and away the largest total of any nation in the world over that time frame. In addition, Nigerian sources estimate that jihadists have murdered approximately 29,000 non-fundamentalist Muslims.

A renewed focus on the crisis emerged last November when President Trump declared the ongoing deadly attacks on Christians in Nigeria to be a “genocide” and threatened to send U.S. troops into the country “guns-a-blazing” to eradicate Islamist terrorists. He also threatened to significantly cut aid to the country if Nigeria’s government “continues to allow the killing of Christians,” with his administration declaring the nation a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) in November. Since then, it appears the Trump administration has settled on the strategy of direct military cooperation with the African nation.

But will the strategy successfully rid Nigeria of Islamist jihadists? Experts like Lt. Col. (Ret.) Bob Maginnis, who serves as senior fellow for National Security at Family Research Council, say that the strategy strikes a sensible medium.

“The decision to send 200 U.S. troops to Nigeria for training purposes — while avoiding direct combat — reflects a familiar and cautious approach,” he told The Washington Stand. “It signals support without plunging America into another open-ended conflict. The December missile strike against Islamic State camps reinforced that message: we are willing to act against terrorist infrastructure, but we are reluctant to expand our footprint.”

“Is that enough?” Maginnis continued. “From a military standpoint, training and targeted strikes can help. Nigeria’s armed forces face a complex threat environment: jihadist groups such as Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province operate across difficult terrain, exploit porous borders, and prey upon vulnerable rural communities — many of them Christian. Professionalizing Nigerian units, improving intelligence fusion, logistics, and air-ground coordination can strengthen Abuja’s capacity to protect its own citizens.”

At the same time, Maginnis argued that the U.S. should take a more consistent approach to fighting Christian persecution worldwide in order to build credibility. “Nigeria has been one of the epicenters of anti-Christian violence, especially in Africa. Villages are attacked, clergy kidnapped, congregations massacred. Persecution of Christians is not isolated or declining; it is expanding geographically and intensifying in severity. What we see in Nigeria is part of a broader global pattern — from parts of the Middle East to communist regimes like China, where state-driven repression seeks to subordinate or silence Christian witness.”

As to the question of whether the U.S. should take more direct military action, Maginnis contended that “we must begin with clarity. The U.S. should support nations that are genuinely committed to defeating jihadist violence and protecting vulnerable populations, including Christians. Training missions, intelligence sharing, and carefully calibrated strikes can be appropriate tools when tied to measurable reforms and accountability. But ‘boots on the ground’ in a combat role is another matter entirely. Nigeria is a sovereign state with a large military. The primary burden must rest with its government.”

He further recommended continuing “training and advisory support for Nigerian forces conditioned on demonstrated commitment to protecting civilians” and “targeted counterterrorism strikes when actionable intelligence identifies terrorist infrastructure,” as well as upping “diplomatic pressure on Abuja to address corruption, impunity, and sectarian bias within its own security services.”

“Expanding into large-scale U.S. combat deployments would risk repeating past mistakes,” Maginnis advised. “But retreating into symbolic gestures while persecution spreads would also be a failure. The United States cannot solve every conflict. It can, however, choose integrity. If we are serious about combating Islamist terrorism in Nigeria, we must also be serious about confronting persecution wherever it occurs — without fear, favor, or double standards.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

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.

It is Islam

January 29, 2026/in Anti-Semitism, Culture War, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Terrorism, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Amil Imani

For decades, I have argued that the enemy is Islam without adjectives, Islam is “pure and simple.” Adjectives such as “extremist,” “radical,” “moderate,” “fundamentalist,” “moderate,” “political,” and “Islamist” mislead the blind and the ignorant.

The naive and wishful-thinking humanists, liberals, as well as soft-headed Jews, Christians, and idiotic atheists succumb to their fears and previous follies regarding the savagery intrinsic in Islamic scriptures and history, recognized by former Muslims who have somehow overcome their misconceptions about the most vicious and dangerous enemy of civilization and mankind.

A revealing book on the subject is Robert Reilly’s “The Closing of the Islamic Mind.”

This purely scholarly work should be supplemented by the work of theologian George Weigel, “Faith, Reason, and the War against Jihadism.”

Terms such as “Political Islam,” “Radical Islam, “or Militant Islam are the contributions of Useful Idiots. These terms do not even exist in the native parlance of Islam simply because they are redundant. Islam is a radical political movement by its very nature and, according to its charter, the Quran.

It is the Useful Idiot who sanitizes Islam and misguides the populace by saying that “real Islam” constitutes the main body of the religion and that this main body is non-political and moderate.

Regrettably, a large segment of the population goes along with these nonsensical euphemisms depicting Islam because it prefers to believe them. It is less threatening to think that only a hijacked small segment of Islam is radical or politically driven and that the main body of Islam is indeed moderate and non-political.

Islam is not a religion. It is a political ideology. In Islam, the mosque and State are the same—the mosque is the State. This arrangement goes back to the days of Muhammad himself. Islam is also radical in the extreme. Even “moderate” Islam is radical in its beliefs and its deeds. Muslims believe that all non-Muslims, bar none, are hellfire-bound and deserve to be maltreated compared to believers.

Many people wonder why Islam is blossoming in the US! They are bewildered as to why Democrats back Islamic ideology, honor their holidays and customs, and promote it as the religion of peace, knowing that Islam is not a religion of peace. In fact, it is an ideology of war. The answer is quite simple: The Democrat Party stands with anyone who hates America, and the Republican Party.

History has proven that once Muslims have the majority, they will institute sharia law and adopt their own legal system—a government within a government.

The Democrat Party has shown by both words and actions that they despise the US Constitution. Regarding the support of Muslims, they will not hesitate to hold the Bill of Rights over anyone who dares to accuse Islam and Muslims of wrongdoing. While crime and threats skyrocket, Islamized citizens will ignore the wrongdoing. They will look the other way for fear of retribution, honor killings, and punishments from those who uphold the Islamic requirement to seek revenge on anyone who dishonors or disagrees with Islam.

The Democrat Party has descended into nihilism, which describes the present State of America. This is a logical consequence of America’s abandonment of its Declaration of Independence, which she never really understood. Which, unknown even to eminent scholars, represent a synthesis of classical and modern political science, which is elaborated in my masterwork “A Judeo-Scientific Guide for the Perplexed.”

The primary target of the Left is the Bible of Israel. The Bible says that God creates nations and individuals, and the Left opposes our country and our individualism. Do you fathom this? This does not require a lengthy discourse.

“By each passing day, the death of Western Civilization — specifically, the death of Europe, will not have been a suicide, but a cold-blooded, premeditated murder, carried out by the Western ruling oligarchy.”

In plain language, Western Europe has been betrayed by the very people entrusted with its protection and stewardship — its political leaders and their enablers. Like former EU President Jean-Claude Juncker, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, and many others.

When the wolf gets into the fold and begins terrorizing the sheep and preying upon them, who is most at fault — the wolf or the shepherd who was supposed to guard the flock? Although his fangs may be bloody, the wolf is only being what he is — a predator. On the other hand, the shepherd has failed in his duty to protect the flock.

In the case of Europe, the “shepherds” have done much, much worse than fail through negligence. They have actively aided and abetted the enemy and let them into the heart of Europe to prey upon its native peoples.

The Muslims who now terrorize Europe must be dealt with like the rabid dogs they are — but a great evil has been done, and the job will not be done until the traitorous leaders of old Europe have been brought to justice and pay the price for their enormous betrayal. They have the blood of innocents on their hands – men, women, and children alike.

In the Germany of the 1930s, very few people were Nazis, and most Germans dismissed them as a bunch of hotheaded fools. Before long, the hotheaded few cowed the dismissive masses, resulting in millions losing their lives.

America: stay awake. It has started to happen here, too. Time is of the essence.

Schweizer: Muslim Jihadists, Western Elites Weaponized American Immigration Programs

January 21, 2026/in Assassination attempt, Communism, Courts & Law, Criminal Illegal Aliens, Culture War, Elections, Hot Topics, Immigration, Marxism, Must Read, Narco-Socialism, Narco-Terrorism, News, Policy, Politics, Social Issues, Socialism, Techno-Fascism, Terrorism, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

A new book is shedding light on how foreign enemies have taken advantage of America’s lax immigration policy to flood the nation with threats. Investigative author and Breitbart News affiliate Peter Schweizer’s book “The Invisible Coup: How American Elites and Foreign Powers Use Immigration as a Weapon” details how the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist and jihadist groups use mass immigration as a means of conquest, and in particular of dominating and subverting Western nations like the U.S.

The Islamist strategy is rooted, Schweizer relates, in hijrah, one of the chief “pillars” of jihad. The idea of hijrah comes from when the founder of Islam, the Arab military leader Muhammad, and his religious devotees were forced to flee Mecca in 622 and seek refuge in Medina. Particularly in recent decades, hijrah, or migration, has become a prominent tool for jihadists to spread Islam via the infiltration of foreign nations. Some hadiths, which are maxims or instructions attributed to Muhammad, present hijrah as an “important weapon” against Western powers and stipulate that the process of hijrah will persist until a foreign nation is “won over” for Islam. Another hadith orders Muslims “to assemble, to listen; to obey; to immigrate; and to wage jihad for the sake of Allah.”

“Just as the radicals who ran the sanctuary city movement had a litmus test for Central American refugees coming to the United States with the goal of creating a revolutionary force,” Schweizer writes, “Islamists seek to import the revolution…”

According to the author, the R-1 religious worker visa program has been a particular target for jihadists, who often train imams in Muslim-majority nations and send them to the U.S. to run mosques and radicalize others. The majority of mosques in the U.S. are now led by foreign-born and usually foreign-trained imams, Schweizer notes.

He cites the example of Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, nicknamed “the Blind Sheik.” The Egyptian-born Abdel-Rahman entered the U.S. via the R-1 visa program, despite being a leader of the militant jihadist group Al-Jama’a al-Islamiyya. He spent three years in Egyptian prisons awaiting trial for issuing a fatwa, a legal ruling in Islamic sharia law, which resulted in the 1981 assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Although acquitted of the conspiracy charges, Abdel-Rahman was exiled from Egypt and made his way to Afghanistan, where he befriended Osama bin Laden, becoming the head of al-Qaeda and its political/financial forerunner, Maktab al-Khadamat (MAK) in 1989, during the Soviet-Afghan War.

In 1990, Abdel-Rahman was granted an R-1 visa to visit the U.S. and assume command of MAK’s financial arms in New York City, despite being named on a terrorist watchlist. The U.S. State Department revoked his visa shortly afterwards, but the jihadi leader somehow managed to obtain legal permanent residence (LPR). In 1991, when attempting to return to the U.S. after visiting the Middle East, his terrorist status was flagged, and federal authorities began the process to revoke Abdel-Rahman’s LPR status. He was, however, still allowed to enter the U.S. in order to appeal the decision. When his appeal was denied, he claimed asylum; during his asylum hearings, it was revealed that the CIA had likely been shielding Abdel-Rahman and ensuring that he was given visas, due to his role in combatting the Soviets in the Middle East.

During his time in the U.S., Abdel-Rahman preached against the U.S., describing Americans as “descendants of apes and pigs who have been feeding from the dining tables of the Zionists, Communists, and colonialists” and encouraging Muslims to “tear [America] apart, destroy their economy, burn their companies, eliminate their interests, sink their ships, shoot down their planes, kill them on the sea, air, or land.” He issued a fatwa declaring it legal for Muslims to rob American banks and recorded numerous sermons in New York City, which were shipped on tape to Egypt, where they inspired an increase in terrorist attacks.

Egyptian state information service chief Mamdouh Beltagui said in a 1993 interview that Abdel-Rahman was using New York City as a “base” for directing jihadist terrorist activities abroad. “He passes on messages to his followers, giving orders about what they should do next and who they should target,” Beltagui stated. “We do not understand why the U.S. authorities have allowed him to enter the country.”

The FBI began investigating Abdel-Rahman in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured over 1,000. It was discovered that the imam likely ordered the bombing and was planning terrorist attacks to destroy the United Nations headquarters, the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the George Washington Bridge, and an FBI building. Abdel-Rahman was arrested in June of 1993 and convicted of seditious conspiracy in late 1995; in 1996, he was sentenced to life in solitary confinement without parole. He died in prison in 2017 at the age of 78.

Another example Schweizer points out is that of Iranian-born Usama Abdulghani, now based in Dearborn, Michigan, just outside of Detroit. Affiliated with Dearborn’s Hadi Institute Youth Community Center, Abdulghani has issued calls for Muslims in the U.S. to “fight Western civilization.” Abdulghani has declared that the “world needs to know” that Western civilization “is no longer a solution. These institutions are morally bankrupt. There is no other way, but God, or taklif — divine obligation-oriented, God-based resistance and rejection of the systems.”

Sheikh Muhammad Ayed, preaching from Jerusalem in 2015, explicated the jihadists’ immigration agenda, encouraging his fellow Muslims to remember that the “night will be over” and Islam will soon “trample them underfoot, Allah willing,” referring to Western nations. “We shall conquer their countries — whether you like it or not, oh Germans, oh Americans, oh French, oh Italians,” he declared. “We will breed children with them,” he added, potentially a veiled reference to mass rapes perpetrated by foreigners from Muslim-majority countries in Western nations.

Schweizer frames the jihadist use of mass immigration as a deliberate choice intended to eventually achieve conquest over Western nations. This weaponization of mass immigration programs coincides with the designs of Western left-wing elites, he claims, who similarly capitalize on broadscale immigration, largely from the third world, in order to effect social change and foment political revolution. He notes that pro-immigration activists within the U.S. have viewed mass immigration as a means of influencing elections. Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) chairman Eliseo Medina, for example, saw his friendship with then-newly-elected President Barack Obama as an opportunity to “change America profoundly” by importing millions of foreigners.

“When they voted in November,” Medina observed of newly-naturalized immigrants, “they voted overwhelmingly for progressive candidates. Barack Obama got two out of every three voters who showed up.” The left-wing labor leader explained that two things “matter for the progressive community: Number one: If we are to expand this electorate to win, the progressive community needs to solidly be on the side of immigrants. That will expand and solidify the progressive coalition for the future.” He continued, “Number two: [If] we reform the immigration laws, it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters. Can you imagine if we have, even the same ratio, two out of three?” Even just eight million immigrants-turned-voters would “create a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle,” he contended.

Relying on polling data and carefully-curated quotes, Schweizer makes the case that newly-naturalized immigrants in the 21st century have overwhelmingly supported Democratic politicians and candidates and are, in fact, to the left of most mainstream and American-born Democrats on most issues, favoring socialist policies and expansive government programs, similar to those of the socialist governments in their home countries. “At the same time, migrants were shown to be less supportive of preserving America’s core values,” Schweizer notes. Foreign-born voters were significantly more likely than their American counterparts to uphold international law as a higher authority than the Constitution and to consider themselves “citizens of the world” instead of U.S. citizens.

“The partisan advantage for Democrats that Obama and Medina noted was not only real; it was growing. Four years after his election, in 2012, a YouGov survey found that recent immigrants favored Democrats over Republicans by almost four to one,” Schweizer warns. “Therefore, the hard work of ignoring citizenship standards to create these voters needed to continue.”

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

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.

Trump Promises Support for Iranian Protestors

January 6, 2026/in Anti-Semitism, Courts & Law, Culture War, Elections, Featured, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Terrorism, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

President Donald Trump has found a new source of leverage against Iran’s Islamist regime — the Iranian people themselves. Protests that began nine days ago have now spread to 26 of Iran’s 31 provinces, as economic unrest catalyzed widespread dissatisfaction with the regime to the brink of open revolt. As is its habit, the repressive regime is now turning its weapons upon its own subjects, earning a stern warning from President Trump. “If Iran shots [sic] and violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their [the protesters’] rescue,” the president said on social media. “We are locked and loaded and ready to go.”

The protest began with shopkeepers and bazaar merchants closing their doors in response to dire economic conditions. Since Iran’s war with Israel, its rial currency has lost 60% of its value, dropping at one point to a record low of 1.445 million to the dollar. Iran’s annual inflation rate reached 42.2% in December, with food prices up 72%. Meanwhile, Iran’s central bank registered a decline in gross GDP of 0.6% (0.8% excluding oil) for the six months beginning in late March 2025.

Residents of the oil-rich country have also suffered power outages and now face rising fuel prices; the central government puts more focus on building missiles, enriching uranium, and keeping its own coffers full than on the plight of its own people. The Iranian regime has even neglected to procure a stable water supply for the capital metropolis.

But what began as protests over economic conditions quickly grew into a more general challenge to the unbending regime. Footage emerging on social media showed protestors chanting “freedom” and “death to the dictator,” as well as calling for a return of Reza Pahlavi, son and heir of the late shah who was booted from power in 1979.

At first, the Iranian mullahs attempted to placate the protestors’ concerns, acknowledging “the pressure on people’s livelihoods” and promising reform. Mohammad Reza Farzin, Iran’s chief central banker, resigned last Monday as the fall guy for the ongoing inflation.

But the protests kept spreading and the popular hatred for their government began to cross the line into open rebellion. In one attack, demonstrators breached a police station affiliated with Iran’s Republican Guard Corps (IRGC) and burned several police cars. In another, they threw stones at police officers and regime-aligned militia members, resulting in one death and a dozen injuries among the government-aligned forces.

Soon, the Iranian regime had reverted to its more typical tactics of suppressing dissent through brutal force. Across protests at 22 locations in 78 cities, the Iranian regime has allegedly killed at least 20 demonstrators and arrested 990, according to data compiled by the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRAI) on Monday.

But the crackdown predated the protests. Since its catastrophic war with Israel in the summer of 2025, the Iranian regime says it has arrested 21,000 “suspects,” and international watchdogs have documented between 1,500-2,000 executions. “The only strategy the regime knows is repression,” said professor Saeid Golkar.

After sweeping out the shah to popular approval, Iran’s Islamist regime has faced increasing popular opposition in recent decades. In 2009, protests in the “Green Movement” challenged former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s disputed reelection. “Day of Rage” protests lasted for a year during the 2011 Arab Spring. High food prices spurred protests in 2017 and 2018, gas prices sparked riots in 2019, and the deadly enforcement of Islamic morality laws initiated protests in 2022.

In response to the 2022 protests, the Islamist regime quelled the protests by killing more than 500 people, suggesting the current repression could become even more deadly.

Yet some signs suggest the result of the current protests could be different. Over the past two years, Iran has suffered one humiliating setback after another, from the devastation of its terrorist proxies, to the collapse of the allied Assad regime in Syria, to Iran’s own defeat by Israel and the United States. As a result, Iran’s military might has been hollowed out, both physically and morally, prompting more protestors to boldly shake the already-shaking regime.

Additionally, Iran continues to face pressure from both Trump and Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu, who have both expressed solidarity with the protestors. “We’re watching it very closely,” Trump told reporters. “If they start killing people like they have in the past, I think they’re going to get hit very hard by the United States.”

Furthermore, one underreported aspect of the Iranian protests is the rapid growth of Christianity within the country, FRC’s Senior Fellow for International Religious Freedom Lela Gilbert told The Washington Stand. Despite a lack of official statistics, a 2021 report suggested Christianity was the fastest-growing religion in the country. In 2024, an Iranian court sentenced five Christian converts to 25 years in prison for abandoning Islam.

“Despite anti-Christian persecution and crackdowns, numerous reports of Iranian converts to Christianity continue. These appear on social media and through personal contacts,” Gilbert explained. “There are stunning stories of increasing numbers of new believers, even in the face of potentially harsh reactions and abuse by disapproving authorities. Yet, despite these concerns, and alongside personal attacks from families and friends, these new believers remain faithful and amazingly outspoken.”

Christianity constitutes a kingdom “not of this world” (John 18:36), and it rarely presents a direct challenge to the governing authorities that exist (Romans 13:1). However, the spread of Christianity also promotes ideas of human dignity and individual freedom, working these through a society like yeast leavening dough (Matthew 13:33). This has made Christianity one of the most powerful forces for toppling despotism in history.

Former President Barack Obama later reflected that he made a mistake not to do more to encourage the Green protests in 2009. Under a President Trump flush with victory, the United States could do many things short of military action —which is probably not off the table — to aid Iranian protestors against the regime. The Wall Street Journal lists several possible options: “restoring internet access when the regime cuts it off, unmasking regime thugs,” enforcing accountability for human rights abuses, and tightening enforcement of existing oil sanctions.

Would these actions be enough? Only the one “who brings princes to nothing” (Isaiah 40:23) knows for certain. But a certain former Venezuelan dictator might advise Ayatollah Ali Khamenei not to underestimate President Trump. According to The Times, a British paper, Khamenei has already worked out an “escape plan” whereby he and 20 close associates would flee to Russia with about $95 billion in assets. Such is not the plan of a man confident is his regime’s longevity.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

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.

After Bondi Beach, the West Must Directly Confront Jihadism, Experts Say

December 17, 2025/in Assassination, Courts & Law, Criminal Illegal Aliens, Culture War, Elections, Featured, Hot Topics, Immigration, Iranian influence, News, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Terrorism, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

As the sharp surge in anti-Semitic attacks continues around the globe with the mass-casualty shooting targeting Jews that occurred at Australia’s Bondi Beach on Sunday, experts say that societies and government officials in the West must directly confront Islamist jihadist extremism rather than attempt to address the issue with accommodations and stricter gun control laws.

The Bondi Beach atrocity, which was committed by a Muslim father-son duo who appeared to be inspired by the Islamic State, took the lives of 15 Jews, including a 10-year-old girl, a rabbi, and an 87-year-old Holocaust survivor. Twenty-two more victims are currently hospitalized, including six in critical condition.

The massacre is just the latest in a string of anti-Semitic attacks that have occurred in Western countries, particularly since the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel that took the lives of over 1,200 Israelis. Last year, the Anti-Defamation League tracked over 10,000 anti-Semitic incidents that occurred in the U.S. alone over the one-year period since October 7, the highest number ever recorded in a single year period. In 2025, at least four American Jews were murdered by Hamas sympathizers in three separate incidents.

Massive surges in anti-Semitic incidents were also recorded in Europe since October 7, including in France, Germany, Ireland, the U.K., the Netherlands, Austria, and elsewhere. In Australia where the Bondi Beach massacre took place, 1,650 “anti-Jewish incidents” occurred over a 12-month span ending on September 30.

Following the Bondi Beach carnage, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stated that the government was “prepared to take whatever action is necessary” in response to the attack by instituting a higher level of gun restrictions. Notably, Australia has already instituted “what advocates considered the ‘gold standard’ on gun control,” including banning “assault rifles and many other semiautomatic weapons, as well as shotguns.”

But experts like Dr. Moshe Glick, president of the New Jersey chapter of Israel365, say that the root of the issue is not about gun control.

“[T]his is not about strict gun laws,” he contended during “Washington Watch” Monday. “The prime minister of Australia talked about, ‘We’re going to increase our gun laws.’ You know, they’ve got some of the strictest gun laws in the world. It’s an ideological hatred. First they come after the Saturday people and then these jihadists come after the Sunday people. So it’s the will of democratic Western culture [and] society to fight these jihadists around the world, or we’ll all be next.”

Glick further expressed encouragement that the Trump administration appears to be confronting anti-Semitism more directly.

“Thank God for President Trump and Harmeet Dhillon [and] Pam Bondi,” he exclaimed. “[There was] a case that happened … in New Jersey where a man, an elderly man, was attacked in front of one of our synagogues — choked. Police didn’t come to his rescue. I ended up coming to his rescue to physically separate him. And what’s crazy is I’m the one that got arrested. We’re so thankful for the fact that the Department of Justice has filed charges against six individuals and two of these jihadi organizations, so hopefully it’s catching [some] attention.”

Glick went on to argue that social media and Middle Eastern financial influences have played a large part in fomenting anti-Semitism in the West. “I think so much of it is our generation gets their information from TikTok and Instagram. And I think there’s a ton of Qatari money that’s being thrown at this to influence public opinion against the Jewish state.”

Going forward, Glick asserted that the U.S. and other Western societies must stand firmly united against jihadist culture, which goes far beyond gun control measures.

“I think we [mistakenly] apply Western culture to this,” he observed. “[W]hen you have an ideological hatred, which if somebody is willing to kill themselves — I mean, these two shooters in Australia, they didn’t think they were going to [commit a] hit and run. They were there to kill as many Jews as they could. … These are not normal people. These are not things where we’re going to have another armed security guard at the front door. That doesn’t work.”

“I think the fear of the Jewish and the Christian community [is] we’ve already seen churches that have been shot up. We’ve seen synagogues that have been shot up,” Glick continued. “[W]e as Americans [should] stand united and say that this jihadist mentality is a sickening cancer within our society and we’re going to stand up united to fight it versus we’re going to have stricter gun laws. … That’s not going to work. It’s such a deeper, sicker problem, and hopefully the world is starting to wake up to that fact.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

Partner with The Washington Stand to bring news from a biblical worldview to readers nationwide. From now until December 31, every gift will be doubled through our year-end Challenge Match.

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.

PERKINS: The Two-State Problem

November 24, 2025/in Anti-Semitism, Culture War, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, Must Read, News, Policy, Politics, Terrorism, Violence, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

Benjamin Franklin once observed, “Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other.” In other words, experience eventually instructs those slow to understand — but in matters of national security and biblical truth, time is not a luxury we possess.

Last week, the U.N. Security Council approved a U.S.-drafted resolution intended to bring lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians. The intentions behind it are understandable; we all desire peace. But peace must be pursued with clear eyes, anchored in both biblical truth and historical reality. Over the last 53 years, roughly a dozen major peace proposals have not only failed but have, tragically, helped cultivate the violent ideology that erupted on October 7, 2023.

Each of those proposals rested on the same false premise: that Israel would or could surrender the land at the heart of its nation to create a Palestinian state. Such a concession would be suicidal for Israel’s security. Worse still, the continual promise — dangled by the international community and now again by the United States — fuels rather than calms hostility. It signals to Palestinian leaders that the world still believes the lie that Israel and the Jewish people stand in the way of their identity, prosperity, and future. In other words, the Jews are the problem.

It is telling that the only successful peace agreements — Egypt-Israel, Jordan-Israel, and the Abraham Accords — have all been negotiated between Israel and sovereign states, not the Palestinians. This underscores a hard but necessary truth: regional peace is achievable, but only when it does not demand Israel relinquish sovereignty over land that is at the very core of its identity, history, and covenant.

I was reminded of this in the spring of 2005, when I sat in a meeting here in Washington as Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and senior members of the Bush administration laid out the Gaza disengagement as a bold new path to peace. My objection came in the form of a single question: Is this consistent with what the Bible says about the land and the Jewish people?

I didn’t get an answer on that day. But October 7 provided the tragic answer.

In the aftermath of that horrific day, I walked through a kibbutz where walls were spattered with the blood of women and children. I stood at the site of the Nova music festival and felt the weight of knowing that American policy decisions helped create the conditions that allowed such evil to flourish. I led the delegation I was with in a prayer of repentance for what America allowed. I am determined not to remain silent while new seeds are being planted that could yield an even darker harvest.

I close with another quote, from the prophet Jeremiah: “They have also healed the hurt of My people slightly, saying, ‘Peace, peace!’ when there is no peace.”

AUTHOR

Tony Perkins

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

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.

Israel Approves Settlement East of Jerusalem, Aims to Eliminate Possibility of Two-State Solution

August 26, 2025/in Culture War, Elections, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Social Issues/by Family Research Council

The Israeli government on Wednesday approved construction in an open tract of land east of Jerusalem, angering proponents of the two-state solution who argue the development would cut a potential Palestinian state in two. For decades, Israel left the area undeveloped due to international pressure. But increasingly anti-Semitic attitudes from nearly every nation but the U.S. convinced the world’s only majority-Jewish state that now was the time to act.

The planned settlement project would construct some 3,400 housing units in a zone label “E1,” short for “East One,” which lies east of Jerusalem, between the Israeli capital and the existing settlement of Ma’ale Adumim. Construction could begin within a year. The plan was approved by the Higher Planning Committee of the Civil Administration, a department of Israel’s Defense Ministry.

Israeli plans for an E1 settlement have been postponed for decades due to pressure from international proponents of a two-state solution. The settlement’s location would sever the most direct link between the Palestinian enclaves of Ramallah and Bethlehem, thus making any Palestinian state carved around feel disjointed and unnatural. This international pressure has come not only from Israel’s adversaries, but even from the U.S. under former administrations.

Unsurprisingly then, Israel’s approval of the plan generated widespread international criticism:

The Palestinian Authority complained that the E1 settlement “fragments … geographic and demographic unity, entrenching the division of the occupied West Bank into isolated areas and cantons that are disconnected from one another, turning them into something akin to real prisons.”
N. spokesperson Stephane Dujarric condemned the plan because it “will drive a stake through the heart of the two-state solution.”
In a statement, 21 foreign secretaries (from Canada, Japan, and 19 European nations) also warned, “if implemented, it would divide a Palestinian state in two, mark a flagrant breach of international law, and critically undermine the two-state solution.”
The U.K. separately summoned Israeli Ambassador Tzipi Hotovely to register its disapproval.

For Israel, undermining a potential “two-state solution” is precisely the point. “The Palestinian state is being erased from the table not with slogans but with actions,” Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich declared. “Every settlement, every neighborhood, every housing unit is another nail in the coffin of this dangerous idea.” Smotrich oversees settlement policy and hopes to double the settler population in Judea and Samaria. The Israeli Security Cabinet previously approved 22 other settlements in May.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also endorses the same end goal. “I said 25 years ago that we will do everything to secure our grip on the Land of Israel, to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, to prevent the attempts to uproot us from here. Thank God, what I promised, we have delivered,” he said Sunday.

Of course, the original “two-state solution” occurred after World War II, when Great Britain divided the Mandate of Palestine into what became the Kingdom of Jordan and the state of Israel. But Arabs living in the Jewish portion, supported at first by the entire Arab world, raised such a stink that international powers contemplated carving another state out of Israel’s portion, to give to the people now called “Palestinians.”

From 2006 to 2023, the Gaza Strip provided the world with a pilot project of what a potential third Palestinian state would like: brutal control by radical jihadists, who oppressed the people and simply used the land to inflict war and terror upon Israel. Hamas’s massacre on October 7 convinced the Israelis that they must never allow the creation of another terrorist-run Palestinian state. Apparently, the same crisis convinced the rest of the world to create a much larger, terrorist-run Palestinian state.

The Trump administration is the notable exception to this “rest of the world.” While Israel’s former allies like Australia and the U.K. have abandoned her to recognize a non-existent Palestinian state, the Trump administration is the friendliest Israel has seen this century. Under President Trump, the U.S. State Department has adopted — or rather restored — the historical terminology “Judea and Samaria” for the land that more recently acquired the name “West Bank.” When a press officer objected to this terminology, he was fired.

The Trump administration’s friendlier posture includes greater acceptance for Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria. When asked about E1’s approval in an interview, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee answered that a two-state solution was not a “high priority” for the administration.

From these various reactions to Israel’s approval of a settlement in E1, two premises become clear. First, both Israel and its global adversaries view this tract of land as an essential link between Palestinian enclaves, which would be necessary to the contiguity and coherence of any future Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria. Second, Israel controls this tract of land so thoroughly that it can build infrastructure on it, while its critics can only complain. These premises lead to the conclusion: the creation of any future Palestinian state would involve taking land currently controlled by Israel and giving it to the Palestinian Authority (PA), which sponsors terrorism against Israel. Such a state would be like Hamas-controlled Gaza from 2006-2023, except bigger.

This reasoning does not only apply to the plot of land designated “E1,” but to nearly the entirety of Judea and Samaria. Israel holds total control over the entire region, except for a number of disconnected enclaves, where about three million Palestinians live. Even in these enclaves, which Israel allows to govern themselves under loose administration by the PA, Israeli security forces regularly enter to track down terrorists. Israeli checkpoints monitor traffic on the major highways.

The point is, Israel is the state that exercises sovereign control over Judea and Samaria. International naysayers have no right to tell it how to develop or not develop any piece of real estate in the area. They certainly have no right to base such restrictions on the remote possibility that a hypothetical, future state will be created in the region, which would necessarily entail taking territory from Israel.

There is no quicker way to explode the mythology of a two-state solution than for Israelis to build communities and live in the biblical heartland they control. Israel knows it, and their international adversaries know it. Now, Israel is taking action, and no other nation has the authority to stop them.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mike Huckabee is Exactly the Right Man to Be Remaking American Policy Toward Israel

The Gaza Famine Claim Was Timed for Gaza City Op

Israel and Ambassador Huckabee Reject Charge of Famine in Gaza

Netanyahu: Global monitoring group’s claim of starvation in Gaza is an ‘outright lie’

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.

Israel Calls up 60,000 Reservists to Support Further Occupation of Gaza

August 21, 2025/in Anti-Semitism, Culture War, Elections, Featured, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, News, Policy, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Social Issues, Socialism, Terrorism, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

Israel will call up around 60,000 reservists to support the army’s planned takeover of Gaza City, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced Wednesday. The announcement underscores the enormous manpower requirements of holding urbanized areas of the Gaza Strip against Hamas. But, as negotiations for the return of the hostages drag on, Israel may have no other choice.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz on Wednesday approved a plan to occupy Gaza City, codenamed “Gideon’s Chariots II.” The first “Operation Gideon’s Chariots” refers to the Israeli offensive, begun in May, which planned to take and hold approximately 75% of the territory in the Gaza Strip. (The first offensive also involved calling up tens of thousands of reservists.)

The full assault plan involves 12 brigades, complete with infantry, armor, artillery, and combat engineers, as well as two brigades normally assigned to guard the Gaza border, whose ordinary posts will be filled with reservists. These 14 brigades will be organized into five divisions, which will each contain tens of thousands of troops.

The IDF are wasting no time with the new offensive. Even before reserve troops have been activated and deployed, the forces already in Gaza are making the first moves. “We have begun the preliminary operations and the first stages of the attack on Gaza City. IDF forces are already holding the outskirts of Gaza City,” IDF spokesman Effie Defrin announced Wednesday.

Israel planned to call these reservists in waves, with 40,000 to 50,000 activated on September 2, while others would be activated in November/December, and still more in February/March.

Even still, the deployment of these reservists is an extraordinary use of manpower for Israel. For a country of just under 10 million people, 50,000 reservists constitute a full 0.5% of the population. These reservists join tens of thousands of other reservists already in Gaza, besides the regular army. The IDF plans to extend the tour of duty for 20,000 reservists by another 30 to 40 days.

Yet, even with these extraordinary actions, Israel’s military manpower is stretched to the limit. Its manpower shortage is estimated to be between 10,000 to 12,000 soldiers. This manpower shortage has created tensions with the ultra-orthodox Haredi community within Israel, which objects to military service on religious grounds. The IDF has taken to appealing to “Jewish communities abroad” for additional recruits.

Such a large activation of Israeli reservists, amid such critical manpower shortages, signal Israel’s intention to fight its way through Gaza as thoroughly and as quickly as possible, in hopes of rescuing the remaining hostages, of whom just over 20 are still believed to be alive.

On Monday, reports surfaced that Hamas — after much arm-twisting by Egypt and Qatar — accepted terms for a 60-day ceasefire proposed by U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff, which would involve the release of 10 living hostages. Israel’s decision to activate 50,000 reservists only two weeks later suggests it either does not believe the ceasefire is imminent or hopes to capture all of Gaza City before it can be finalized.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

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.

France Hallucinates a Palestinian State, while Israel Must Confront Reality

July 28, 2025/in Anti-Semitism, Culture War, Elections, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Social Issues, Terrorism, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

French President Emmanuel Macron announced Thursday that “France will recognize the State of Palestine” (or so X translated his words into English). Such recognition is the only way to secure “a just and lasting peace in the Middle East,” he insisted. “There is no alternative.” While Macron may safely indulge foolish fantasies from the safe distance of 2,000 miles, Israel must confront conditions as they really exist.

The basic blunder lying beneath Macron’s pronouncement is that he seeks to recognize a Palestinian state that does not exist. A “state” is a government that exercises sovereignty over a certain people within a certain territory. The only Palestinian entity that fits that description (or did, from 2006 to 2023) is Hamas in Gaza. But Macron insisted on the “demilitarization of Hamas” (again, translated), suggesting that Hamas would lose its power in Gaza.

In fact, Macron announced his recognition of Palestinian statehood in a letter to Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority (PA), thus implying that he recognizes the PA as the rightful government of Palestine. The problem is that the dysfunctional PA hardly has the territory, people, or even authority to qualify as a state. The word to describe recognizing something that doesn’t exist is hallucination.

Indeed, Macron effectively admits that the alleged Palestinian state is a figment of his imagination. “We must build the State of Palestine,” he urges, and “ensure its viability.” Ah, so the state does not exist now and cannot exist on its own. Furthermore, he declares, “we must … ensure that, by accepting its demilitarization and fully recognizing Israel, it contributes to the security of all in the Middle East.” With this line, Macron even projected his own desires onto the PA. The PA has never agreed to demilitarize or recognize the state of Israel, and it has repeatedly refused to accept deals that would offer it a state alongside Israel.

By re-introducing an approach to Middle East peace that has already proven unworkable so many times before, Macron leaves himself open to the charge that he is “doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.” By presenting this tried-and-failed strategy as the only alternative, Macron exhibits narrow-minded blinders that seem to function as an irrational article of faith — not a trait of great statesmen.

“I’m not surprised that something like that would come from France, from Macron,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said on “This Week on Capitol Hill.” “I’ve never been a two-state solution advocate because … I just don’t think it’s feasible right now, as demonstrated on October 7th. You can’t divide Israel and put … as a close neighbor, a group that wants to eliminate their neighbor.”

War in Gaza

Macron’s solution to end the war in Gaza is similarly short-sighted. “We must immediately implement a ceasefire, release all hostages, and provide massive humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza,” he demanded. What does he think Israel has been trying to do for the past two years? “The international community, with these types of stunts … are not helping bring this conflict in Gaza to a conclusion,” said FRC President Tony Perkins.

The primary sticking point is that Hamas refuses to release the hostages, and a permanent ceasefire would remove any leverage Israel has to force them to do so. The secondary sticking point is that Hamas routinely robs aid convoys, preventing it from reaching the people of Gaza. The goals Macron articulated align with Israel’s war objectives, but he imagines he could achieve them by snapping his fingers. Snap away, Mr. Macron, and Godspeed!

Rewarding Terrorists

Unfortunately, despite tacitly endorsing Israel’s cause and condemning that of Hamas, Macron’s actions only serve to bolster the cause of Hamas by driving home the point that terror attacks on Israel will be rewarded with greater international recognition for Palestine. “This reckless decision only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace,” responded Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Thursday. “It is a slap in the face to the victims of October 7th.”

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz congratulated Macron on awarding “a prize for the Hamas murderers and rapists that committed the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.”

Macron’s “announcement this week compounded a problem and made things much worse,” agreed U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee. “We’ve been working on some very touchy issues between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and we were not there yet. We were moving in the direction. And what he did this week blew it all off the table.”

Huckabee had nothing but mockery for Macron. “What he should do is just give a part of the French Riviera” to the PA, “because he never said where this nation needs to be,” Huckabee joked. “If one nation can just declare another place on the earth to be a state, then I think it would be fitting if the U.K. [declared] France to be a British colony — why not?”

The French are likely touchy about Huckabee calling their sovereignty into question, as any nation-state would be. But why does France think its recognition of a nonexistent Palestinian state within Israel’s borders is any less offensive to Israel? “A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it,” declared Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Israeli Response

In fact, the Israeli Knesset did take offense. They responded to Macron on Wednesday by passing a (nonbinding) resolution calling for the annexation of Judea and Samaria in a rare bipartisan vote of 71-3.

“When Europe and other areas of the world decide they’re going to start telling Israel that [they’re] going to let Hamas stay in Gaza, or that [they’re] going to declare unilaterally a Palestinian state, the reaction in Israel is not to surrender,” Huckabee observed. “What happened in the Knesset this week was a message that should be understood not only in the Palestinian Authority … but it ought to be a message to the Europeans: that, when you go out there, and you start pushing Israel to surrender, their response is going to be the same.”

Negotiation Cooldown

Effects from Macron’s decision even cascaded to derail the very ceasefire negotiations he endorsed. After aggressive new demands from Hamas, American and Israeli diplomats in Qatar packed up shop and headed home. White House envoy Steve Witkoff complained that Hamas’s response “shows a lack of desire to reach a ceasefire,” leading the U.S. to seek “alternative options” to bring the hostages home.

“Hamas has never been serious about a peace agreement. They’ve never been serious about relenting on their hatred of Jews and Israel,” reflected Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) on “Washington Watch.” “All they’re doing is playing for time. It’s why they took the hostages as leverage. They don’t plan on giving them up.”

“That is the reality of who Hamas is,” he added. “The sooner we understand and recognize and acknowledge and accept that, I think the better off we’ll be. While I would like a different outcome, it’s simply not realistic with the ideology of this barbaric, religious, anti-West, anti-Israel, anti-Christianity group of people.”

As far as Israel is concerned, talks “did not collapse,” reported Axios. Negotiators merely withdrew to “shake up” negotiations and put additional pressure on Hamas. Of course, it helps Israel’s standing with the Trump administration if it maintains a posture that is open to negotiation. But the prospect for a long-term peace with Hamas — or any replacement Palestinian state within the borders of Israel — is slim to none. Even for the short-term, the prospects for peace are severely damaged by silly stunts like the one played by President Macron.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Macron’s Palestine Gambit

Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing: The Stealth Islamization of America

Israeli Arabs are Privileged to Live in Freedom — Watch and Learn!

Islam Demands Unconditional Surrender

The Integration Trap: Erasing Kurdish Autonomy In Syria’s Reconstruction

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.

As Syrian Ceasefire Begins, Experts Warn Trump Admin. to Proceed with Caution

July 23, 2025/in Culture War, Elections, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Social Issues, Socialism, Techno-Fascism, Terrorism, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

A shaky ceasefire in southern Syria between warring Islamic factions appears to be holding after deadly violence erupted last week in the district of Suwayda, which provoked Israel to launch a series of strikes to protect the Druze minority in the region. Experts remain wary of the ability of the new Syrian government, with its roots in Islamist extremism, to maintain stability in the country.

On Sunday, reports indicated that an agreement orchestrated by the Syrian government for the Druze and Bedouin tribes to cease hostilities was reached, with no reported violence occurring as of Sunday. The violence began a week ago after a Druze merchant was reportedly abducted on the road to Damascus. As a result, Druze and Bedouin fighters began an armed conflict that was joined by Syrian government forces, with both sides claiming atrocities have been committed against them. The U.K.-based monitoring organization Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) reported that over 1,120 people have been killed, including 427 Druze fighters and 298 Druze civilians as well as 354 government security personnel and 21 Sunni Bedouin.

The bloody conflict drew the attention of Israel, which launched strikes last week on 160 targets in the region on behalf of the Druze, a 150,000-person minority group within the Jewish state. According to Dr. A.J. Nolte, director of the Institute for Israel Studies at Regent University, the reason behind Israel’s intervention is rooted in a number of factors.

“There are a couple of dynamics, and some of them are emotional in terms of actually domestic politics and policy, and some of them are strategic,” he explained during “Washington Watch” Friday. “… The Druze populations in Galilee have been citizens of Israel for a long time. They are active in the IDF [Israel Defense Forces]. … There are also Druze communities in the Golan Heights, which, of course, Israel annexed in 1967. Those communities in the Golan have been divided from their family members. … [S]o for those Druze in the Golan who have been fairly loyal to Israel, they haven’t necessarily taken citizenship because they don’t want to fight their cousins, but they have been generally loyal. … [S]o these Druze were, let’s just say, very much agitating for Israel to defend their cousins, and many of them were, in fact, going across the border to see family, and also some youth were maybe going to potentially fight alongside the Druze in southern Syria.”

Nolte further detailed a “practical” reason for Israel’s Syria operations. “[T]he Golan Heights are part of Israeli sovereign territory, and so having a little bit of a buffer and having some Druze communities on the Syrian side of the border that would have positive feelings toward Israel provides defense and depth on that northern flank. … I think that one day there can be normalization with Syria, but from the Israeli perspective, hope is not a strategy. The Druze are a known quantity; their loyalty is known. And I think for [Israel], it’s a strategic choice between the Druze and the unknown.”

Meanwhile, a distressing account from the SOHR reported that 194 Druze civilians were “summarily executed by [Syrian] defence and interior ministry personnel.” In addition, 128,000 civilians living in Suwayda have been displaced by the violence, according to the U.N.

Still, the Trump administration is signaling its support of the new Syrian government, saying there is “no Plan B” for stabilizing the country after years of civil war. U.S. envoy Tom Barrack further criticized Israel’s intervention, saying that while the Jewish state has its own prerogative to defend itself, the strikes created “another very confusing chapter” and “came at a very bad time.” He also contended that Syrian authorities “need to be held accountable” for killings of civilians.

Nolte argued that the apparent differences between the U.S. and Israel are likely the result of strategic diplomacy that the Trump administration is attempting to carry out.

“I think we should always keep in mind with President Trump that he has a lot of irons in the fire in the Middle East,” he pointed out. “… [B]y criticizing Israel’s strikes on Damascus, he allows himself to be positioned as sort of an honest broker between Syria and Israel, because if he comes out in support of … Netanyahu’s strikes in Damascus on Syrian military targets … it becomes much more difficult for him to then try to negotiate between Israel and Syria as an honest broker. So I think there’s a lot of careful diplomacy that is going into the distance that appears to be publicly created. … I think Trump is playing Middle Eastern politics and is probably playing the hand he’s been dealt about as well as he can.”

At the same time, experts like John Bolton, who served as national security adviser during the first Trump administration, say that the new Syrian government led by President Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former al-Qaeda member, has much to prove before it can be trusted.

“[I]t’s complicated like many things in the Middle East,” he acknowledged during “This Week on Capitol Hill” over the weekend. “You can say for sure, this new regime in Syria is very anti-Iran. That’s quite important to Israel to cut off the supply of weapons and other equipment to Hezbollah, one of Iran’s terrorist proxies in Lebanon. But the new government in Damascus itself has a history of terrorism. The new government is … saying they’re renouncing it to get better relations with the West. But the treatment of the minority of religious populations in Syria is a very important question.”

Bolton continued, “My personal view is the new regime in Syria has really not proven satisfactorily that it has renounced its terrorist past, and this is important because you don’t want a new Syrian government to consolidate control over the whole territory, including in the northeast, where American allies — Kurdish fighters — are holding approximately 10,000 ISIS terrorist prisoners. We don’t want that to happen unless we’re really sure that this regime wants to turn a page. We don’t need another terrorist government in the Middle East. We don’t need an Afghanistan on the Mediterranean. So I think we should be cautious. I certainly welcome the regime being against Iran, but there are just a significant number of other questions that remain unresolved.”

Bolton, who formerly served as ambassador to the United Nations during the George W. Bush administration, went on to argue that there is much that the Syrian government can do to prove that they are not a threat to the West, including opening the books on the regime of former dictator Bashar al-Assad and booting out Russia.

“I’d like to know … everything in the Assad regime files on American hostages that were taken over the past many years, or the hostages really from anywhere else,” he observed. “I’d like to know about the Assad government’s pursuit of chemical and biological weapons. Open the files. If you’re not a terrorist yourself, you don’t have any need of chemical or biological weapons. Let’s find out where the Assad regime purchased some of the critical elements of that program. And it would be nice as well to kick the Russians out of their naval base at Tartus and their air base in Latakia province in Syria, while we’re at it. So there’s some concrete things the new regime could do, I think, to establish their bona fides. But they haven’t done it yet.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israel’s Debt to the Druze

World Condemns Israel for Preventing Al Qaeda Genocide of Druze

Republican Rep Randy Fine Says People In Gaza Can ‘Starve Away’ Until Hostages Are Released

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.

Gaza Ceasefire Inches Closer, but Israel Remains Committed to Defeating Hamas

July 10, 2025/in Anti-Semitism, Culture War, Iranian influence, Must Read, News, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Social Issues, Socialism, Terrorism, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

Hamas’s genocidal war against Israel is proceeding so poorly that the masters of propaganda have now stooped to throwing grenades at aid workers. On Saturday, America suffered its first casualties in Gaza since Biden’s floating pier fiasco, when terrorists motivated by Hamas’s cash bounties threw grenades at two civilian contractors delivering aid to Gazans through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). Fortunately, the grenades failed to kill their victims, just as Hamas has failed to prevent GHF from delivering more than 60 million free meals to Gazans, thus undermining their authority.

Since Hamas’s militias are pulverized every time they face Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in open combat, the terrorist organization is reverting to familiar terrorist tactics, such as roadside bombs. On Monday night, Hamas killed five IDF soldiers and wounded 14 after remotely detonating three roadside bombs, then opening fire on forces who arrived to rescue the wounded. In late June, a Hamas militant killed seven IDF soldiers after throwing a bomb inside their armored vehicle. Since Israel ended its 12-day ceasefire with Iran, at least 17 Israeli soldiers have been killed in Gaza.

Such tactics and attrition may remind Americans of the circumstances that American soldiers faced as they tried to maintain order in Iraq after the downfall of Saddam Hussein. Some polls suggest that Israelis are also growing tired of a seemingly endless struggle, with around 70% of Israelis now supporting an end to the war in exchange for the release of all hostages.

At the same time, Israel’s campaign to clear and hold Gazan territory has gone relatively well. The IDF said on Friday that it now holds operational control over approximately two-thirds (65%) of the Gaza Strip. Whether the IDF presses through the remaining portion of Gaza, or Israel strikes a deal with Hamas, the time is ripe to hammer out a resolution to the war in Gaza.

On Tuesday morning, a senior Israeli official told reporters in Qatar that negotiators had already settled 80% to 90% of the terms for a new ceasefire. According to an Egyptian official, Hamas would release 10 living hostages and 20 dead hostages during the 60-day ceasefire. Hamas also agreed to hold no public humiliation spectacles before releasing them.

At first, Hamas objected to the ongoing operation of GHF in Gaza, since its operation discredits the terrorist organization, and the terror group cannot plunder its aid. But the two sides have reportedly struck a compromise, under which the U.N. and Palestinian Red Crescent will lead aid operations, but GHF would continue to operate.

Remaining areas of disagreement reportedly include the ongoing presence of IDF inside Gaza and the prospect for the ceasefire to turn into a permanent peace. “Israel wants Hamas gone. Hamas wants to retain power. So, right there, you get this conflict,” analyzed Family Research Council President Tony Perkins.

Of course, the more fundamental reason behind both Israel’s wish to expel Hamas and Hamas’s wish to cling to power is that Hamas is unwaveringly committed to the annihilation of Israel — as they demonstrated on October 7, 2023.

“The single biggest obstacle standing in the way of this [peace] is Hamas, and particularly Hamas’s possession of hostages, because the hostages are literally the only leverage Hamas has,” said Regent University professor A.J. Nolte on “Washington Watch” Tuesday. “The desire of the Israeli people is to bring them home … but they also recognize that, any deal you make, Hamas has a very high likelihood of breaking.”

Thus, the question persists of who will govern Gaza after Israel’s war with Hamas ends. “History will tell us that evil will fill a void there in the Middle East very rapidly,” Perkins predicted. “We’ve seen that happen before.”

The aforementioned Egyptian official said the current ceasefire proposal would “put Gaza under a group of Palestinians without political affiliations known as the Community Support Committee,” summarized The Times of Israel. Yet Israel is “not talking about giving up land this time,” Perkins pointed out. Although Netanyahu is willing that “Palestinians should have all the powers of governance,” he said, “Israel would have to retain control of security over Gaza,” which rules out the classic two-state solution.

During his trip to Washington, D.C. on Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also endorsed President Trump’s proposal to relocate the current population and turn the Gaza Strip into a luxury resort. “They want to give the Palestinians a better future,” he suggested. “I think we’re getting close to finding several countries [where they could go]. I think this will give them the freedom to choose. Palestinians should have it, and I hope we can secure it.”

Negotiations in Qatar have continued as Netanyahu’s stay in Washington enters its third day. After a Monday dinner meeting, a senior Israeli official said there was “full trust” and “total coordination” between American and Israeli leaders.

Israel has made some concessions, including a redrawn proposal to partially withdraw IDF troops from Gaza, which Arab diplomats attribute to U.S. pressure. Yet Israel has not budged on its core requirements, which include no permanent end to the war until Hamas is thrown out of Gaza.

Israel will only accept a future vision for Gaza in which “there is no more Hamas,” a senior official said Tuesday. “It has to lay down its weapons. Its people have given up. The leaders have been exiled. Another force has taken over the territory and prevents the use of weapons.”

When the remnants of Hamas’s battalions have exchanged any hope of victory for random attacks on aid workers distributing food to Gazans, the final expulsion of Hamas will be good for Gazans too.

AUTHOR

Joshua Arnold

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

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.

D.C. Murder of Jewish Couple: ‘This Is a Major Watershed Moment’

May 27, 2025/in Anti-Semitism, Courts & Law, Culture War, Elections, Featured, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, Marxism, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Radical Islamic Terrorism, Religion, Social Issues, Terrorism, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Family Research Council

It may have been the 593rd day of the conflict in Gaza — but last Wednesday, the war came to America. In a nightmarish attack on the streets of D.C., the hatred that’s been boiling under the surface spilled over, taking the lives of a young couple who will never have the chance to grow old together. “Instead of walking you down the aisle,” Israeli Embassy spokesman Tal Naim wrote mournfully, “we are walking with you to your graves.”

Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim were casualties of a battle with no real ground forces, no weapons system, no command structure. But it’s a force that a growing number of countries — including the United States — are desperately trying to overcome: anti-Semitism.

“I did it for Palestine,” the shooter told police officers at the Capital Jewish Museum, where the two embassy workers’ bodies lay outside — the deliberate targets of a man who was born and raised in America. They were a handful of days away from going to Jerusalem to meet his parents. Sarah’s own mother, Nancy, didn’t know Yaron was planning to propose until the entire world realized he never would.

She was two days away from flying to D.C. to watch her daughter’s goldendoodle Andy while they were away. When she saw the news alert about the shooting, Nancy hurried to open the locator app and check her daughter’s location. “I pretty much already knew,” she told The New York Times. “I was hoping to be wrong.” Still reeling, Sarah’s dad admitted, “The ironic part is that we were worried for our daughter’s safety in Israel. But she was murdered three days before going.”

Like so many people in disbelief, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins could only shake his head. “This is not something I expected here on the streets of America. I’ll be very frank.” The day after the killings rocked the Western world, he sat down with Elan Carr, CEO of the Israeli American Council and former U.S. special envoy to monitor and combat anti-Semitism.

“This is more than just another incident,” Carr stressed. “This is a major watershed moment in this fight.” As a nation and a world, he underscored, “We have to fight against Jew hatred. We have to understand how dangerous it is. We have to understand how prevalent it is. And we have to understand where this comes from. And when you look at [the shooter Elias] Rodriguez’s background and you look at the ideological indoctrination [that he experienced] to get to this point, it’s very clear that we’ve got a real fight on our hands, and we need to stop the indoctrination of Americans in anti-American, anti-Western, and anti-Semitic values that contradict the very spiritual DNA of our civilization.”

In the days following the attack, larger cities like New York and D.C. are on high alert, promising a bigger police presence around synagogues and other Jewish institutions. The greatest mistake, most believe, is becoming complacent. “I hate to say it,” Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) told Perkins on “This Week on Capitol Hill,” but I think oftentimes we have become numb to these things happening internationally and certainly in the Middle East. But we [should be] completely shocked that they happen in the nation’s capital, right here in the United States of America.”

The Pennsylvania congressman, like so many others, blames the anti-Jewish sentiment taking over college campuses. Here’s a person, he said of the shooter, who “grows up in America and is willing to assassinate and execute Jews on the streets of America.” It’s unfathomable. But then, he lamented, “We have accommodated this global intifada, the calls for ‘Free Palestine,’” he warned. “And this is the result of that. This is the next phase of that. The radical leftist anti-Semitic movement is robust around the world, and it has unfortunately come home to America.”

Let’s be clear, Carr wanted people to know. “‘Free Palestine’ is not a pro-Palestinian statement. It is an anti-Semitic call for genocide against the Jewish people. That’s what that is. And we have to understand that when Americans are indoctrinated in anti-Semitic genocidal hate, they are being ruined. A generation of American kids [is] going to be ruined and raised in a culture of violence and aspiration to jihad,” he paused, “which is what we saw. And so, we’ve got to fight this indoctrination of America’s young people.”

Above all, he emphasized, “This has to be a unifying moment. We have to understand that all of us are in the crosshairs, and we are facing a despicable, violent, evil enemy that is bloodthirsty. We saw that on October 7th. We saw that on October 8th. And the global reaction of glee and joy at the murder of 1,200 Jews with medieval barbarity. And we see it today … in the United States.”

This is all in the shadows of the current Iranian talks, Perry reminded people. “And we know that Iran continues to stoke the flames.” This tragedy, he insisted, “just hints at the urgency of making sure that not only does this rhetoric stop and these actions stop, but that the potential for mass global atrocities” at the hands of monsters like Iran, Hamas, and their proxies “also stop.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

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

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Bars Harvard from Admitting Foreign Students amid Rise in Anti-Americanism, Anti-Semitism

How Did America Reach Level 5 Anti-Semitism?

Jew-Hatred Is Not Imaginary

‘Tyranny in Disguise’: Will Democracy Survive in Europe?

Illegal Immigrant Arrested For Alleged Jet Ski Hit-And-Run That Killed Teenager

Secretary of State Marco Rubio: “Adolf Hitler dreamed of a world without Jews, an idea he shares with Hamas.”

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.

Tag Archive for: radical Islam

War in Gaza

Rewarding Terrorists

Israeli Response

Negotiation Cooldown