Saving Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan from Hamas and the Europeans - Fred Fleitz

 

by Fred Fleitz

Trump’s Gaza peace plan, once doubted, swiftly freed all surviving Israeli hostages — a major win now threatened by Hamas’s resistance to disarmament and European meddling

 

Despite some setbacks, President Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan has been an unprecedented success because it quickly achieved its most important objective: the release of all live Israeli hostages held by Hamas. The U.S. and its Arab allies are working hard to pressure Hamas to agree to implement the rest of the deal to achieve a lasting Middle East peace. Trump officials will also be pressing European states to fully support the plan and not undermine it.

The quick release of the Israeli hostages was considered impossible just a few weeks ago and reflected the high priority that President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu placed on quickly saving the lives of these hostages while hammering out the details of other aspects of the agreement later.

The agreement also includes a cease-fire and a humanitarian aid surge in the first stage. Both were achieved, but they are at risk due to Hamas’s attacks on Israeli forces and its failure to return all the bodies of deceased hostages.

After Israel’s recent retaliation against Hamas’s violations of the cease-fire with heavy airstrikes on October 29, Israeli officials said they were resuming the cease-fire. Hamas handed over two bodies the next day, which it claimed were the remains of deceased Israeli hostages.

Hamas is resisting critical security-related elements of Phase Two of the peace plan. Hamas leaders have not given a clear answer on whether their forces will disarm. Some are insisting that Hamas fighters must be permitted to keep their “personal weapons.” In addition, the quick action by Hamas fighters to occupy the 45% of Gaza evacuated under the plan by Israel Defense Forces and their subsequent execution of supposed collaborators in these areas does not bode well for whether Hamas will ever agree to disarm and cede control of these areas to an International Stabilization Force (ISF).

Hamas leaders are also bickering with Arab mediators over the Phase Two provisions on post-war administration of Gaza and the ISF. Under the peace plan, Hamas is to play no role in these efforts, and the Palestinian Authority will be included only after it reforms. Hamas is insisting on a post-war role in governing Gaza and wants a so-called “inclusive Palestinian national framework” that includes all Palestinian factions, including Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, to negotiate post-war governance and security agreements. Hamas also rejects the ISF because it claims it will be a pawn of the United States and Israel, even though this force is expected to be composed of a neutral Palestinian police and troops from Egypt, Indonesia, Azerbaijan, several other Muslim states, and possibly Turkey.  In addition, Hamas leaders have also demanded that the ISG only be deployed on Gaza’s borders with Israel.

Hamas is under intense pressure from Arab states, especially Qatar and Turkey, to drop these objections to the peace plan. Given how significantly Iran, Hamas’s principal sponsor, has been weakened and the solid support for the peace plan by Arab states, Hamas leaders are isolated in their resistance to the plan. In addition, President Trump has been clear that if Hamas refuses to disarm and cooperate with the peace plan, the United States will support Israel continuing the war to destroy Hamas.

A significant obstacle to implementing the rest of the 20-point plan and convincing Hamas to disarm is the delay in the deployment of the International Stabilization Force. Several states are resisting volunteering troops for the ISG because they do not want to get involved in a war with Hamas. Some states have indicated that their forces will not forcibly disarm Hamas. Others have said they will not participate in the ISF unless Hamas agrees to cooperate with it in advance.

In addition, the Israeli government wants a veto over which states participate in the ISF and reportedly has ruled out troops from Turkey and Qatar.

Axios reported on October 30 that the U.S. has been involved in sensitive talks to establish the ISF and hopes to have a plan ready in the next few weeks. U.S. Central Command is taking the lead in drafting the plan, which will include a new Palestinian police force that will be trained and vetted by the U.S., Jordan, and Egypt, and troops from Arab and Muslim countries. Although the plan reportedly will call for deploying the ISF throughout Gaza with Hamas’s support, if Hamas refuses to agree to the force, the ISF will initially be deployed to the southern area of Gaza that Hamas does not control to create a safe zone for rebuilding, according to the Axios report.

The peace plan also faces problems from counterproductive messages by some Western European leaders who primarily want to use it as a way to advance the creation of an independent Palestinian state instead of first pressuring Hamas to solidify the cease-fire, disarm, and halt its attacks against Israel.

Some European leaders also strongly disagree with excluding the Palestinian Authority from the interim governance of Gaza and the ISF without reform, because they claim reforms are unnecessary. One European diplomat told the author last weekend that his government will refuse to participate in the peace process under the 20-point plan unless the Palestinian Authority is immediately and fully involved in this process.

These positions by European leaders to second-guess and revise the fragile 20-point plan are not going to succeed because European states were not involved in negotiating the agreement, and the plan can be implemented without them. However, any public calls to change the plan by the UK, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and other European states will embolden Hamas’s leaders to make similar demands and refuse to cooperate with it.

During his visit to Israel last week, Vice President JD Vance said the cease-fire was “going better than expected” and warned that “if Hamas does not cooperate, it will be obliterated.” I believe this is the correct assessment and reflects that.

Trump administration officials knew Hamas was unlikely to fully comply with the agreement, if it complied at all.

But we’re not to that point yet. A shaky cease-fire continues to hold. Hamas just turned over more bodies of hostages. Qatar and Egypt are pressuring Hamas to disarm and cooperate with the peace deal. U.S. officials are working to organize and deploy the ISF. This needs to be done as soon as possible. And I am certain that Trump officials are telling European officials to keep their complaints about the peace plan to themselves.

The Trump 20-point peace plan is a bold initiative to resolve a complex dispute that goes back decades. Its complete success was always a long shot. But the priority of this plan was freeing the remaining hostages, which has been achieved. If Hamas refuses to disarm and continues to violate the cease-fire, Israel will resume the war with America’s support.

***

Fred Fleitz previously served as National Security Council chief of staff, a CIA analyst, and a House Intelligence Committee staff member. He is the vice chair of the America First Policy Institute’s Center for American Security.

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2025/10/31/saving-trumps-gaza-peace-plan-from-hamas-and-the-europeans/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

New York’s Deal with the Devil - Stephen Soukup

 

by Stephen Soukup

New York is poised to make its own Faustian bargain—selling its soul for “free” perks and socialist promises that will cost the city far more than it can ever afford to pay.

 

 

One of the best-known legends in the Western tradition is the story of Faust, a brilliant scholar who becomes disillusioned with the limits of man’s knowledge and experiences and, as a result, sells his soul to the devil in exchange for extraordinary power, insight, and earthly pleasures. The German-speaking world is most familiar with the story as retold in an epic drama by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, considered one of the greatest works in all of German literature, while English speakers are likely most familiar with the version—“Dr. Faustus”—produced nearly two centuries earlier by Christopher Marlowe. Gen-Xers (like me) are, of course, most familiar with the version told in 1986 by screenwriter John Fusco, starring the Karate Kid himself as an aspiring blues guitarist and the great Steve Vai as the devil’s guitarist.

The moral of the story—in German folklore and in Marlowe’s telling—is that arrogance and craving for temporal pleasures and rewards are damning vices. They push man to make stupid choices, to underestimate his worth (and the worth of all humanity), and to risk full-blown tragedy for comparatively small gains. The contemporary terms “deal with the devil” and “Faustian bargain” are universally understood to represent foolish and ultimately destructive decisions made by those lacking foresight and wisdom.

Naturally, I mention all of this today for a reason—a couple, actually. First, residents of New York City go to the polls this coming Tuesday and, from all indications, are expected to make their own Faustian bargain. They are expected to elect the avowed Socialist and not-so-avowed-but-still-obvious Islamist Zohran Mamdani as their next mayor. They are expected to hand leadership of the financial center of the universe over to a Marxist, to turn the keys of the city in which the most horrific terrorist attack ever occurred to someone who campaigned with an unindicted co-conspirator on the first World Trade Center bombing, and to stake their collective future on the words and deeds of a spoiled, dishonest nepo-baby who has never had a real job in his life.

They are willing to do all of this in return for a few baubles: free bus rides, rent-controlled apartments, city-owned grocery stores, and an ever-higher minimum wage—and, of course, the social status that goes along with such virtue-signal-voting. Even if these policies were deliverable and not likely to unleash financial havoc, they would still be almost entirely irrelevant in the grand plan to “make NYC affordable.” None of them will do anything to help the city’s most vulnerable, those whom Mamdani claims to want to help. At the risk of mixing my soul-selling literary metaphors, one can’t help but be reminded of Thomas More’s line (delivered to Richard Rich), “Why, Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world… but for Wales?”

The second reason I bring up Faust today is because the deal with the devil that New Yorkers are about to make is not merely foolish and short-sighted but is also, in a very real way, out of character for the American people. Goethe’s version of the story of Faust is different from the traditional folklore version as well as Marlowe’s interpretation. It is more complicated and nuanced. More to the point, it helps explain the differences between the animating zeitgeist of the far left that has captured the Democratic Party and will be electing Mamdani, and the more foundational American spirit.

The key difference between Goethe’s Faust and the traditional character is that the former is skeptical of the promises made by Mephistopheles. The folklore version of Faust is a vain and sinful man. Likewise, Marlowe’s Faustus is arrogant and selfish. He sells his soul for a fixed term, enjoys the pleasures and power he is granted, and, in the end, is hauled off to hell. Goethe’s character, by contrast, views the deal with the devil as a test, one he does not believe that he can fail. After challenging the devil to show him gifts and treasures that are truly extraordinary, and after Mephistopheles promises to do so, Goethe’s Faust proclaims:

When, to the Moment then, I say:

‘Ah, stay a while! You are so lovely!’

Then you can grasp me: then you may,

Then, to my ruin, I’ll go gladly!

Then they can ring the passing bell,

Then from your service you are free,

The clocks may halt, the hands be still,

And time be past and done, for me!

In other words, Goethe’s Faust is restless and constantly striving. While he is foolish enough to presume that he will never have to make good on his promise to Mephistopheles, he is also eager enough to improve himself and to expand his knowledge and abilities that he believes firmly that temporal perfection is impossible to achieve, that the devil’s promises are hollow and cannot produce true satisfaction for him. He knows that, whatever the devil’s powers, man can always strive for better and continue to work toward personal and moral improvement.

Socialism, communism, Marxism, and leftism—whatever you call it—are fantastical, millenarian ideologies. It promises that which cannot be achieved and replaces religion, faith, and constant striving with shallow earthly comforts. In the end, of course, it delivers nothing of the sort. Indeed, in the end, it is far more likely to deliver hell on earth than anything remotely approximating paradise.

When that happens, of course, the left simply shifts blame, claims that others are responsible for its sins, and does nothing to express regret or remorse. It wallows in the hell it has created and begs for more.

The American spirit—which, as I have noted before, largely eschews true leftism—is nothing like that. It is much more akin to the spirit of Goethe’s Faust, constantly seeking to improve itself, even as it acknowledges that perfection is impossible in this world.

Fittingly, in Goethe’s version of the story, Faust is saved by his restlessness and spirit, as well as the constant pleading of his betrayed love interest, Gretchen. He does, eventually, utter the words that should trigger his payment of the contract with Mephistopheles, but because he does so unselfishly (seeing the vision of the better life that his efforts have produced for others), he is redeemed.

New Yorkers are likely to make a terrible deal this Tuesday. Whether they will, at some point, have the wisdom to realize this and to work to fix what they’ve broken remains to be seen. Given the influence of the left, however, I am dubious. 

Stephen R. Soukup is the Director of The Political Forum Institute and the author of The Dictatorship of Woke Capital (Encounter, 2021, 2023)

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2025/11/01/new-yorks-deal-with-the-devil/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iranian Regime Drops Mask: Open March Toward Nuclear Bomb - Majid Rafizadeh

 

by Majid Rafizadeh

When Iran claims now that the JCPOA is "dead," it is simply acknowledging that it never had any intention of honoring it in the first place. While the regime publicly claimed to respect the deal, in reality, it was quietly expanding its capabilities, building advanced centrifuges, and enriching uranium far beyond the levels needed for peaceful nuclear energy.

 

• Iran's regime has officially declared that it will not abide by any nuclear limits. It is finally admitting out in the open that its ultimate objective has always been to become a nuclear-armed state.

• Its announcement... represents the formal end of Iran's long-standing campaign of deception, in which it pretended to cooperate with international nuclear agreements while secretly expanding its program.

• When Iran claims now that the JCPOA is "dead," it is simply acknowledging that it never had any intention of honoring it in the first place. While the regime publicly claimed to respect the deal, in reality, it was quietly expanding its capabilities, building advanced centrifuges, and enriching uranium far beyond the levels needed for peaceful nuclear energy.

• The idea that Iran can be persuaded through diplomacy or economic incentives to change its behavior has failed time and again.

• The first and most crucial step is to reestablish deterrence.

• In addition to deterrence, the West needs immediately to reimpose and expand sanctions and secondary sanctions -– announcing that countries that do business with Iran may no longer do business with the United States. Unfortunately, Europe remains far behind.

• Appeasement and indecision will only embolden Tehran further. The Iranian regime is going full nuclear, and the West needs to act — swiftly, decisively, and with unity — before removing Iran's nuclear program becomes difficult.

Iran's announcement to the world that it will no longer respect any laws, treaties, or limits on its nuclear program is, in essence, a declaration of war. The regime has always wanted nuclear weapons. The West must tighten sanctions, monitor every step of Iran's program, and maintain credible military options. Pictured: Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian looks on as a 'Qasem Soleimani' missile is displayed during a military parade in Tehran, on September 21, 2024. (Photo by Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images)

Iran's regime has officially declared that it will not abide by any nuclear limits. It is finally admitting out in the open that its ultimate objective has always been to become a nuclear-armed state.

Its announcement is not merely a change of rhetoric; it represents the formal end of Iran's long-standing campaign of deception, in which it pretended to cooperate with international nuclear agreements while secretly expanding its program.

Since the Islamic Republic of Iran's establishment in 1979, its leadership has viewed nuclear weapons as a guarantee of regime survival and a means of projecting power across the Middle East and further. For decades, Iran has cloaked its ambitions under the banner of "peaceful nuclear energy." Now, it has stepped out from behind the curtain. It is no longer pretending to follow the rules of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or any agreement that limits its activities. Iran is signaling to the world that it intends to move forward, unrestricted and unapologetic, toward the finish line — acquiring nuclear weapons.

This is not the first time the Iranian regime has defied international agreements and nuclear limits. Iran has been in violation of its commitments for years, including under the Obama administration's Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the "Iran nuclear deal." The JCPOA, which was presented by its architects as a tool to constrain Iran, in practice provided the regime with international legitimacy, economic relief, and sufficient time and resources to strengthen its nuclear and ballistic missile programs. When Iran claims now that the JCPOA is "dead," it is simply acknowledging that it never had any intention of honoring it in the first place. While the regime publicly claimed to respect the deal, in reality, it was quietly expanding its capabilities, building advanced centrifuges, and enriching uranium far beyond the levels needed for peaceful nuclear energy. Even as Iran's officials posed as partners in diplomacy, their scientists were working tirelessly to bring the country closer to a nuclear weapons threshold.

The Obama-era nuclear deal, hailed by some as a diplomatic breakthrough, was, in reality, a gift from US President Barack Obama to the Iranian regime. The deal gave Iran access to billions of dollars in frozen assets, lifted crippling sanctions, and restored its access to the global financial system.

Before the deal, Iran was on its knees economically, largely due to the firm sanctions imposed by the Bush administration. These sanctions had weakened the regime's economy, restricted its oil exports, and reduced its ability to fund its regional proxies. The JCPOA reversed that process. Once sanctions were lifted, Iran began exporting oil again, receiving foreign investments, and trading with Asia and Europe.

This influx of money not only revived the regime but emboldened it. Instead of using its newfound wealth to improve the lives of Iranians, the leadership poured those billions into its military, its nuclear weapons program and the ballistic missiles to deliver them, and its network of Middle East terrorist groups, including Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Hamas.

Years later, the consequences of that deal became tragically clear. Iran's funding and support for its proxy militias directly contributed to instability, bloodshed, and the terrorism of Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis. The Iranian regime, enriched and emboldened by the West's concessions, was able to accelerate its nuclear advancements while simultaneously fueling violent movements across the region. Hamas's October 7, 2023 massacre of Israelis was just one of the many outcomes of Tehran's empowerment after the nuclear deal.

By the time international inspectors raised alarms, Iran was already only a few weeks away from acquiring the material necessary for a nuclear weapon — and this happened under the very deal that was supposed to stop it. This pattern should serve as a powerful lesson for policymakers everywhere: appeasing tyrannical regimes does not bring peace; it induces greater danger. Making deals with the Iranian regime is no different from negotiating with Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler. It is a fatal illusion to believe that a totalitarian system built on deceit, violence and religious extremism can overnight become a trustworthy partner.

Now Iran has made it official — it will not respect international rules, it will not follow any limits, and it will pursue its nuclear weapons ambitions with complete disregard for the global order. Iran has openly stated that it will not honor its obligations, meaning it is preparing to use everything it has — its uranium stockpiles, advanced centrifuges, and technical expertise — to build nuclear weapons. It will not do so alone. Iran has devoted friends in what can only be described as the "dictators' club": China, Russia, and North Korea. These regimes have increasingly been cooperating closely, sharing military technology, intelligence, and political support. Russia has already declared that it will not recognize the reimposition of United Nations sanctions — the so-called "snapback" mechanism — against Iran. In other words, the world's authoritarian powers are closing ranks, ignoring international law, and giving Iran the green light to cross the nuclear threshold.

Faced with this reality, the West needs finally to wake up to the danger of an Iran with nuclear weapons. The idea that Iran can be persuaded through diplomacy or economic incentives to change its behavior has failed time and again. The West cannot afford a nuclear-armed Iran, which would not only endanger Israel and other Middle East states but destabilize the entire global order. A nuclear-armed theocracy that sponsors terrorism would trigger a regional arms race, push Saudi Arabia and Turkey toward developing their own nuclear weapons, and place the world on the edge of catastrophe.

The first and most crucial step is to reestablish deterrence. The United States and its allies must make it clear that the military option is on the table. Any evidence that Iran is advancing its nuclear weapons program should be met with decisive action, including targeted strikes on nuclear facilities if necessary. The regime must understand that the world will not tolerate its nuclear blackmail.

In addition to deterrence, the West needs immediately to reimpose and expand sanctions and secondary sanctions -– announcing that countries that do business with Iran may no longer do business with the United States. Unfortunately, Europe remains far behind. The European Union needs to stop providing diplomatic cover for Tehran and instead adopt a unified strategy of maximum pressure. This means expelling Iranian diplomats, closing down Iranian cultural centers and embassies that serve as fronts for intelligence operations, cutting off trade, and freezing all assets connected to the regime. The message must be clear: there will be no business, no legitimacy, and no cooperation with a government that defies international law and threatens global peace.

At the same time, the West would do well to increase its support for the Iranian people, who continue to resist their dictatorship through protests and civil disobedience. Moral and political support for the Iranian population, even in words, can send a strong signal that the world stands with them, not with their oppressors.

Iran's announcement to the world that it will no longer respect any laws, treaties, or limits on its nuclear program is, in essence, a declaration of war. The regime has always wanted nuclear weapons. The West must tighten sanctions, monitor every step of Iran's program, and maintain credible military options. Appeasement and indecision will only embolden Tehran further. The Iranian regime is going full nuclear, and the West needs to act — swiftly, decisively, and with unity — before removing Iran's nuclear program becomes difficult.

• Follow Majid Rafizadeh on X (formerly Twitter)

 

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a political scientist, Harvard-educated analyst, and board member of Harvard International Review. He has authored several books on the US foreign policy. He can be reached at dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22021/iran-march-toward-nuclear-bomb

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Comey blames 'ambiguous' question for indictment over alleged lie, but his answer was unequivocal - Steven Richards

 

by Steven Richards

His own FBI often used "process crimes" to get at Trump-allied people, but now James Comey’s lawyers say congressional testimony at the center of ex-FBI director’s indictment was muddied by “confusing” and “ambiguous” questioning.

 

Former FBI Director James Comey is urging a federal court to dismiss the denied charges against him for false testimony to Congress in a 2020 hearing by arguing that the questions he answered were ambiguous. At the same time, a review of Comey’s testimony at the time appears unequivocal.

In a new filing with the Federal District Court in Alexandria, Virginia on Thursday, Comey’s lawyers argued that Sen. Ted Cruz’s questions to Comey were “confusing" and "fundamentally ambiguous.” They said Comey’s response to these questions was “literally true” and therefore cannot support a conviction. 

Comey was indicted by a federal grand jury last month for allegedly lying to Congress when he denied authorizing FBI leaks to the media, Just the News previously reported. Multiple sources told Just the News that Comey had been charged for authorizing his personal adviser and friend Daniel Richman to leak to the press and then misleading the Senate about it.

The grand jury indictment against Comey

The indictment, formulated by the Trump Justice Department and approved by a grand jury, originates from allegations that Comey misled the Senate during his testimony in late September 2020, when he reiterated his May 2017 denial that he had ever authorized an FBI leak of information to the media about the Trump-Russia investigation or Clinton-related investigations. The indictment also alleged that Comey had obstructed Congress by lying to the Senate.

The charges against Comey center around the claim that Richman, who was a special employee of the FBI during the 2016 election, assisted Comey with leaking the so-called “Comey Memos” to the New York Times in 2017 after Comey's firing by President Donald Trump. Richman’s efforts to do so were already public knowledge by 2017. 

The leak was apparently an effort by Comey to prompt the appointment of a special counsel to carry on the bureau’s Trump-Russia investigation, which proved to be baseless. Comey has described Richman as a “friend”to investigators, and Richman also went on to be Comey’s personal attorney. 

At Comey’s direction, records show Richman was made a special government employee in 2015 through early 2017, where he allegedly spoke with the press to help shape news stories in Comey’s favor, although Richman has said Comey never asked him to talk to the press,  Just the News previously reported. 

Comey’s alleged leaking, and Richman’s role in the allegations, were investigated by the FBI’s Arctic Haze and Tropic Vortex classified leaks inquiries, which were reviewed by then-U.S. Attorney John Durham. However, Comey never faced any criminal charges at the time. 

Cozy arrangement with NYT reporter

Earlier this summer, Just the News reported that Comey told FBI agents during one of those internal probes that he used a special conduit to a Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times writer in his bid to polish his image and push for a special prosecutor to take down Trump.

Richman admitted to agents that he often communicated on behalf of Comey with Times reporter Michael Schmidt, whose work was part of the newspaper’s Pulitzer-winning stories on Russia collusion. The goal, Richman told the FBI, was “to correct stories critical” of Comey and the FBI and to “shape future press coverage.”

Just the News also reported this summer that federal prosecutors gathered evidence from more of Comey's top lieutenants that he authorized the leak of classified information to reporters just before the 2016 presidential election but ultimately declined to bring criminal charges. 

Comey's lawyers: "Literally true" answers given

In a 2017 Senate hearing, Comey was asked by senators about whether he personally had been an anonymous source to the media about investigations into either the Trump campaign or the Hillary Clinton email server or whether he authorized anyone else to be one. He categorically denied both counts. 

“Never,” Comey told Sen. Chuck Grassley when asked whether he had been a personal source. “No,” he replied when asked whether he had ever authorized anyone else to leak information to the media. 

Then in a 2020 hearing, Comey doubled down on his testimony. “I stand by the testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017,” Comey told Sen. Ted Cruz when he asked about the ex-director’s prior testimony. 

Comey’s lawyers say that Cruz’s line of questioning was “lengthy” and “confusing.” 

“[After] speaking for more than a minute, Senator Ted Cruz asked Mr. Comey to recall statements he had made three years earlier and to simultaneously address statements that Senator Cruz incorrectly claimed were made by Andrew McCabe, the former Deputy Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI),” Jessica N. Carmichael, one of his lawyers wrote in the Thursday filing.

“Viewed in context, Senator Cruz’s questions cannot form the basis for a violation of Section 1001(a)(2) because they were fundamentally ambiguous. And, regardless, Mr. Comey’s answers to them were literally true,” they later argued. 

A group of university professors filed an amici brief — unusual in a trial court — supporting Comey's motion to dismiss the case, saying, "Mr. Comey’s prosecution poses a grave threat to prosecutorial independence and the rule of law in the United States." The amici's filing was allowed by order of United States District Judge Michael S. Nachmanoff, a Biden appointee.

The court has scheduled a hearing on the dismissal motion for November 5, 2025. 

 

Steven Richards

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/comey-blames-ambiguous-question-indictment-over-alleged-lie-reply-was

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Obamacare's inconvenient truths exposed during shutdown - Amanda Head

 

by Amanda Head

Expert says "When he said, 'If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.' No you couldn't. Obamacare made a lot of those health care plans illegal." Other infirmities of ACA have been laid out, including nebulous allegations of fraud.

 

After years of Democrats telling the American people that former President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act (ACA) was a thriving system, the glaring truth revealed now during the government shutdown is that not only has the ACA resulted in widespread fraud and allegations of kickbacks to insurance companies, the American people are footing the bill for subsidies to hide the fact that Obamacare is broken. 

"Everything Obama told us was a complete lie," E.J. Antoni told John Solomon during a special report on the government shutdown sponsored by the Association of Mature American Citizens. 

Antoni, who serves as chief economist at the Heritage Foundation, continued: "When he said, 'If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.' No you couldn't. Obamacare made a lot of those health care plans illegal. He said, 'If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.' No, it forced a lot of doctors out of business, and it forced a lot of doctors to no longer take most insurance."

President Barack Obama repeatedly promised Americans during the rollout of the ACA — commonly known as Obamacare — that "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor," a claim intended to reassure Americans about the ACA's impact on existing healthcare arrangements. However, millions of people lost access to their preferred and established physicians due to narrowed insurance networks and cancellations of plans which did not comply with the law's new requirements, leading even left-leaning PolitiFact to name it the "Lie of the Year" in 2013.

Insurance companies pocketing profit from subsidies meant for Americans

Rep. Jack Bergman, R-Mich., revealed the latest scandal within Obamacare. Bergman, speaking to Just The News, laid out the timeline for subsidies which were meant to lighten the burden for Americans but when unused, were pocketed by the insurance companies. 

Bergman explained that "In 2010, the Democrats passed the Affordable Care Act. Then in 2014, ACA premium tax credits became available, meant to help families earning 100 to 140% of the federal poverty level - that was designed to help those folks. In 2021, through the ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act), Democrats temporarily extended and expanded those subsidies to everyone, regardless of income, for one year. In 2022, the IRA (Inflation Reduction Act), they extended the expansion again, but only through January 1 of 2026."

Dems let their own deadlines expire

Bergman emphasized that the expiration imposed by Democrats implicitly meant that the extension was not meant to be permanent. That extension expires and is what Democrats have shut down the government over. As Bergman puts it, "They're blaming us, the Republicans, for letting their own temporary extensions expire."

The largest surprise regarding these subsidies, is that they haven't been going directly to patients. They've been going to insurance companies, according to Bergman. "Insurance companies' profits right now are up something like 240+ percent. There's something morally wrong with that. Not only is it shamefully wrong, but morally wrong." 

Bergman did not name any specific insurance companies.

"Millions of these so-called ghost enrollees, people who are technically eligible, but are unaware of it, never use these subsidies. The insurers pocket the difference."

OpenSecrets reported that in 2012, the health insurance industry donated roughly $9.6 million to Democrats. In 2024, the industry donated almost $40 million to Democrats.

Private practices being run out of town

Gone are the days of family doctors operating private practices. 

Based on the most recent data from the American Medical Association (AMA) and other analyses, physicians who practice medicine fully independently (not owned by or affiliated with hospitals, health systems, private equity, or insurers) make up roughly 42-47% of all practicing physicians as of 2024. 

According to The Advisory Board, 2023 data show more than 77% of physicians are employees of hospitals, health systems, or other corporate entities, citing a report from the Physicians Advocacy Institute (PAI).

Industry observers say that the consolidation was vastly accelerated by Obamacare's costly new regulatory burdens, administrative requirements, and reimbursement cuts that made independent practices financially unsustainable for many private-practice physicians.

Americans told ACA would reduce insurance rates, protect unions

Similarly, Obama repeatedly assured Americans that the Affordable Care Act would cause the average family's health insurance premiums to drop by up to $2,500 per year. In reality, premiums rose sharply for many individuals and families, with the Kaiser Family Foundation reporting an increase of over 100% in some individual markets from 2013 to 2017, prompting widespread criticism of Obama's promise as misleading. From 2013 to 2019, the national average premium hike was 129%. 

Adding insult to injury for unions who supported Democratic Party campaigns, including Obama's presidential campaign, Obamacare's mandates hiked premiums for union Taft-Hartley plans by adding costs without exchange subsidies. Those mandates included covering adult children to 26, removing lifetime limits, and requiring essential benefits.

In 2013, leaders from the Teamsters, UFCW, and UNITE-HERE warned these rules would wreck members' benefits and push employers to cut hours.

 

Amanda Head

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/inconvenient-truths-obamacare-exposed-during-shutdown

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Pentagon green lights Tomahawks to Ukraine, decision now with Trump - Jerusalem Post Staff

 

by Jerusalem Post Staff

A new Pentagon assessment stated that gifting Ukraine with the missiles would not negatively impact the US's stockpile, following Trump's hesitancy to give away what "we need to protect our country."

 

U.S. President Donald Trump welcomes Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy at the White House in Washington, DC, US, October 17, 2025.

(photo credit: REUTERS/JONATHAN ERNST)

 

The Pentagon gave the White House permission to send Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, CNN reported on Friday.

The decision now rests in US President Donald Trump’s hands, the report stated, citing three officials familiar with the matter.

 

In October, Trump stated that he was against giving Ukraine the long-range missiles, stating that “we don’t want to be giving away things that we need to protect our country.”

However, the new Pentagon assessment stated that the move would not negatively impact the US’s stockpiles.

 

The Department of War gave its assessment to the president earlier in October before he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The Pentagon is seen from the air in Washington, DC, US, March 3, 2022. (credit: REUTERS/JOSHUA ROBERTS/FILE PHOTO)

 Two European officials familiar with the matter 

Trump told Zelensky in a private meeting that he would not provide Kyiv with the Tomahawks at that point in time.

 

The US president had spoken with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the phone a day prior to his meeting with Zelensky.

 

In the call, Putin said that providing Kyiv with the missiles would damage US-Russia relations.

The missiles were never off the table, officials told CNN, and the administration had plans on how to quickly send them to Ukraine should Trump give the order.

 

But US defense officials are concerned regarding how Ukraine would train and deploy the missiles, sources told CNN.Another sources stated that there were several operational issues that would need to be fixed before Ukraine could use the missiles.

 

The missiles are traditionally launched from ships or submarines, but European officials believe that Ukrainians would be able to figure out a work around to launch them.

The US Army has also developed ground launchers for the misses.

 

Zelenksy wrote in a X/Twitter post Monday that he hopes to expand his countries long range capabilities by January of next year.

“Global sanctions and our pinpoint precision are practically syncing up to end this war on terms fair for Ukraine. All deep-strike goals must be fully locked in by year’s end, including expansion of our long-range footprint.”

Jerusalem Post Staff

Source: https://www.jpost.com/international/article-872346

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

A crumbling empire: Is the Iranian Revolution finally at an end? - opinion - David Ben Basat

 

by David Ben Basat

The struggle between Israel and Iran is not over; it has merely entered a cautious waiting phase. Israel must ensure that Iran never returns to that path again.

 

IRANIAN SUPREME LEADER Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks during a televised address in Tehran in September 2025.

(photo credit: Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/West Asia News Agency/Reuters)

Five years have passed since the assassination of Qassem Soleimani, the man who led the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guards and was one of the most powerful figures in the Middle East. His image became mythic, and his shadow continues to loom over Tehran.

His successor, Gen. Esmail Qaani, appointed by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei immediately after the killing in January 2020, has been trying to preserve the influence of the “martyr” and restore Iran’s regional prestige. Yet, in the reality of a regime exhausted both economically and morally, the Islamic Revolution is barely standing.

Soleimani was not only a military commander; he was a master strategist who knew how to blend diplomacy, psychological warfare, and military power. Qaani, who served as his deputy for years, lacks both the charisma and ability to coordinate among the various Shi’ite militias spread throughout the Middle East.

Iran's crumbling empire

The empire that Soleimani built has begun to crumble. In Iraq, criticism is mounting; in Lebanon, following Hassan Nasrallah’s assassination, Hezbollah’s grip on the country has significantly weakened; in Yemen, there is growing fatigue with Iranian influence that has failed to produce tangible results.

In 2024, Masoud Pezeshkian, a physician by profession, was elected president of Iran. He attempted – without much success – to present a more moderate face for the regime. Pezeshkian speaks of economic reforms and cautious openness toward the West, but he finds himself trapped between two immense centers of power: Supreme Leader Khamenei on one side and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps on the other.

Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian holds up a book as he addresses the 80th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) at the UN headquarters in New York, US, September 24, 2025. (credit: Shannon Stapleton/Reuters)

Pezeshkian understands the people’s yearning for normal lives but is forced to contend with a security establishment that prioritizes ideology over economic survival.

FOR YEARS, Iran’s nuclear ambitions symbolized independence, defiance of the West, and deterrence. The destruction of its nuclear reactors in a precise Israeli-American attack in June 2025 shook the very foundations of that dream. The Natanz, Fordow, and Arak facilities, the core of the project, were obliterated in a sophisticated operation that combined aerial strikes, cyber warfare, and controlled explosions.

Seemingly, this was a strategic collapse. Yet Tehran turned it into a turning point. Rather than abandon the dream of the bomb, the regime portrayed the attack as justification to continue the race. Khamenei declared that “the destruction of the reactors proves why Iran must secure a nuclear deterrent capability at any cost.”

Reality, however, has struck the leaders of this terror state. Iran no longer has a real deterrent infrastructure to rely on. Teams of scientists have scattered, some killed, and the logistical network has collapsed. Even Russia and China – once considered close allies – are keeping their distance. Iran is discovering that its nuclear dream has become a heavy burden, and the balance of terror it sought to create has been replaced by global sanctions.

For Qaani, the destruction of the reactors represents a double failure, both security and strategic. Once promising that “Soleimani’s blood will yield strategic revenge,” he now faces a country that has lost its central deterrent card. The Iranian army continues to attempt to export the revolution through militias, but it is becoming clear that this is not a winning strategy.

The recent attacks on Quds Force headquarters in Damascus and Tehran, and the assassinations of senior figures, including Hezbollah secretary-general Nasrallah, Gen. Mohammad Reza Zahedi, and Iranian commanders in Syria and Lebanon, have demonstrated just how deep Israel’s intelligence penetration runs within the Iranian system.

This is not merely an operational achievement but proof that the regime has lost the sense of immunity that characterized it for decades.

Pezeshkian is now trying to rehabilitate Iran’s international image. To the world, he sends messages of moderation and a desire to return to a new nuclear agreement, yet he is forced to promise “resistance and justice.” The Iranian public does not believe him. Economic reforms have not materialized, and the destruction of the nuclear reactors has become a symbol of national embarrassment and helplessness.

THE ASSASSINATION of Soleimani and the destruction of the reactors – pillars of Iran’s power – mark the beginning of the end for the Shi’ite revolutionary era. A new generation of Iranians no longer views Israel or the United States as an enemy, but rather sees corruption and repression at home as the true adversaries.

For Israel, the strike on the reactors was not merely intended to halt the project and remove an existential threat; it was meant to change the rules of the game. It proved that real deterrence is not built through declarations but through action.

Israel, in coordination with the United States, demonstrated that it is willing to act, even unilaterally, against world powers when its national security is at stake. In doing so, Israel upended Iran’s deadly hand and exposed the weakness of the Iranian regime.

Today, Iran faces a new reality: it has lost its legendary commander, its nuclear reactors, and the trust of its people. Instead of becoming a regional superpower, it is now a nation under global sanctions.

The murderous regime will not abandon its murderous ideology until its people rise up and overthrow the rule of the ayatollahs. The destruction of the reactors did not kill the regime’s dream; they will continue underground, seeking to revive their ambitious nuclear project.

The struggle between Israel and Iran is not over; it has merely entered a cautious waiting phase. Israel must ensure that Iran never returns to that path again.

David Ben Basat is the CEO of Radios 100FM, an honorary consul and deputy dean of the Consular Diplomatic Corps, president of the Israel Radio Communication Association, and a former IDF Radio monitor and NBC correspondent.

Source: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-872230

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Only Muslim soldiers to be allowed to serve as Gaza peacekeepers - Telegraph - Jerusalem Post Staff

 

by Jerusalem Post Staff

Despite plans for former British prime minister Tony Blair to take an administrative role in the Palestinian territory, Ynet reported that no Western countries would be involved in the force.

 

Hamas, Red Cross searching for the remains of deceased hostages in Gaza City, October 28, 2025.

(photo credit: TPS-IL)

The soldiers deployed to Gaza as part of a peacekeeping force will be exclusively Muslim, the Telegraph reported on Friday, citing diplomatic sources.

While the current ceasefire agreement was orchestrated by US President Donald Trump, regional countries will police the Palestinian territory and ensure adherence to the agreement.

The role of the stabilization force is still in discussion, according to the report. It is unclear if the force will be responsible for the disarmament of Hamas or simply policing Gaza once the terror group has relinquished its control.

Which countries will police Gaza?

Jordan’s King Abdullah said earlier this week that he anticipated Amman being one of several Muslim and or Arab countries to play a role in Gaza, though he did not answer whether Jordanian forces would disarm Hamas.

Israeli leadership has also flat-out rejected some nations from playing a role in Gaza, namely Turkey and Qatar, which have diplomatic ties to Hamas. Israel has argued that both Ankara and Doha were founded on the principles of the Muslim Brotherhood, the same Islamist extremist roots as Hamas.

Displaced Palestinian woman Amal Alyan holds the keys to her destroyed home, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, at Al-Shati camp in Gaza City, October 21, 2025. (credit: Ebrahim Hajjaj/Reuters)

Foreign ministers of some Muslim countries will meet in Istanbul on Monday to discuss the Gaza ceasefire and next steps there, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on Friday, voicing concern over whether the ceasefire will continue.

That meeting, to discuss the situation in Gaza, was attended by Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Pakistan and Indonesia.

"The topics being discussed currently are how to proceed to the second stage, the stability force," Fidan said.

Some analysts have speculated that Indonesia, which has thawed its approach to Israel in recent months, will play a role. 

Egypt and the United Arab Emirates are also anticipated to contribute to the force.

Despite plans for former British prime minister Tony Blair to take an administrative role in the Palestinian territory, Ynet reported that no Western countries would be involved in the force.

Jerusalem Post Staff

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/defense-news/article-872312

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

300,000 Orthodox shutter Jerusalem in mass protest against IDF enlistment - David Isaac

 

by David Isaac

The rally, in which protesters prayed and recited Psalms, was sparked by the recent arrests of Jewish seminary students.

 

Hundreds of thousands of ultra-Orthodox Jews attend the "million man" protest against IDF conscription, in Jerusalem, October 30, 2025. Photo by Yonatan Sindel/Flash90.

Israeli police estimated that more than 300,000 haredim from all ultra-Orthodox streams gathered in what was dubbed a “million-man march” at the entrance to Israel’s capital on Thursday to protest efforts to enlist them to the Israel Defense Forces and to condemn arrests by the IDF of yeshiva students, who have ignored enlistment orders.

One death was reported during the demonstration. Menachem Mendel Litzman, 20, fell from a height of about 20 stories at a construction site in Jerusalem. The police said it was an apparent suicide.

The rally, in which protesters prayed and recited Psalms, included participants from the Lithuanian, Chassidic and Sephardic Haredi communities.

Some 2,000 police officers, including Border Police, secured the rally and directed traffic in Jerusalem, which was effectively closed off to traffic during the event. Israel Railways, in coordination with police, shut down Jerusalem’s central train station starting from 12:30 pm on Thursday due to the protests.

Nearly all Israelis agree that haredim must play a larger role in Israel’s national defense, particularly in the aftermath of Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attack. Many Israelis served for months without respite in the Gaza Strip and elsewhere during the subsequent war.

Most Popular

Ben & Jerry’s co-founder scoops up ‘Palestine peace’ sorbet after clash with UnileverOct. 30, 2025

There’s no room for neutrality when it comes to antisemitismOct. 30, 2025

Danon accuses UN of violating mandate in drone shootdownOct. 30, 2025

Ultra-Orthodox have received near-blanket exemptions from military service in what started as a release for about 400 Torah scholars at the state’s establishment. But in June 2024, Israel’s Supreme Court declared that ultra-Orthodox men must be conscripted, effectively ending the decades-long system of exemptions. 

However, of the 19,000 summons issued by early June 2025, only some 5% (996) reported to induction centers. Of those, only 1.2% (232) were conscripted, the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) reported.

In an effort to enforce the law, the IDF began making arrests. The recent arrests of three yeshiva students last week appeared to cross a red line for the haredi community.

Rabbi Dov Landau, a leading figure in Israel’s Lithuanian haredi community, who is currently in the United States, spoke with Rabbi Moshe Hillel Hirsch. Together, they lead the Slabodka yeshiva in Bnei Brak, a haredi city near Tel Aviv.

According to Ynet, Landau said: “I heard that a terrible incident took place in the Land of Israel. Yeshiva students were arrested. It seems to me, and if you think so, [we should] hold a large assembly of many prayers. It can help in every way, and if that’s what you think, then I think it’s the right thing to do right now.”

Among ultra-Orthodox concerns is that conscription will lead to alienation from the community and yeshiva students, once exposed to outside influences, won’t return. They also argue that Torah study protects the nation of Israel and is itself a form of defense.

Thousands of ultra orthodox Jews seen at the Yitzhak Navon train station in Jerusalem, on their way to attend the “million man” protest against IDF conscription, in Jerusalem, Oct. 30, 2025. Credit: Chaim Goldberg/Flash90.

The demonstration organizers issued a statement on Thursday, saying, “The Torah is what stood for us at all times to protect and save, and even these days the holy Torah is the one that protects the Jewish presence in the Holy Land and the people of Israel, and it is only thanks to it that we exist…

“The rally expresses its firm demand from the authorities that the arrangement that has existed throughout the years regarding Torah students must be maintained with all due vigilance.”

“Anyone who wishes to learn Torah should do so without restriction and without interruption, as it has been ruled that anyone who dedicates his life to Torah must not be burdened with any other burden, for they are the hope of our people.” 

David Isaac

Source: https://www.jns.org/300000-orthodox-shutter-jerusalem-in-mass-protest-against-idf-enlistment/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Jihad in Bangladesh: Islamists Erasing Hindu Heritage - Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury

 

by Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury

In a disturbing development, the government's response to a court petition demanding a ban on ISKCON described the movement as a "religious fundamentalist organization". This rhetoric, once confined to the fringe, now finds a place in official discourse - a dangerous sign of how far Islamist influence has penetrated the state.

 

• The rise of Islamist extremism in South Asia is entering a new and troubling phase.

• Their real goal, however, is far darker than banning a Hindu organization: it is to purge majority-Muslim Bangladesh of its remaining Hindu population and to reshape the country into a theocratic state.

• In a disturbing development, the government's response to a court petition demanding a ban on ISKCON described the movement as a "religious fundamentalist organization". This rhetoric, once confined to the fringe, now finds a place in official discourse - a dangerous sign of how far Islamist influence has penetrated the state.

• [I]n the eyes of Islamist ideologues, peaceful outreach represents a challenge -- the assertion of a pluralistic worldview that contradicts their absolutist doctrine.

• What makes this current wave of anti-Hindu agitation particularly alarming is its transnational dimension. Intelligence officials in Dhaka have identified growing coordination between Bangladeshi and Pakistani Salafist groups, some with direct ideological or logistical ties to organizations once linked to Al Qaeda and ISIS.

• The persecution of ISKCON is not merely an attack on a Hindu organization -- it is part of a larger strategy to dismantle Bangladesh's secularism and to replace tolerance with totalitarian theology.

• If left unchecked, this campaign could transform Bangladesh into yet another bastion of jihadist ideology in South Asia.

In Bangladesh, the latest target of jihadist wrath is the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), a global Hindu organization. Pictured: Members of the Islamist Hefazat-e-Islam movement hold a rally in Dhaka, Bangladesh on November 29, 2024, to demand a ban on ISKCON. (Photo by Munir Uz Zaman/AFP via Getty Images)

The rise of Islamist extremism in South Asia is entering a new and troubling phase. What began as a political movement cloaked in piety has increasingly transformed into a campaign of cultural and religious erasure. In Bangladesh, the latest target of jihadist wrath is the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), a global Hindu organization. Islamists now brand it an "extremist Hindutva group", call for banning it, commit arson against its temples, and violence against its followers. Their real goal, however, is far darker than banning a Hindu organization: it is to purge majority-Muslim Bangladesh of its remaining Hindu population and to reshape the country into a theocratic state.

Since last year's jihadist-backed coup in Bangladesh, attacks on ISKCON centers and Hindu temples in the country have sharply escalated. Hardline groups such as Hefazat-e-Islam (HeI) and Intifada Bangladesh have taken the lead in this campaign, with vocal support from elements within the country's government. In a disturbing development, the government's response to a court petition demanding a ban on ISKCON described the movement as a "religious fundamentalist organization". This rhetoric, once confined to the fringe, now finds a place in official discourse - a dangerous sign of how far Islamist influence has penetrated the state.

The case of Chinmoy Krishna Das, a former ISKCON member imprisoned for advocating better treatment of religious minorities, underscores the climate of intimidation. Radical mobs have repeatedly targeted ISKCON's temples in Bangladesh, vandalizing idols and torching prayer halls. Each attack serves the same purpose -- to terrorize religious minorities and silence voices that preach coexistence.

Recently, security agencies uncovered a chilling plot that could have ignited nationwide violence. Islamists fabricated a story that Mawlana Muhibullah Miyaji, a 60-year-old Muslim cleric from Tongi, had been abducted and tortured by ISKCON members. The narrative spread rapidly on social media, prompting calls for jihad against Hindus. Only a swift police investigation - aided by surveillance videos and forensic evidence - exposed the story as a complete fabrication.

Authorities believe the motive behind this staged abduction was to incite mob attacks on Hindu communities and ISKCON centers, plunging the country into chaos while distracting attention from the rapid radicalization of Bangladesh's Islamist ecosystem.

To the outside world, ISKCON hardly appears as a threat. Founded in New York City in 1966 by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, the movement has grown into a global spiritual and humanitarian network. With over 500 temples, rural communities, and vegetarian centers worldwide, ISKCON promotes vegetarianism, devotional service, and universal brotherhood. Yet in the eyes of Islamist ideologues, peaceful outreach represents a challenge -- the assertion of a pluralistic worldview that contradicts their absolutist doctrine.

What makes this current wave of anti-Hindu agitation particularly alarming is its transnational dimension. Intelligence officials in Dhaka have identified growing coordination between Bangladeshi and Pakistani Salafist groups, some with direct ideological or logistical ties to organizations once linked to Al Qaeda and ISIS. The return of radical Islamist preacher Zakir Naik into Bangladesh -- made possible by the Yunus regime's decision to lift the ban on his Peace TV -- is viewed as a signal of state appeasement. Naik's record is well known: he has justified suicide bombings, glorified Osama bin Laden, and inspired the murderers behind the 2016 ISIS-style attack on Dhaka's Holey Artisan Bakery.

Even more disturbing is the arrival of Ibtisam Elahi Zaheer, a senior figure in Pakistan's Markazi Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadis and close associate of Hafiz Saeed, the mastermind of the 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai, India. Zaheer's speeches -- urging Muslims to "kill apostates" and denouncing Jews and Christians as "enemies of Islam" -- have drawn scrutiny from UK authorities for inciting violence. His presence in Bangladesh today raises urgent questions about who facilitated his entry and what networks stand behind him.

The growing coordination of Islamist movements across national borders, coupled with a permissive government, threatens not only Bangladesh's fragile communal harmony but also regional stability. The persecution of ISKCON is not merely an attack on a Hindu organization -- it is part of a larger strategy to dismantle Bangladesh's secularism and to replace tolerance with totalitarian theology.

If left unchecked, this campaign could transform Bangladesh into yet another bastion of jihadist ideology in South Asia.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury is an award-winning journalist, writer, and Editor of the newspaper Blitz. He specializes in counterterrorism and regional geopolitics. 

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/22020/bangladesh-islamists-erasing-hindu-heritage

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter