Saturday, March 8, 2025

Khamenei rejects Trump’s proposal for nuclear negotiations - JNS Staff

 

by JNS Staff

The Iranian leader called the U.S. administration a “bully government” not interested in “resolving issues.”

 

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivers an address on Oct. 19, 2022. Source: Channel 1 (Iran) via MEMRI.
Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivers an address on Oct. 19, 2022. Source: Channel 1 (Iran) via MEMRI.

Tehran will not be bullied by the United States over its nuclear program, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said on Saturday, a day after President Donald Trump said he sent a letter to the Iranians asking to negotiate a deal.

“The insistence of some bully governments on negotiations is not to resolve issues, but to dominate and impose their own expectations,” Khamenei said in a meeting with senior Iranian officials in Tehran, Reuters reported.

“Talks for them is a path to have new expectations, it is not only about Iran’s nuclear issue. Iran will definitely not accept their expectations,” the dictator added, seemingly ruling out a path to negotiations.

Trump, in an interview with the Fox Business channel on Friday, said that his letter conveyed the message, “’I hope you’re going to negotiate, because it’s going to be a lot better for Iran.’

“I think they want to get that letter,” he continued. “The other alternative is you have to do something, because Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.”

Speaking to reporters on the same day in the Oval Office, Trump said that there would be “interesting days ahead” with respect to the Islamic Republic.

“We’re down to final strokes with Iran,” Trump said, using a golf metaphor. “We’re down to the final moments. We’re at final moments. Can’t let them have a nuclear weapon.”

Tehran has significantly increased its stockpile of near-weapons grade uranium, enough to build six nuclear bombs, according to an International Atomic Energy Agency report seen by Reuters.

In Khamenei’s remarks on Saturday, he also accused Western media of not allowing denial of the Holocaust.

No one can “protest the crimes committed in Palestine and Lebanon, or deny what Hitler is claimed to have done to the Jews, on Western-run social media,” he said.

Khamenei further slammed European nations for criticizing Tehran’s noncompliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement on its nuclear program, signed in 2015 during the Obama administration.

France, Britain and Germany “are issuing statements, claiming that Iran has not fulfilled its nuclear commitments under the JCPOA! Someone should ask them: Have you fulfilled yours? You never did from the very beginning!” he said.

Iran’s supreme leader stressed that during the administration of President Hassan Rouhani (2013-2021), the Islamic Republic “tolerated” the deal for a year, until the Iranian parliament approved a bill prohibiting the country from renewing the JCPOA agreement.

“There was no other way. And now, the same holds true: There is no other way to stand against coercion and bullying,” Khamenei said.


JNS Staff

Source: https://www.jns.org/khamenei-rejects-trumps-proposal-for-nuclear-negotiations/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran rejects Arab plan, calls for one-state solution in Gaza conflict - Seth J. Frantzman

 

by Seth J. Frantzman

Iran says a two-state solution won’t secure Palestinian rights.

 

IRAN’S SUPREME Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei meets with Yahya Sinwar of Hamas, in Tehran, 2012. In 2023, Sinwar was asked to defer a large-scale military campaign to give Iran and its allies enough time to prepare for it, but Sinwar chose to go ahead on October 7, says the writer. (photo credit: Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA via REUTERS)
IRAN’S SUPREME Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei meets with Yahya Sinwar of Hamas, in Tehran, 2012. In 2023, Sinwar was asked to defer a large-scale military campaign to give Iran and its allies enough time to prepare for it, but Sinwar chose to go ahead on October 7, says the writer.
(photo credit: Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA via REUTERS)

Iran has said that it prefers a one-state solution to the conflict in Gaza rather than the recent plan that Arab states have proposed. The Arab initiative came out of a meeting in Cairo last week. Iran has now spoken out at a meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), where foreign ministers from various Muslim countries have gathered.

This is a pivotal time in the region. There is still a ceasefire in Gaza, and Hamas has rejected Israel’s attempt to extend the first phase of a hostage deal. The Trump administration is now open to direct talks with Hamas. Iran and the Arab states oppose the Trump plan for re-settling Gazans.

The Arab League backs a plan for reconstruction that Egypt has been pushing for Gaza. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said at the OIC that the two-state solution “will not secure Palestinian rights, emphasizing Tehran’s support for the establishment of one state representing all the original inhabitants of Palestine.”

He said, “With due respect to the views of some brotherly countries on the two-state solution, the Islamic Republic of Iran maintains its view that this solution will not lead to the realization of the right of the Palestinian people.” This is an important moment for Iran. It has lost some of its influence in the Middle East after the fall of the Assad regime. It is trying to claw this back. It also has less influence in Lebanon, and it wants to use the Houthis to continue to threaten Israel.

Leaders of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, the Palestinian Authority, and the Arab League participate in discussions on the potential displacement of Gazans in Cairo, February 1, 2025.  (credit: screenshot)Enlrage image
Leaders of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, the Palestinian Authority, and the Arab League participate in discussions on the potential displacement of Gazans in Cairo, February 1, 2025. (credit: screenshot)

No two-state solution

“In our view, ‘one democratic state’ representing all the original inhabitants of Palestine is the only viable solution,” the Iranian foreign minister said. “Given the Israeli regime’s persistent defiance of the UN Charter, its designation of the UN Secretary-General as persona non grata, the complete obstruction of UNRWA’s operations, and the unprecedented tragic loss of hundreds of UN staff in Palestine, it is imperative to continue our endeavors for Israeli regime’s expulsion from the United Nations,” Iran said at the OIC. Iran’s state media published the entire speech of the foreign minister, indicating how important they see it.  

Iran says that it has “uncompromising support” for the “cause of Palestine. “While the Islamic Republic of Iran supports the present resolution, and without prejudice to the foregoing, it would like to put on record the following reservations on the content of the outcome of this meeting, details of which will be communicated later with the Secretariat [of the OIC],” the Iranians’ said.

Iran says it doesn’t want the OIC to be construed as recognizing the “Zionist regime.” The Iranian foreign minister went on to say that Iran “earnestly hopes that this auspicious meeting will inspire the international community to take meaningful action to advance justice and peace for the people of Palestine. May this gathering be a renewed commitment to their honorable cause.”

Iran is thus trying to claw back some role in the Islamic world. It is obviously concerned that the Saudi Arabian and Egyptian proposal at the Arab League for Gaza could end with moderation or the replacement of Hamas. Iran would thus lose out in Gaza as well. 


Seth J. Frantzman

Source: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-845221

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Is the Camp David peace at risk? - opinion - Yaakov Katz

 

by Yaakov Katz

As military buildups along the Gaza border escalate and diplomatic rhetoric hardens, a 45-year peace treaty faces its most serious test yet.

 

PRIME MINISTER Benjamin Netanyahu meets with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi ahead of the opening of the UN General Assembly in New York in 2017. A peace treaty that has been a pillar of regional stability for 45 years is suddenly being questioned, says the writer. (photo credit: Egyptian Presidency/Reuters)
PRIME MINISTER Benjamin Netanyahu meets with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi ahead of the opening of the UN General Assembly in New York in 2017. A peace treaty that has been a pillar of regional stability for 45 years is suddenly being questioned, says the writer.
(photo credit: Egyptian Presidency/Reuters)

As if Israel didn’t have enough trouble, talk of a potential war with Egypt is now spreading across the Middle East.

A peace treaty that has been a pillar of regional stability for 45 years is suddenly being questioned. What was once considered an untouchable agreement is now caught in the crosswinds of war and political maneuvering, serving as a stark reminder of how fragile the region remains, even after nearly a year-and-a-half of conflict.

Tensions with Egypt began in May when Israel launched its ground offensive into southern Gaza. As part of the operation, Israeli forces took control of the Philadelphi Corridor, an eight-mile strip of land separating Gaza from Egypt. For years, the corridor had been a major smuggling route, with Hamas using underground tunnels to bring in weapons, fighters, and supplies.

The move triggered immediate pushback from Cairo, which claimed that Israel’s increased military deployment along the border violated the Camp David Accords. In response, Egypt began reinforcing its own military presence in the Sinai.

Tensions escalated further when an exchange of fire between Israeli and Egyptian soldiers resulted in the death of an Egyptian serviceman. Both sides explained that the incident was caused by a misunderstanding, but it did not help.

 THEN-PRIME MINISTER Menachem Begin and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat greet each other at their first meeting at the Camp David summit as US president Jimmy Carter looks on in September 1978.  (credit: JIMMY CARTER LIBRARY/NATIONAL ARCHIVES/REUTERS)Enlrage image
THEN-PRIME MINISTER Menachem Begin and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat greet each other at their first meeting at the Camp David summit as US president Jimmy Carter looks on in September 1978. (credit: JIMMY CARTER LIBRARY/NATIONAL ARCHIVES/REUTERS)

Israel has insisted that its military posture in Gaza is solely aimed at eliminating Hamas and preventing future attacks. Egypt’s military buildup along the border, however, remains unexplained. Officials in Cairo claim it is defensive, a reaction to Israel’s movements, but some in Israel fear it could be part of a larger strategic shift.

Despite the heightened rhetoric, security coordination between Jerusalem and Cairo has continued. The two countries are still cooperating on ceasefire and hostage negotiations with Hamas and the management of the Rafah border crossing. But at a political level, the tone has changed.

In Washington, Israel’s new ambassador, Yechiel Leiter, openly accused Egypt of violating the peace treaty, claiming that military bases in Sinai had been expanded beyond what the Camp David Accords allow. “These bases can only be used for offensive operations,” he warned. “That’s a clear violation, and it’s not something Israel can tolerate.”

Inside the Jewish state, the situation has become a growing concern for residents near the Egyptian border. Communities in the area have reported seeing an increase in Egyptian military activity, spotting troop movements on the other side of the fence, and hearing frequent explosions. Senior IDF officials have acknowledged the buildup but have attempted to downplay concerns, saying there is no intelligence indicating that Egypt has hostile intentions toward Israel.

On both sides of the border, there are elements eager to stoke tensions. Israeli intelligence has tracked a rise in Hebrew-language threats from Egyptian social media accounts, warning of destruction if Jerusalem provokes Cairo.

At the same time, in Israel, there is increasing talk about the long-term risks if Egypt’s government were to collapse. The country has already seen two governments overthrown in the past 14 years, and if the current government were to fall and be replaced by a radical leadership, Israel could find itself facing the largest military in the Arab world along its southern border.

Trump's Gaza plan

The situation deteriorated further after US President Donald Trump unveiled his plan for Gaza and his demands that Egypt and Jordan take in Gaza’s two million residents. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi canceled a planned visit to Washington, and Egyptian officials warned that any reduction in American military aid could jeopardize the peace treaty with Israel.

Political considerations on both sides are making de-escalation even more difficult. Egyptian leaders have avoided making any public declarations rejecting the possibility of conflict. Not because they want war but because they do not want to be seen as bowing to Trump or to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, both of whom are deeply unpopular in Egypt.

In Israel, the IDF does not currently view a military conflict with Egypt as an immediate threat, but the October 7 attacks have forced a reassessment of how they need to take every potential threat more seriously than in the past.

For now, Israel’s more immediate security concerns remain to the North. In Syria, the IDF is maintaining positions and recently warned it would strike if the new government in Damascus targets the country’s Druze population.

Meanwhile, in Jordan, Israeli intelligence is closely monitoring the possibility that Islamic radicals, emboldened by the success in Syria, could attempt to seize power. If Jordan were to fall, Israel would find itself facing a hostile front along its eastern border for the first time since 1967.

The coming weeks will be critical. For nearly half a century, Israel and Egypt have benefited from the peace forged at Camp David. For Jerusalem, the agreement meant securing peace with its most powerful Arab adversary. For Cairo, it meant breaking away from the Soviet bloc, aligning with the United States, and securing billions of dollars in military and economic aid.

So far, both Netanyahu and Sisi have remained largely silent on the growing tensions. That silence is a mistake. A clear statement from both leaders could calm the situation, reaffirm the importance of the treaty, and send a message that neither side is interested in allowing a crisis to spiral out of control.

The treaty has survived multiple wars in the region and numerous leadership changes, but that does not mean it can be taken for granted. The reality is that peace requires constant maintenance.

 
Yaakov Katz
is co-author of a forthcoming book, While Israel Slept, about the October 7 Hamas attacks, and is a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute, a global Jewish think tank based in Jerusalem.

Source: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-845036

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

New army chief ‘knows where the IDF needs to go’ - Yaakov Lappin

 

by Yaakov Lappin

Decisive victory the goal, Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir says.

 

IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir visits the Western Wall in Jerusalem's Old City on March 5, 2025. Photo by Yonatan Sindel/Flash90.
IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir visits the Western Wall in Jerusalem's Old City on March 5, 2025. Photo by Yonatan Sindel/Flash90.

Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir took the helm as the 24th Chief of the Staff of the Israel Defense Forces on Wednesday, succeeding Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi. With the IDF poised to return to combat against Hamas in Gaza at any moment, and with the Iranian nuclear program making alarming progress, Zamir steps into the role at a pivotal time.

Zamir has stressed the need for military victory, stating on Wednesday, “Our actions will speak [for themselves].”

In his first address as IDF Chief of Staff, Zamir set the tone for his tenure, declaring, “This is an existential war. We will persist in our campaign to bring our hostages home and to defeat our enemies. The mission placed upon me from this day forward is clear: to lead the IDF to victory.”

Zamir’s career, spanning four decades, includes service as the military secretary to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (2012-2015), head of the IDF Southern Command (2018-2021), deputy chief of the General Staff (2023-2025), and most recently, director general of the Ministry of Defense, where he led programs worth billions of shekels to boost domestic arms production.

Col. (res.) Dr. Hanan Shai, a research associate at the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy and a former investigator for the IDF’s commission evaluating the 2006 Second Lebanon War, emphasized that Zamir’s appointment marks a return to a generation of officers trained under Israel’s traditional operational doctrines.

Shai, who taught Zamir at the Command and Staff College, which trains senior IDF officers, told JNS on Thursday that Zamir is a rare product of an officer training program established after the 1982 First Lebanon War.

“Unlike others in recent decades, he is a graduate of a command training program that was founded after “Operation Peace for Galilee” [the First Lebanon War], under the sponsorship of Dan Shomron [the 13th IDF chief of staff]. This program was created as a response to the realization that the IDF’s level of command professionalism was very low,” said Shai.

A rigorous six-year study, led by top Israeli military historians and analysts, concluded that the IDF’s existing training frameworks failed to equip officers with the necessary tools for senior military leadership.

According to Shai, the IDF originally adopted a command doctrine influenced by German and British military philosophies, emphasizing leadership, initiative and battlefield decision-making.

In 1994, however, these doctrines were discarded in favor of deterrence-based strategies modeled on the U.S. military’s post-Cold War approaches.

“All of the IDF’s invaluable doctrinal knowledge was thrown away, and the consequences became evident in 2006, 2014, and now in 2023,” Shai stated, referring to the Second Lebanon War, “Operation Protective Edge” and the current war.

Zamir, Shai explained, is “the last officer who was trained under the original IDF doctrinal framework” and therefore has the knowledge and ability to lead the military back to a warfighting doctrine focused on the overarching goal of decisive victory.

“This, therefore, is his big advantage. He knows where the IDF needs to go, and more important, he knows how to get it there,” Shai said.

Failure and recovery

The transition from Halevi to Zamir represents a stark contrast in leadership styles and strategic visions. In his farewell speech on Wednesday, Halevi acknowledged the IDF’s failure on Oct. 7, 2023, adding later in his address, “For many years, the IDF stood firm in its missions. On October 7, the IDF failed.

“This was under my watch, and what happened is my responsibility, and I bear and will bear it forever,” he said.

Halevi, who served for nearly 40 years in the IDF, framed his tenure as one defined by both failure and by recovery after Oct. 7. He recounted how the IDF, despite its initial collapse, managed to regroup and mount a massive counteroffensive.

“From now on, every officer and commander must see themselves as if they were personally present on October 7,” he stated, emphasizing the need to internalize the lessons of the war to prevent another catastrophe.

Halevi’s legacy will forever be marred by the conceptual and operational failures that led to Oct. 7, but he is also credited with leading the military recovery. Still, several critical aspects of that recovery have come in for criticism as well, such as Halevi’s reported adamant objection to setting up an Israeli military administration in Gaza and taking over the humanitarian aid process, leaving Hamas free to hijack the flow of goods and to continue to exploit the aid to position itself as the terror regime of Gaza.

“During the 42-day Phase 1 [of the ceasefire], 25,000 aid trucks entered Gaza—half of Hamas’s budget in Gaza comes from these trucks,” Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar told British Foreign Secretary David Lammy on Thursday, following London’s objection to the cutting off of aid trucks. “Hamas is restoring its military capabilities and recruiting new, young terrorists. This cannot continue!” Sa’ar added.

Zamir’s appointment is part of a broader restructuring of the IDF’s leadership. On Thursday, Defense Minister Israel Katz congratulated Maj. Gen. Yaniv Asor and Brig. Gen. Itzik Cohen on their appointment as Southern Command chief and head of the IDF Operations Directorate, respectively.

“The State of Israel needs you and trusts you to lead the generation of victory to decisive triumph in every theater and against every enemy,” Katz told the generals.

Zamir addressed the heavy burden of command in his first written order to IDF soldiers and commanders on Thursday. “The IDF did not fulfill its mission on October 7. We will not hide that, nor will we cover it up.”

However, he immediately pivoted to the mission ahead: “From here, we turn our heads in one direction—to victory and the decisive defeat of the enemy. This is our mission. This is our goal.”

Zamir added, “To our enemies—those who sought to annihilate us, who slaughtered and raped, who burned and abducted—we will land a crushing blow.

“We will not turn back until they are destroyed, and we will not rest until our brothers and sisters are returned from the tunnels of captivity—this is our moral duty,” the IDF chief said.


Yaakov Lappin is an Israel-based military affairs correspondent and analyst. He is the in-house analyst at the Miryam Institute; a research associate at the Alma Research and Education Center; and a research associate at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University. He is a frequent guest commentator on international television news networks, including Sky News and i24 News. Lappin is the author of Virtual Caliphate: Exposing the Islamist State on the Internet. Follow him at: www.patreon.com/yaakovlappin.

Source: https://www.jns.org/new-army-chief-knows-where-the-idf-needs-to-go/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Preparations completed for Gazan migration - Ariel Kahana

 

by Ariel Kahana

Israel has finalized arrangements to enable thousands of Gazans to leave daily through three routes.

 

Photos of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas affixed at the Rafah border crossing between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, Nov. 1, 2017. Photo by Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90.
Photos of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas affixed at the Rafah border crossing between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, Nov. 1, 2017. Photo by Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90.

Israel has completed the necessary preparations to enable the migration of Gaza residents, provided countries are found willing to accept them.

In recent weeks, a mechanism has been established, under the direction of Defense Minister Israel Katz, designed to create conditions that would allow 2,500 Gazans to leave the Strip daily. Currently, more than two million Palestinians live in the Gaza Strip.

Security sources told Israel Hayom that one country has already expressed interest in accepting construction workers from Gaza, but international controversy surrounding the issue has caused it to freeze its involvement in the matter for the time being.

Migration to destination countries could be carried out via sea, with passage through Israel at Ashdod Port.

An additional route, by air, would be through Ramon Airport, near Eilat. It should be noted that this route has been operating for several months for wounded individuals who have left the Strip, and approximately 1,500 Gaza residents are known to have left via this route to other countries.

Another departure route is the Rafah Crossing. Through this crossing, according to information available to Israel, about 35,000 people have evacuated from the Strip to Egypt since the beginning of the current war. In many cases, they continued from Egypt to other destinations around the world.

Israel is interested in allowing as many Gaza residents as possible to leave the Strip. Therefore, the policy is to allow family members of sick and wounded individuals to leave with them to other countries. In the vast majority of cases, those who left Gaza were absorbed into Arab countries, but there are also those who have migrated to Romania and Italy with the intention of not returning.

“Our interest is to let as many people as possible leave. That’s the rationale of the Trump plan that Israel has expressed support for. We are trying to implement it,” said a security source.

Meanwhile, The Israeli Reservists—Generation of Victory movement has published its own framework for the voluntary migration of Gaza residents, based on principles of international law. The plan proposes the removal of 1.7 million Gazans via air, sea and land routes to host countries around the world, including Egypt, Libya and Gulf states.

The initiative includes full funding for departure from Gaza, temporary housing solutions, and a financial grant for migrants, at an estimated cost of up to $100 billion—less than the cost of rehabilitating the Strip.

According to Maj. (res.) Gilad Ach, chairman of the movement: “We are presenting an orderly plan to remove the ongoing threat to Israeli citizens from the Gaza Strip. … A one-time opportunity has now been created to exploit the window of opportunity opened by the current U.S. administration.”

Originally published by Israel Hayom.


Ariel Kahana

Source: https://www.jns.org/preparations-completed-for-gazan-migration/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Massacres in Latakia test Syria’s new government amid rising violence - analysis - Seth J. Frantzman

 

by Seth J. Frantzman

Massacre reports put pressure on Syria’s new leadership to respond.

 

Attendees gather during a national dialogue, a key milestone in the transition to a new political system after decades of Assad rule, in Damascus, Syria February 25, 2025. (photo credit: REUTERS/KHALIL ASHAWI)
Attendees gather during a national dialogue, a key milestone in the transition to a new political system after decades of Assad rule, in Damascus, Syria February 25, 2025.
(photo credit: REUTERS/KHALIL ASHAWI)

Reports of massacres of civilians in Syria’s Latakia are a major test for the new government of Syria. Since the fall of the Assad regime, the new authorities have sought to try to balance the needs of numerous Syrians from different regions and groups.

The group that came to power on December 8, 2024, after the Assad regime fell, was led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which has its roots in extremist groups that opposed the Assad regime. Since December, there have been concerns that HTS might persecute minorities. However, the leader of HTS, Ahmad al-Sharaa, moved quickly to make it seem Damascus had a new face.

The clashes that began in Latakia on March 6 have been brewing for months. Depending on the source, the reports say that groups of insurgents with ties to the old regime attacked the security forces of the new Damascus government.

Unclear reports from Syria

The result was the deaths of dozens of members of the security forces. Faced with this growing opposition, the government appears to have unleashed numerous armed men on Latakia without much control over their behavior. This led armed groups to enter Latakia, claiming to seek revenge and supposedly conducting security sweeps. In reality, it seems that on March 7, dozens of people, perhaps hundreds, were murdered. The victims are mostly members of the Alawite minority. The Assad family is a member of the same group.

 A civilian man rides his motocycle infront of a military convoy heading towards Latakia to join the fight against the fighters linked to Syria's ousted leader Bashar al-Assad, in Aleppo, Syria, March 7, 2025.  (credit: REUTERS/MAHMOUD HASSANO/FILE PHOTO)Enlrage image
A civilian man rides his motocycle infront of a military convoy heading towards Latakia to join the fight against the fighters linked to Syria's ousted leader Bashar al-Assad, in Aleppo, Syria, March 7, 2025. (credit: REUTERS/MAHMOUD HASSANO/FILE PHOTO)

 As with any conflict where there are multiple sides, the reports are always going to be unclear. What is clear is that Alawites and others fear that a massacre is taking place in areas around Tartous and other cities and towns. Video shows men being murdered in the streets, run over, forced to crawl on the ground; and they show groups of bodies dumped in places.

Backers of the Damascus generally say that these killings are an unfortunate outcome of some people who sought revenge and that they are a kind of collateral damage of “security” operations. They argue that the Assad regime was brutal and that, by extension, responses to Assad loyalists killing members of the new security forces will result in these extremes.

 The reality is that the government in Damascus is facing its first major test. It has faced many smaller tests already, such as finding a way to work with the Druze minority in southern Syria, managing relations with Turkish-backed proxies called the SNA, or managing talks with the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

Latakia was always going to be complex because there are so many people among the Syrian rebel factions and SNA that have wanted revenge for the years of Assad's rule. They see the Alawite minority as a place to take out their vengeance. Voices excuse this behavior by arguing that we should focus on the larger crimes of Assad or that there is too much attention given to minorities in Syria. These folk argue that it is “disinformation” to claim that there is now a campaign of pogroms targeting Alawites.

 Time will tell which is the case. For now, the government in Damascus will need to assure international partners that the reports of massacres will be addressed. It will also need to be transparent. If it ends up relying on gangs and extremisms to enforce its rule in Latakia, then it will become little better than the former regime. 


Seth J. Frantzman

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-845219

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Congressional negotiators release spending bill to avoid government shutdown - Nicholas Ballasy

 

by Nicholas Ballasy

The bill largely maintains current spending levels

 

Congressional negotiators unveiled a 99-page spending bill that would keep the government funded through the start of the fiscal year 2026.

If passed by March 14, the bill would avoid government shutdown. 

The bill largely maintains current spending levels the same.

An additional $8 billion would be included for defense programs and an additional $6 billion for veterans' healthcare.

Non-defense spending would drop by about $13 billion.

Read the bill here.


Nicholas Ballasy

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/congress/congressional-negotiators-release-spending-bill-avoid-government-shutdown

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump put the brakes on offshore wind, now critics of onshore wind want to be heard too - Kevin Killough

 

by Kevin Killough

Like critics of offshore wind, opponents of wind farms on land say the projects ruin the the countryside, impact historic sites and harm wildlife.

 

As was expected, Trump issued a moratorium on offshore wind lease sales upon taking office. Critics of offshore wind in coastal communities organized a national network during the Biden administration, which they say ignored their concerns about impacts to whales and other marine wildlife, the viewshed and electricity rates. Ironically, while most of them are in blue states that voted for Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris, Trump’s opposition to offshore wind gave them hope their concerns might be heard. 

Likewise, the land-based wind industry also has plenty of critics forming community opposition groups who feel their concerns went unheard during the Biden era. The Albany County Conservancy (ACC) in Wyoming last month sent letters to Energy Secretary Chris Wright, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, and Attorney General Pam Bondi requesting that federal permitting processes be suspended for a wind project near Laramie, Wyoming. 

Flipping a switch

Historically, coal mining has provided the bulk of Wyoming’s tax revenues. As coal demand declines, driven primarily by a switch to natural gas, Wyoming has sought to tap into the subsidies that often attach to renewable energy projects

For critics living in the wind belts of southern Wyoming — where 20 wind projects are proposed across the state in addition to those currently operating — are a major concern. Besides the impacts to the views of Wyoming’s open plains and historic sites,  say the wind industry is industrializing migratory routes of golden eagles. The ACC filed a petition in the U.S. District Court of Wyoming challenging the federal approval of the Rail Tie project, an approximately 160-turbine project planned for southeastern Albany County, and they’re considering a similar petition against the Two Rivers Wind Project

Anne Brande, executive director of the Albany County Conservancy, told Just the News that she is personally seeing the impacts on wildlife of wind energy in Wyoming. She goes for walks in the Boulder Ridge area of the Laramie Mountains south of Laramie where the Rail Tie wind project is planned, and she said she’s seen a rapid decline in the population of eagles. 

“I go back like 15 or 20 years, and there'd be a lot more bird activity. Gosh, it is like somebody flipped a switch,” Brande said. 

Mike Lockhart, a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist, has been using satellite tags to track the eagles since 2014. According to the petition against Rail Tie, Lockhart’s research found that 82% of the documented eagle deaths were human caused and 43.5% of the known deaths of tagged eagles were caused by wind turbines. This is more than vehicle collisions, hunting and electrocutions combined. 

Christi Shafer, external relations and communications for Repsol, the developer of Wind Tie, told Just the News that, although the company isn't named on the ACC's petition, it's aware of it and continuing to monitor it closely. 

"Repsol Renewables North America is proud to operate in Wyoming, where we are advancing our Rail Tie Wind Project safely and responsibly. We are committed to providing sustainable energy that benefits people and the planet, and we are confident that the approvals in place for our project meet or exceed the relevant regulatory requirements," Shafer said. 

Historical experiences

Gabriella Hoffman, policy analyst for the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), traveled to Wyoming to produce a video about Wyoming’s wind industry for part of a “Conservation Country” series on issues impacting the American West. 

The video explores other issues with wind, such as the impacts to tourism and historical sites, such as the Ames National Moment, a 60-foot granite pyramid 35 miles west of Cheyenne. The pyramid was built in 1811 to honor the Ames brothers, who were influential leaders in the construction of the transcontinental railroad. It was designated a National Historic Landmark in 2016.

The pyramid sits on an open prairie that looks very much like Wyoming looked when it was built. Mary Hopkins, a retired Wyoming historic preservation officer, explains in the video that the experience visitors have when they come to the site will change as wind projects are erected around it. 

Hoffman told Just the News that across the West, the issues with the onshore wind industry are very similar as those coastal communities have with offshore wind development. 

“There's a recurring theme with onshore wind, much like offshore wind. A lot of these environmental interests love to talk a great game about pursuing clean energy, but they lean on their red state friends or red states to extract resources and transfer all that supposed clean electricity to blue states,” Hoffman said. 

A January 20 Executive Order halted the Lava Ridge wind project in land-locked Idaho. Trump’s moratorium on offshore wind also placed a moratorium on the Lava Ridge project while the Department of Interior reviews the project’s permits. The proposed wind farm had generated considerable opposition due to its proximity to a historic site. “It was literally on the boundaries of the Minidoka National Monument site where FDR put Japanese Americans in internment camps,” Hoffman said. 

Going ‘gangster’ on wind

Some legislatures in red states are pushing back against what critics call the industrialization of open spaces in the West. The Arizona Legislature is considering a bill that would be among the nation’s most restrictive, removing about 90% of the state’s land from consideration for wind energy infrastructure, according to USA Today.

Lawmakers in Oklahoma this week advanced a bill that would increase the setbacks for wind facilities from 1.5 nautical miles from any public-use or municipality owned airports, public schools and hospitals, by 0.25 miles or 2.5 times the turbine’s height — whichever is greater. 

The Idaho legislature is considering a bill, the Idaho Capital Sun reports, that would create a new tax on commercial wind turbines in the state. Idaho Rep. Ted Hill, a Republican, testified at a hearing on the bill’s introduction in February that the excise tax is so big that “we are going gangster on it and really make it hardcore.” 

The tax, according to the Sun, would be equal to $25,000 for every foot of height for any commercial wind turbine with a minimum height of 100 feet. The average height of a wind turbine in the U.S. is about 320 feet, so if the bill passes, a wind developer with a 100-turbine project in Idaho would have to pay $800 million in excise taxes. 

Hoffman: "We've moved away from climate posturing"

According to the Renewable Rejection Database, a project maintained by energy expert Robert Bryce, there have been 472 wind projects rejected in the U.S. since 2013. That includes four so far this year. 

 CFACT's Hoffman said that it’s part of a shift in thinking on energy, especially in red states where many of these projects are being built. Not only do they have more rural territory, they also typically have more business-friendly regulatory environments that are attractive to all industries. However, as local opposition grows, state lawmakers are taking notice. 

“I think some of them [red states] are reassessing their support for these projects, because it is so unpopular. We've moved away from climate posturing as a country. This administration is very keen on not having that anymore,” Hoffman said. 

Hoffman said that the best path toward cleaner energy without all the program of land-intensive wind power is nuclear. “You want a clean energy source with a low footprint, low emissions — almost zero emissions — you'd go with nuclear. It uses a fraction of the land. And it's not as ugly on the landscape,” Hoffman said. 


Kevin Killough

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/energy/trump-put-brakes-offshore-wind-and-now-critics-onshore-wind-want-their

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Cut Federal Funding to Barnard - Alan M. Dershowitz

 

by Alan M. Dershowitz

Signs at these protests call for "war" and "intifada". Nor is the war limited to Israel.

 

  • [Barnard's] radical "studies" departments are propaganda mills that teach students what to think rather than how to think. Consider, for example, the "Women's Gender and Sexuality Studies Department". Its website calls for students to "smash the white supremacist hetero-patriarchy."

  • In other words, this women's studies department has little to do with scholarship, teaching or learning. It has everything to do with advocacy. That is true of many other specialized studies departments at Barnard.

  • Signs at these protests call for "war" and "intifada". Nor is the war limited to Israel. It is directed against Americans as well. The protests involve masked students, faculty and non-students who occupy buildings, prevent Jewish students from attending classes and threaten to close down the college unless it divests from Israel and takes other bigoted actions.

  • The college administration, instead of disciplining students who break the rules and the law, negotiated with them. Cutting off funding from Barnard will not hurt students who want a real education, because Barnard students can enroll in courses at Columbia, which is affiliated with Barnard. It will put an end to the propaganda "courses", and "studies" "programs" in which Barnard seems to specialize.

  • It is imperative that freedom of speech, protected by the First Amendment, not be compromised by the government. Barnard is a private institution not bound by that amendment. Moreover, those activities that would cause a shutdown of federal funding are not covered by freedom of speech. They consist largely of physical actions, such as trespassing, blocking access, harassment and other forms of intimidation. Pure protests consisting of speech should not be a basis for defunding.

Barnard College has become the incubator for anti-American, anti-Israel and anti-semitic protests. Signs at these protests call for "war" and "intifada". Nor is the war limited to Israel. It is directed against Americans as well. The protests involve masked students, faculty and non-students who occupy buildings, prevent Jewish students from attending classes and threaten to close down the college unless it divests from Israel and takes other bigoted actions. Pictured: Anti-Israel protesters outside Barnard College in New York on February 27, 2025. (Photo by Timothy A. Clary/AFP via Getty Images)

President Donald Trump has pledged to cut federal funding to schools that do not protect Jewish students from anti-semitic harassment and violence. The best place to begin this process is Barnard College in New York City. Cutting funding to major research universities threatens cutbacks on grants for medical and other important scientific research. Barnard College, on the other hand, is not a university. It does not have a medical school. Its faculty does little or no research that would affect Americans on a day-to-day basis. Cutting off federal aid to Barnard would have few negative impacts on issues that legitimately concern Americans, especially if it focuses on discriminatory actions and does not interfere with protected free speech

Barnard has become the poster child for anti-American, anti-semitic and anti-decent activities. Its radical "studies" departments are propaganda mills that teach students what to think rather than how to think. Consider, for example, the "Women's Gender and Sexuality Studies Department". Its website calls for students to "smash the white supremacist hetero-patriarchy." Its mission is described as follows:

"WGSS is dedicated to linking inquiry and action, theory and practice, scholarship and feminism. We work with our colleagues in Africana Studies, American Studies, and the Barnard Center for Research on Women to develop analyses and practices that address the current moment, including scholarly discussions, student projects with local communities, videos on transformative justice...."

In other words, this women's studies department has little to do with scholarship, teaching or learning. It has everything to do with advocacy. That is true of many other specialized studies departments at Barnard.

It is not surprising therefore that Barnard has become the incubator for anti-American, anti-Israel and anti-semitic protests. Signs at these protests call for "war" and "intifada". Nor is the war limited to Israel. It is directed against Americans as well. The protests involve masked students, faculty and non-students who occupy buildings, prevent Jewish students from attending classes and threaten to close down the college unless it divests from Israel and takes other bigoted actions.

When two Barnard students were expelled for disturbing a class at Columbia University taught by an Israeli professor, protesters occupied Barnard's Milstein Hall — named after a Jewish donor — and demanded that these expulsions be rescinded. The college administration, instead of disciplining students who break the rules and the law, negotiated with them. Cutting off funding from Barnard will not hurt students who want a real education, because Barnard students can enroll in courses at Columbia, which is affiliated with Barnard. It will put an end to the propaganda "courses", and "studies" "programs" in which Barnard seems to specialize.

It may also eventually cause the closing down of Barnard, because colleges depend on federal funding to supplement tuition and contributions from alumni. Donations from alumni are down recently, for understandable reasons.

Barnard's closure would be no great loss. Qualified students could transfer to Columbia or other universities, with no real negative implications. If federal funding is what is keeping Barnard afloat, it deserves to sink.

Higher education needs a shot across the bow and there is no better target than Barnard. Others may follow if they persist in destroying objective education and substituting ideological propaganda. Taxpayers should not be funding such bigoted enterprises.

It is imperative that freedom of speech, protected by the First Amendment, not be compromised by the government. Barnard is a private institution not bound by that amendment. Moreover, those activities that would cause a shutdown of federal funding are not covered by freedom of speech. They consist largely of physical actions, such as trespassing, blocking access, harassment and other forms of intimidation. Pure protests consisting of speech should not be a basis for defunding.

Federal funding is not a right. Every institution that seeks taxpayer funding must earn that privilege by what it is contributing to our nation. Barnard no longer deserves our financial or other support. Neither do other colleges and universities that do not protect Jewish students and faculty from harassment and intimidation on campus.

Most university administrators have failed to provide such protection because they are fearful of the reaction from radical students and faculty in their midst. There must be external pressures to incentivize cowardly administrators to do the right thing. Cutting off federal funding from the worst offenders, such as Barnard, would be a good beginning.


Alan M. Dershowitz
is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of War Against the Jews: How to End Hamas Barbarism and Get Trump: The Threat to Civil Liberties, Due Process, and Our Constitutional Rule of Law. He is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute, and is also the host of "The Dershow" podcast.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21459/cut-federal-funding-to-barnard

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Unit 8200 created AI language learning tool from intercepted Palestinian Arabic comms - report - Mathilda Heller

 

by Mathilda Heller

The investigation found that Unit 8200 trained the large language model (LLM) to understand spoken Arabic.

 

ILLUSTRATION: AI transposed over Arabic text (photo credit: Canva, INGIMAGE)
ILLUSTRATION: AI transposed over Arabic text
(photo credit: Canva, INGIMAGE)

Israel’s military surveillance Unit 8200 has reportedly developed a vast database of intercepted Palestinian communications in order to construct an artificial intelligence tool similar to ChatGPT, a joint investigation by The Guardian, +972 Magazine and Mekomit alleged on Thursday.

Israel reportedly hopes that the resulting AI tool "will transform its spying capabilities."

The investigation by the three papers found that Unit 8200 trained the large language model (LLM) to understand spoken Arabic, specifically Palestinian Arabic but also Lebanese dialects, by giving it significant amounts of intercepted telephone conversations and texts.

This was done with the aim of building an advanced chat bot able to answer questions about and provide insights into the people it is monitoring, three Israeli sources told +972 Magazine and The Guardian.

In an AI conference in Tel Aviv last year, a former intelligence officer called Chaked Roger Joseph Sayedoff said he had been part of the development of the model.

“We tried to create the largest dataset possible [and] collect all the data the state of Israel has ever had in Arabic,” he said.

“It’s not just about preventing shooting attacks," a source told +972 Magazine and The Guardian, "I can track human rights activists, monitor Palestinian construction in Area C [of the West Bank]. I have more tools to know what every person in the West Bank is doing.”

The Guardian alleges that the Unit 8200 officers were mobilized from major US tech companies, such as Google, Meta and Microsoft, chosen because of their expertise in building LLMs.

The development of the LLM

The development of the LLM encountered challenges because many open-source and commercial Arabic-language models were trained using standard written Arabic and not spoken Arabic, the report continued.

One source told +972 Magazine and The Guardian that “There are no transcripts of calls or WhatsApp conversations on the internet. It doesn’t exist in the quantity needed to train such a mode."

Therefore, the officers needed to collect all the spoken Arabic text the unit obtained and "put it into a centralized place." Sayedoff said that the unit “focused only on the [Arabic] dialects that hate us”.

The LLM was also specifically trained to be aware of specific military terminology used by terrorist groups, the sources said. 

According to the source, the model’s training data consists of approximately 100 billion words.

That said, the investigation did not ascertain if the AI tool has actually been deployed, however it was reportedly still being trained in latter half of 2024.

 Sayeret Haruv forces operating in Jenin (credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)Enlrage image
Sayeret Haruv forces operating in Jenin (credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)

Zach Campbell, a senior surveillance researcher at Human Rights Watch (HRW), expressed concern that the LLM would be used by Unit 8200 to make significant decisions about the lives of Palestinians in the West Bank.

“It’s a guessing machine,” he told the three investigating outlets. “And ultimately these guesses can end up being used to incriminate people.”

An IDF spokesperson did not specifically tell +972 Magazine annd The Guardian about the LLM, but reportedly said that he military “deploys various intelligence methods to identify and thwart terrorist activity by hostile organisations in the Middle East”.

Israel's use of AI

As The Guardian and +972 Magazine explains, AI usage is not new to Unit 8200, which has been using it for around ten years as a way of analyzing communications and recognizing patterns. Machine learning has also been used since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, for example as a way of identifying targets.

The Associated Press reported in February that the IDF's use of Microsoft and OpenAI technology "skyrocketed," following October 7, and was specifically used for identifying targets swiftly.

“These AI tools make the intelligence process more accurate and more effective,” the IDF told AP. “⁠They make more targets faster, but not at the expense of accuracy, and many times in this war they’ve been able to minimize civilian casualties.”

While many countries' spy agencies use LLMs, or are developing them, a former western spy chief said Israel's usage of Palestinian communications allowed it to use AI in ways “that would not be acceptable” among other spy agencies.

Campbell called the LLM “invasive and incompatible with human rights."

“We’re talking about highly personal data taken from people who are not suspected of a crime, being used to train a tool that could then help establish suspicion,” he said.

Brianna Rosen, a former White House national security official and senior research associate at Oxford university, said her main concern was that a ChatGPT-like tool can be based on errors or make mistakes: “Mistakes are going to be made, and some of those mistakes may have very serious consequences."

The IDF allegedly did not respond to The Guardian’s queries around how Unit 8200 will prevent inaccuracies and biases. “Due to the sensitive nature of the information, we cannot elaborate on specific tools, including methods used to process information,” a spokesperson said.

“However, the IDF implements a meticulous process in every use of technological abilities,” they added. “That includes the integral involvement of professional personnel in the intelligence process in order to maximize information and precision to the highest degree.”

The use of AI by the IDF was reported by high-ranking officers in February 2023. The officers revealed that IDF uses AI apparatuses to assist in offensive decision-making, for example, if a target is a military or a civilian one.

In addition, some defensive tools are used, like ones that alert forces that they are under threat of a rocket or a missile or that assist in better safeguarding border movement.

In December 2024, the Washington Post reported on an AI tool called Habsora — or "the Gospel" — used by the IDF to rapidly refill its "target bank," a list of Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists to be killed during military operations, along with details about their whereabouts and routines.

The Jerusalem Post reached out to the IDF for comment.


Mathilda Heller

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-845128

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Vlad, What’s a Guy Have to Do to Get Blacklisted by You? - Thaddeus G. McCotter

 

by Thaddeus G. McCotter

Criticizing Putin for decades apparently isn’t enough to make his blacklist—while others land on it with ease.

 

During a bygone era of Detroit Lions football misery, a losing coach who was trying to end his suffering cried out in anguish: “What’s a guy have to do to get fired around here?”

He soon found out.

Recently, one of my in-laws who lives in the United Kingdom (UK) informed me that he had received a singular distinction: he’d been placed on “Putin’s blacklist.”

While he is a private individual, it was not beyond the realm of possibility. Following the dictum to trust but verify, I checked. He had, indeed, been banned from entering the Russian Federation. I felt a tinge of envy and the brutal ache of unfairness.

After all, I have been assailing the former KGB spook for over two decades. My rightful antipathy toward Mr. Putin preceded Presidents George W. Bush seeing a soul in Vlad’s eyes; Barack Obama attempting a “Russian reset”; Donald Trump trying his own reset (and, unlike Mr. Obama, being slandered by the Democrats’ Russia-gate lie); and Joe Biden continuing his family’s long-running “fleece through strength” grift in Ukraine until Putin’s latest criminal invasion of a neighboring nation.

Speaking of trust but verify, Vlad, I have receipts. For example, per the Estonian World Review archives for 2006:

Congressman McCotter was one of the first American leaders to sound the alarm about Vladimir Putin’s creeping authoritarian tendencies and called for Western resolve in the face of Putin’s implicit threats to neighboring countries. At last year’s [2005] Joint Baltic American National Committee (JBANC) conference, McCotter coined the term “Re-Stalinization” to describe internal and external features of current Russian political thought.

How could Vlad resist blacklisting me after that and much, much more? I remained publicly and implacably opposed to the wannabe vozhd and his revanchist Russia’s international criminality on global display in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014 and 2022.

I even trekked across the Atlantic to England to denounce your shirtless, Billy Squier-like visage:

Recently, Congressman McCotter traveled to London, where he delivered a speech and debated a leader of Russia’s Motherland (Rodina) Party before the House of Lords. McCotter called for a renewed sense of shared purpose for the West, and for a transcendent moral order to revitalize the European-American transatlantic alliance. [Italics mine.]

Welcome to the party, J.D. Vance. I felt your pain.

But, no, you blacklisted my brother-in-law. Really, Vlad? Here in the blessed land of liberty, you only had to be MAGA to be cancelled, doxed, and blacklisted.

Or, now, you only need to recognize the futility of the continuing carnage in Ukraine and seek peace.

Both the progressive left and the neo-con Right have branded as a Putin stooge anyone who will not join them to “stand with Ukraine” until—when, exactly? The last Ukrainian killed? The first American soldier killed after being sent to Ukraine as a “security guarantee?” Or World War III?

One can explain why Russia invaded Ukraine without excusing this crime. Indeed, if one does not understand what led to this bloodbath, one cannot craft a just, enduring peace to put an end to it. No, it will not be perfect justice. That would entail not only restoring Ukraine’s boundaries, including Donbas and the Crimea. But that is not possible under current— or any realistically foreseeable—conditions on the ground.

To pretend otherwise is detrimental to peace and abets further deaths. Still, to make such cruel calculations in the abstract is the forte of the neocons. But one might have expected otherwise from the progressive Left, who had no qualms arguing that they could “support the troops but not the war” when their own nation’s men and women in uniform were confronting the enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan. If they could argue that opposing the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars did not mean they also supported Saddam Hussein and the Taliban, then it is the height of hypocrisy for them to claim that supporting peace in Ukraine makes someone a minion of Putin—like, say, Mr. Obama?

Via a 2016 post by Brookings that touched upon Mr. Obama’s response to Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine:

In an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic, President Obama laid out key elements of his approach to foreign policy… As regards the two-year-old conflict between Ukraine and Russia, the president said Ukraine is a core interest for Moscow, in a way that it is not for the United States. He noted that, since Ukraine does not belong to NATO, it is vulnerable to Russian military domination, and that “we have to be very clear about what our core interests are and what we are willing to go to war for.”

It would seem progressives who supported Mr. Obama’s position then need to explain the reason for their newfound support for open-ended escalation in Ukraine now—other than “orange man bad.” Not holding my breath….

Vlad, do not make their mistake. I support a negotiated peace in Ukraine, and I want to see you deposed for your war crimes by the very Russians whose progeny and prospects you have squandered in the killing fields of your “near abroad” during your criminal pursuit of your solipsistic delusions that have made Russia not an emerging empire but an international pariah.

True, the crystalline morality of the present quagmire requires an alacritous end to the slaughter. Likely, then, the world and I must wait until you are stuffed in history’s dumpster and buried beneath the ignominy you so richly deserve. But my animus towards autocrats like you, Vlad, remains implacable, while I patiently await the opportunity to disrespectfully defecate upon your grave.

That said, Vlad, what’s a guy have to do to get blacklisted by you?

***

An American Greatness contributor, the Hon. Thaddeus G. McCotter (M.C., Ret.) served Michigan’s 11th Congressional district from 2003-2012, He served as Chair of the Republican House Policy Committee and as a member of the Financial Services, Joint Economic, Budget, Small Business, and International Relations Committees. Not a lobbyist, he is also a contributor to Chronicles; a frequent public speaker and moderator for public policy seminars; and a co-host of “John Batchelor: Eye on the World” on CBS radio, among sundry media appearances.


Thaddeus G. McCotter

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2025/03/08/vlad-whats-a-guy-have-to-do-to-get-blacklisted-by-you/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter