Saturday, November 14, 2020

Pro-Trump supporters descend on DC for 'Million MAGA March' near White House - Marisa Schultz


​ by Marisa Schultz

President Trump flashed a thumbs up from his motorcade

Tens of thousands of President Trump supporters gathered Saturday in Washington, D.C. -- echoing claims of voter fraud and urging him not to concede to President-elect Joe Biden -- and were rewarded by an appearance from Trump himself.

The president and his motorcade drove past the supporters, some of them waving Trump flags and holding signs saying "Stop the Fraud" and "Best Prez Ever." The crowd chanted "Four More Years!" as Trump gave a thumbs up.


Trump hinted Friday on Twitter he may attend the rally, but his motorcade Saturday was headed to his Virginia golf course instead. 

Supporters of President Donald Trump cheer as his motorcade drives past a rally of supporters near the White House, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Supporters of President Donald Trump cheer as his motorcade drives past a rally of supporters near the White House, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

"Heartwarming to see all of the tremendous support out there, especially the organic Rallies that are springing up all over the Country, including a big one on Saturday in D.C," Trump tweeted Friday. "I may even try to stop by and say hello."


Trump went on to say the "Election was Rigged"  but Twitter labeled the tweet with a warning that Trump's fraud claims are disputed.  His campaign has yet to provide evidence of the systemic fraud he has alleged.


The latest vote tallies from the Nov. 3 election show massive turnout and influx of mail-in voting due to the coronavirus pandemic.

Biden has garnered more than 78 million votes -- a record -- compared to Trump's more than 72 million. The former vice president is on track for more than 290 electoral votes, compared to Trump's 232. Georgia is the one state Fox News has not called, but Biden is winning the Peach State ahead of a hand recount. 

A motorcade carrying President Donald Trump drives by a group of supporters participating in a rally near the White House, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

A motorcade carrying President Donald Trump drives by a group of supporters participating in a rally near the White House, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

In D.C. Saturday, a "March for Trump" demonstration organized by Women for America First was to go from Freedom Plaza to the Supreme Court. An estimated 10,000 people were anticipated, according to their park permit, and crowds filled the streets around the White House.

Enthusiastic Trump supporters delivered a series of fiery speeches from Freedom Plaza repeating Trump's unfounded claim that there was widespread election fraud and that Trump actually had a victory. Some talked of more specific ways to stop Biden from becoming president, including legal challenges, election audits and urging states to appoint pro-Trump electors who would defy the popular vote results in their states.

"This election was stolen from us," said Courtney Holland, a conservative activist from Nevada, told the crowd, a line that was often repeated. She then led a chant of "Stop the Steal!"


Speeches were also expected from Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Penn.; Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz.; Rep.-elect Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga.; Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Texas, and others. 

Demonstrators came from various corners of the country -- including Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Florida, Pennsylvania and Maryland -- and were peaceful. The Trump supporters were partying, live streaming, singing, and chanting “Stop the Steal," "For more Years" and “USA.” Upbeat supporters said Trump has been a fighter for America and now it's time to stand up for him as he fights for four more years. 

"President Trump: We have your back," said Scott Presler, a conservative activist.

A smattering of counter-demonstrators was also spotted, bashing Trump's attempts to overturn Biden's victory. Refuse Fascism is organizing near the White House to demand "The Trump/Pence Regime Must Go," organizers said. 


Another pro-Trump demonstration called "The Million MAGA March" was set for Washington D.C. The far-right Proud Boys have indicated on social media they will be attending and a group with Proud Boys vets and hats was seen walking in the crowd. The march was slated to start at the Supreme Court and end at Freedom Plaza.

Supporters of President Donald Trump cheer as his motorcade drives past a rally of supporters near the White House, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

Supporters of President Donald Trump cheer as his motorcade drives past a rally of supporters near the White House, Saturday, Nov. 14, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

"The Million Maga March will be the greatest Trump rally in history," the group tweeted. "We demand a transparent election process, free of fraudulent ballots."


Rich Edson contributed to this report.


Marisa Schultz  


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Israel, The Sunnis and The Return of a Pro-Iran White House - Caroline Glick


​ by Caroline Glick

The Israeli media grotesquely cheers.


President Donald Trump is the most pro-Israel president in history. President Barack Obama was the most anti-Israel president in history.

And now, the likeliest outcome of last week's presidential election is that Obama's vice president Joe Biden will be inaugurated on January 20 and Trump will depart the White House.

Trump is rightly exercising his right to cause a vote recount in Wisconsin and Georgia and suing to fight alleged voter fraud in Michigan and Pennsylvania. But to win the race at this point, Trump will need to win in Arizona and Georgia and either reverse the vote count in Wisconsin or Michigan or win the election in Pennsylvania. Trump owes it to his 71 million voters to ensure that the election results reflect the will of the voters. And so, he will exhaust all legal avenues. But the probability his efforts will win him the election is low.

The Israeli media grotesquely cheers the apparent defeat of Israel's best friend ever in the Oval Office and his replacement by the vice president of the most hostile US leader in history. While doing so the commentators soothingly insist Biden is a great friend to Israel.

While comforting, this claim is untrue, particularly in relation to Iran.

Biden is not known for his strong principles. Long a weathervane for popular opinion, Biden has changed his positions on everything from the politics of race to international trade to criminal justice to social security and Medicare. But while he has been quick to align his position on nearly all issues with the prevailing political winds, Biden has maintained allegiance to one, deeply controversial position throughout the years. That position is sympathy and support for the theocratic regime in Iran.

In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, Biden advocated giving $200 million to Iran to show America's good intentions to the Islamic world. During the Iraq War, Biden was one of the most powerful voices calling for the US to cut a deal with Iran which would essentially transform post-Saddam Iraq into an Iranian satrapy.

Biden was one of the chief advocates of nuclear appeasement towards Iran, both in the years preceding his ascendance to the vice presidency under Obama and throughout Obama's nuclear talks with Iran. Those talks, of course, led to the conclusion of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal that gave Iran an open path to a nuclear arsenal within a decade.

Since announcing his run for office, Biden – who was viciously critical of Trump's decision to abandon the nuclear deal – has pledged repeatedly that he will reinstate the US' commitment to the deal if elected, ensuring Iran acquires a nuclear arsenal.

In response to this anticipated policy change in Washington, Israel and its allies in the Persian Gulf have a keen interest in taking action to minimize Iran's prospects for achieving military nuclear capability during the next two months.

Those allies, in particular Saudi Arabia, are undoubtedly concerned at the prospect of a Biden administration. And their concern is well-placed.

In an election-eve interview with the Dearborn, MI-based American Arab News, Biden's running mate Senator Kamala Harris pledged to upend US-Saudi ties.

In her words, "Instead of standing by as the government of Saudi Arabia pursues disastrous, dangerous policies, including the ongoing war in Yemen, we will reassess the US relationship with Saudi Arabia and end support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen."

In other words, the US will support Iran's Houthi proxy in its war against Saudi Arabia.

There is an upside for Israel in Biden's anticipated turn towards Iran. Saudi Arabia, which was diffident about joining the UAE, Bahrain and Sudan in normalizing its ties with Israel may choose to do so in the coming weeks. Such a move, which would vastly widen the Arab-Israel peace forged by President Trump through the Abraham Accords would present the Biden administration with a major alliance standing as one opposed to a nuclear-armed Iran.

In the same interview, Harris pledged to work against Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria and block all Israeli moves to implement its sovereignty in Judea and Samaria in accordance with the Trump peace plan, while reopening the US consulate in Jerusalem that specifically served the Palestinians independent of the US Embassy to Israel. US aid to the PLO-run Palestinian Authority in Judea and Samaria and to Hamas-run Gaza will also be forthcoming, she promised.

In anticipation of these hostile moves, over the next two months, Israel should take concerted and meaningful action to dismantle illegal, strategically located Palestinian settlements in Area C.

If the Republicans are able to maintain their control over the Senate, and with a diminished Democrat majority in the House of Representatives, Biden will have difficulty passing the progressive domestic policy agenda he ran on. With the Israel-Sunni alliance system that Trump has strengthened and expanded, he will also face obstacles on his way to reinstating Obama's Middle East policies.


Caroline Glick is an award-winning columnist and author of “The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Georgia recount may be as corrupt as the election itself - Andrea Widburg


​ by Andrea Widburg

Democrats made this fraud possible because they have steadily chipped away at other election legitimacy gatekeepers, such as identification checks and signature matches.

On Friday morning, Georgia began to recount the votes it received on November 3.  However, within a short time, reports came in that the recount process was being conducted with as little respect for transparency as the original vote count.  Without that transparency, this recount is a waste of taxpayer time and money.

Before getting to the problem with the recount itself, we need to be sure we're all on the same page about what's happening in Georgia, so some background is necessary.  In my post about the two different types of election fraud, I explained that the first type of fraud goes to ballot legitimacy.  That is, was the piece of paper that got fed into the counting machine from a duly registered voter?  If not, that vote cannot be counted.

We know from the affidavits flooding in from across the country that the Democrats used the Wuhan virus to justify mailing out millions of ballots to anyone on the voter registers, whether that person had since died, moved on, or lost interest in voting.  Because voter rolls are chock-full of such voters, mass mailings meant that thousand, tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of ballots were floating around in mail-in states, free for anyone to grab and submit.

Democrats made this fraud possible because they have steadily chipped away at other election legitimacy gatekeepers, such as identification checks and signature matches.  In Democrat-run states, voting became as easy and as vulnerable to fraud as going to a shopping mall, filling out names on slips of paper, and sticking them in a big bucket for a promotional "drawing" for a bike or car.  Or, even better, mailing hundreds of completed slips of paper to your buddy at the car dealer for him to put in the bucket.  That's how Democrat states ran their elections in 2020.

So here's what's important to know about Georgia's recount: the recount will do nothing to correct this first type of fraud.  The process of vetting voters was wholly corrupt, and there is no way to disentangle the illegitimate from the legitimate ballots during the recount.

The second type of fraud involves counting.  Data-crunchers have produced powerful evidence that electronic voting machines in contested states were set to switch votes from Trump to Biden.  Jay Valentine has an accessible rundown of that type of fraud here.  What's good about computer fraud is that, while it can be hidden on a small scale, on a large scale, it leaves unmistakable clues.  (You can read more about these clues here and here.)  There's strong evidence that the same pro-Biden code that showed up in Michigan also affected votes in Georgia.

In theory, while it won't winnow out illegitimate ballots, a hand recount will at least prevent a repeat of the computer counting fraud.  However, that works only if the humans doing the counting don't cheat.

The best way to prevent humans from cheating is to watch them.  Indeed, those of you old enough to remember the Florida recount in 2000 will also remember that the media wandered freely through the counting rooms, getting close-ups of people carefully examining each ballot for those infamous hanging chads.  Everyone understood that the point was to get it right.

What happens, though, when the people in charge of the recount, in place of transparency, once again refuse to allow representatives of the parties to audit their work?  What happens is this:


In a brief video that I can't embed but that you can view here, Dick Morris explains that there is more going on than just barring Republicans from observing the vote.  In addition, to the extent there are still available envelopes from the mailed in (absentee) ballots, secretary of state Brad Raffensperger stated that the counters would not attempt to match the signatures.

The refusal to check signatures or otherwise try to validate mail-in ballots has created hugely anomalous rejection rates.  Typically, Georgia rejects 3.5% of absentee ballots because they cannot be validated.  This year, says Morris, the rejection rate is 0.002%.  As Morris said, with nothing more, that discrepancy points to vast fraud.

Not content with removing these fraud controls, Raffensberger also ordered the counties to finish the process by 3 P.M. on Saturday.  Georgia received roughly 5 million votes.  It's ludicrous to believe they can properly be recounted in one and a half days.  This isn't a recount; it's fraud theater.

For more information about what's going on in Georgia, including the Senate runoff, be sure to check out  That site is all over Georgia's election fraud.

Image: Rotten peach by Steven Depolo.  CC BY 2.0.  Label added in Pixlr by Andrea Widburg.


Andrea Widburg  


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Left’s Stalinist Purge Attempt Against Trump Supporters - Joseph Klein


​ by Joseph Klein

Trump-haters demand a “reckoning".


President Trump continues to exercise all the rights he is entitled to under the law to challenge the vote counts in key battleground states. Whatever happens, Trump’s extraordinary record of accomplishments on behalf of the American people deserve to be defended against the mass dissemination of crass anti-Trump propaganda. And the more than 70 million Americans who voted to reelect President Trump to a second term should hold their heads up high against all the disgusting ad hominem attacks aimed their way.

Trump-haters did everything they could for four years to undermine the legitimacy of the Trump presidency. They are now lashing out at President Trump and his supporters for daring to question the legitimacy of the mainstream media’s anointment of Joe Biden as president-elect before all recounts and court challenges play out and the states’ electors make the election results official.

According to the New York Times’ Moscow bureau chief Andrew Higgins, President Trump is acting like a dictator by refusing to concede the election after the press decided he lost. There have been no official certifications of the states’ election results. But for Higgins and his media pals, it’s all over because the media say so. Higgins has been in Russia too long where there is no independent judiciary to resolve election disputes. Whatever Putin wants, Putin gets. To remind Higgins, in the United States we do have an independent judiciary under our Constitution's separation of powers.

We have seen this year an unprecedented widespread use of mail-in ballots across the country that may have resulted in significant fraud affecting vote tallies in key battleground states. Asking for vote recounts, audits and independent judicial review is not, as Higgins believes, akin to using “the time-honored tools of dictators” to reverse elections. It is an inherent part of America's system of the rule of law.

Leftists won’t be satisfied simply with a Biden win. Their thirst for revenge knows no bounds. Leftists who accuse President Trump of sowing hatred against his enemies are planning to make life miserable for patriotic Americans who were affiliated with the Trump campaign and administration. Robert Spencer laid out the leftists’ slash-and-burn tactics in his column entitled “A Biden Presidency and the American Gulag.”

Spencer mentioned, for example, the “Trump Accountability Project,” which demands on its website that “those who took a paycheck from the Trump Administration should not profit from their efforts to tear our democracy apart.” Former Democratic National Committee national press secretary Hari Sevugan, who also served as a campaign spokesman for former President Barack Obama, is behind this crude attempt at a Stalinist purge. Sevugan tweeted that employers thinking of hiring anyone who served in the Trump White House “should know there are consequences for hiring anyone who helped Trump attack American values.”

Spencer also reminded us of Bill Clinton’s Labor Secretary Robert B. Reich’s despicable name and shame tweet on October 17th: “When this nightmare is over, we need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. It would erase Trump’s lies, comfort those who have been harmed by his hatefulness, and name every official, politician, executive, and media mogul whose greed and cowardice enabled this catastrophe.”

And then there is Democratic-Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who tweeted after the election: “Is anyone archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny their complicity in the future? I foresee decent probability of many deleted Tweets, writings, photos in the future.”

Journalists like to think of themselves as presenting the “first rough-draft of history.” But real journalists today are few and far between. Instead, we have the Trump-hating media doing their part to paint the Trump era as a dark chapter in American history. For four years, they tried to destroy President Trump with baseless charges and false stories. Trump correctly called out the political bias in much of the mainstream media and exposed their gross hypocrisy for the American people to see. This enraged the holier-than-thou media establishment further. Now, after prematurely anointing Joe Biden as the next president, Trump’s enemies in the media are angling for the last word in describing the Trump presidency as some sort of an evil autocratic regime.

In the words of The New Yorker writer Masha Gessen, for example, we have been through a “trauma”  caused by “the most divisive and destructive Presidency in memory.” She demands “a reckoning” for what she claims President Trump has put us through. Gessen wants “congressional hearings, special-counsel investigations, court proceedings, town halls, journalistic projects, truth-and-reconciliation commissions, and some yet-to-be-invented formats” so that we can “talk about what happened and about how we go on living in such a way that it doesn’t happen again.”

Masha Gessen is not the only so-called “journalist” demanding a “reckoning.” Bret Stephens, an op-ed columnist for the New York Times who considers himself a conservative, wrote that the conservative movement needs a “reckoning” because of its support for President Trump. Stephens does not speak for conservatives. He is just another Trump-hater writing for the Trump-hating, left leaning New York Times. Why should conservatives have turned against President Trump when he delivered historic tax cuts, massive deregulation, the appointment of more than 200 conservative judges and three originalist Supreme Court justices, enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws, support for law enforcement, and defense of the Second Amendment? Stephens has no answer other than to charge Trump with being  “immoral — manifestly, comprehensively and unrepentantly.” The credible reports of Biden family corruption, from which the “big guy” Joe Biden stood to benefit, did not make it on Stephens’ radar.  

Anne Applebaum, a  staff writer at The Atlantic, wrote that “Trump is a president who never had America’s interests at heart.” Did she have her head in the sand for the last four years? What does Applebaum think that President Trump’s “America First” policies, which he brilliantly executed on behalf of American workers, were all about?

Jennifer Rubin, who writes opinion columns for The Washington Post, went over the edge completely during an appearance on MSNBC. "It's not only that Trump has to lose, but that all his enablers have to lose," Rubin said. "We have to collectively in essence burn down the Republican Party."

Rubin also tweeted, “Any R now promoting rejection of an election or calling to not to follow the will of voters or making baseless allegations of fraud should never serve in office, join a corporate board, find a faculty position or be accepted into ‘polite’ society. We have a list.” This reference to a list sounds eerily like the late Senator Joe McCarthy’s infamous “list” of alleged Communists working for the State Department that McCarthy referred to in a 1950 speech.

Gessen, Stephens, Applebaum, Rubin and their Trump-hating media cohorts are infected with the Trump Derangement Syndrome. They detest President Trump’s combative style, which they falsely claim is racist. They detest his insistence on strictly enforcing the nation’s immigration laws, deliberately obscuring the distinction that Trump has frequently made between immigrants who arrive in the U.S. legally and the gate crashers who are in this country illegally. They detest Trump’s America First policies, even though they confuse what they think is isolationism with smart multilateral relationships that do not rip off the United States. They find Joe Biden’s bland tone, along with his rejection of America First policies while embracing globalist institutions, oh-so reassuring.

The many, many millions of Americans who voted for President Trump are understandably proud of what he has accomplished on behalf of the American people in four short years. Here is a sampling:

  • Destroying the ISIS territorial caliphate that Obama regarded as a junior varsity team, and killing its ruthless leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi
  • Facilitating historic Middle East peace agreements between Israel and three Arab countries
  • Confronting China’s destructive behavior towards the United States that previous presidents ignored
  • Keeping the United States out of new overseas wars while lowering tensions with North Korea
  • Achieving energy independence
  • Creating a pre-pandemic economy with historically low unemployment, including for African-Americans and Hispanics, and reducing the poverty rate to a 17-year low
  • Putting America back on the path to economic recovery sooner than many so-called “experts” expected after making the decision to initially shut down the country in order to slow the spread of the coronavirus
  • Combating the once-in-a-century coronavirus pandemic by forging unprecedented partnerships between government and the private sector and sharply reducing bureaucratic red tape, in order to produce ventilators, personal protective equipment, and testing capabilities in record time
  • Paving the way for rapid development, production and distribution of vaccines that can finally allow us to return to a normal life
  • Lowering the price of prescription drugs
  • Reaching bipartisan agreement to push through legislation giving individual Americans and small businesses an economic lifeline during the pandemic
  • Spearheading and signing the First Step Act, which reforms the criminal justice system and reverses years of mass incarceration of African-American males

President Trump accomplished all this and more in spite of  how the Democrats and their media enablers went after President Trump and his allies with manufactured charges of Russian collusion, followed by the most divisive, partisan, and destructive impeachment farce in American history.

The self-important dunderheads in the media must not be allowed to prevail with their “first draft” of revisionist history that seeks to label President Trump, in the sneering words of the New York Times, as “the worst American president in modern history.” Unless the truth wins out regarding President Trump’s outstanding accomplishments in the face of unrelenting efforts to sabotage his presidency, the leftist media will get away with shaping how history ultimately judges the Trump presidency. We cannot let that happen.


Joseph Klein  


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden's Great Leap Forward: A split second in Wisconsin - Dan Rabil


​ by Dan Rabil

The statistical word for this is bullfeathers.

I live in Switzerland and was working at my computer the morning after the U.S. election when I was stunned to see the Fox election map suddenly do something completely unnatural: in a split second between 3 A.M. and 4 A.M. U.S. Central Time, the Wisconsin icon switched from light-red Trump to light-blue Biden.  In that same instant, the probability meter, which had been very accurate in 2016, likewise jerked from a 77% Trump likelihood to over 80% Biden.

Maybe it's because most Americans did not watch it happen live as I did, but I have since wondered why this bizarre moment — Biden's Great Leap Forward — has not been widely mentioned.

So I decided to find that late-night moment of Biden's Blue Miracle in the voting results database.  The database is sent from the supplier to the New York Times, and here is the link for the Wisconsin data:

In the screen shot below is the moment I saw happen in real time at 3:42:20 ("Z" or Zulu Time is six hours ahead of Wisconsin time), as the lead changed from a 3.6% Trump lead to a 0.3% Biden lead:

Here's the effect of that data dump before and after:

Note that within the first 40 minutes after Wisconsin's vote counts began publishing at 8 P.M., Trump established a lead that basically held steady at around 51% to 47% for the next seven hours, as the total count climbed to nearly 3 million votes.

Note also that the two candidates remained fairly close throughout the night as the count rose from about 500,000 to 3 million, implying that this was not a case of Trump getting huge in-person numbers, only to have them erased by slightly more huge Biden mail-in numbers, as the Democrat media would have you believe.  Rather, Biden voters appeared to have slogged to the polls and early vote drop-off bins as much as anyone else, contrary to the notion that they cowered in fear of COVID and all voted by mail.

Everything was quiet as occasional vote updates trickled in: 2,200 ballots at 2:20 A.M.; 5,900 votes at 3:08 A.M.  Suddenly, 170,000 votes — 5% of the total state count — came crashing in in one dump (there were over 340 data time series delivered, making this one 17 times larger than average).  Trump had been ahead by 108,000 votes at 3:42 A.M., only to be behind by 9,000 votes an instant later.  (With 99% of the vote counted and the state called for Biden, the basement-dwelling candidate had a 20,000-vote lead.)

In summary: With the ballot count approaching 3 million out of a total of less than 3.3 million recorded, the worst presidential candidate in history, who could barely get his tired body across the Delaware state line for a 60-person "rally," at 3:42 A.M. on the night of the election bagged a net of 118,215 votes in a single massive data dump to take a narrow lead.  And that lead then just stayed nice and steady till the count slowly finished eight days later.

The statistical word for this is bullfeathers.

Dan Rabil  


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Video: Tlaib, Omar, Ocasio-Cortez Ruling Over America -


​ by

The nightmare hovering on the horizon.


[To get the whole story on the roots of the Left’s malice and what lies behind its war of destruction on free societies, read Jamie Glazov’s United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror: CLICK HERE.]

Subscribe to the Glazov Gang‘s YouTube Channel and follow us on Instagram: @JamieGlazov, Parler: @JamieGlazov and Twitter: @JamieGlazov.

This new Glazov Gang episode features Barry Nussbaum, the founder of American Truth Project.

Barry focuses on Tlaib, Omar, Ocasio-Cortez Ruling Over America, revealing The nightmare that now hovers on the horizon.

Don’t miss it!


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Arabs: "Westerners Must Stop Appeasing Islamists" - Khaled Abu Toameh


​ by Khaled Abu Toameh

We are now seeing a large number of Arabs and Muslims warning about the clear and present danger Islamism poses to many different societies.

  • "Political Islamic organizations are the reason for perpetuating terrorism and hatred. These organizations are banned in most of the Islamic countries, while Europe, especially Britain, embraces them and allows them to operate freely. Europeans can only blame themselves." — Mohammed al-Sheikh, Saudi writer, Twitter, October 29, 2020.

  • "There is no doubt that France's previous policies, lenient with [Muslim] extremists, contributed to the current wave of terrorism, as well as legislation that guarantees the right to asylum and immigration to every expatriate on its soil." — Hailah al-Mashouh, Saudi columnist and political analyst, Elaph, November 5, 2020.

  • The group [Muslim World League] warned that Islamists have succeeded in implementing their political projects in non-Muslim countries under the umbrella of training mosque preachers and funding Islamic charities.

  • We are now seeing a large number of Arabs and Muslims warning about the clear and present danger Islamism poses to many different societies. These individuals are demonstrating courage and conviction in taking this public stance. Their advice, that Western states must eradicate Islamist organizations in Europe, is vitally important.

The recent terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims in France and Austria should serve as a warning to Europeans who have long been appeasing and endorsing extremist Muslim politicians and organizations. Pictured: The door of a restaurant, riddled with bullet holes, in Vienna, Austria on November 3, 2020, the day after a terror attack in which four people were killed. (Photo by Helmut Fohringer/APA/AFP via Getty Images)

The recent terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims in France and Austria should serve as a warning to Europeans who have long been appeasing and endorsing extremist Muslim politicians and organizations.

This warning was sounded in the past few weeks by a growing number of writers, political analysts and politicians in Arab and Islamic countries. The main message they are sending to the Europeans: Political Islam is a threat not only to non-Muslims, but to Muslims and Arabs as well. Europeans need to wake up and start confronting the Muslim extremists.

"Political Islam organizations are the reason for spreading hatred and terrorism in the world," said Saudi writer Mohammed al-Sheikh.

"Political Islamic organizations are the reason for perpetuating terrorism and hatred. These organizations are banned in most of the Islamic countries, while Europe, especially Britain, embraces them and allows them to operate freely. Europeans can only blame themselves."

Abdel Moneim Ibrahim, a prominent political analyst from Bahrain, wrote that France is paying the price for its "courtship" of political Islam.

"Is France really paying the price for its complacency and its lax security grip on the dozens of terrorist organizations operating under the cover of charitable or Islamic societies, Quran memorization or teaching the Arabic language, as well as scores of imams in French mosques who incite violence and hatred and sympathize with jihadist terrorist groups?

"This is true. France bears part of the responsibility for not closing these suspicious associations under the pretext of freedom of expression and freedom of religions...

"The French government knows very well that there are suspicious Islamic governments and organizations currently supporting terrorist acts in France. It knows very well that Turkey -- specifically the government of [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan -- and Qatar -- are the ones that feed terrorism and support it with money from France and the rest of the European countries. Turkey and Qatar rely on suspicious associations supervised by the Muslim Brotherhood and other terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda and ISIS."

If France continues to flirt with political Islam, Ibrahim cautioned, "the innocent French will continue to pay a very high price."

Palestinian political analyst Adli Sadeq pointed out that in many Western countries, the Muslim Brotherhood organization was still being treated as a "moderate political movement."

Many countries, Sadeq said, have refused to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization because they falsely consider it a "moderate" group. "It makes no sense to say that the Muslim Brotherhood is centrist and moderate," he argued. "There is no difference between them and the jihadist groups."

Tunisian newspaper editor and political analyst Alhashimi Nawiri called on Western countries to re-evaluate their relations with Islamic organizations:

"It has become clear that these [Islamic] organizations, in their ideological depth, are fascist groups that have nothing to do with democratic values.

"The damage that the West has begun feeling is having a severe impact on the cohesion of its societies and states. This is the result of embracing and nurturing these [Islamic] political movements. The presence of these groups in Western countries has begun to cast a shadow over millions of Muslims living there and who are required (after each terrorist attack) to prove their innocence and clarify that Islam is innocent of these groups and their actions."

Hailah al-Mashouh, a Saudi columnist and political analyst, also took France to task for its conciliatory policies toward Islamic organizations:

"There is no doubt that France's previous policies, lenient with [Muslim] extremists, contributed to the current wave of terrorism, as well as legislation that guarantees the right to asylum and immigration to every expatriate on its soil."

She advised the European Union to outlaw and criminalize all political Islamic groups, especially those affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, and said such a move would be an effective weapon to combat terrorism.

"There is no decisive solution to the [terrorist] attacks except by criminalizing and expelling extremist groups," al-Mashouh emphasized. The Western countries, she added, should learn from the Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated groups, which were expelled from the two countries. Failure to expel these groups from France and other Western countries, she warned, will lead to more violence and bloodletting.

The Muslim World League, a pan-Islamic group whose declared goal is to clarify the true message of Islam by "advancing moderate values that promote peace, tolerance and love," warned that political Islam is an extremist, dangerous and violent ideology.

"The ideas of political Islam are based on spreading hatred, interfering in the affairs of states and influencing their national cohesion, as well as inciting violence in it in order to pass its political agenda," the group said in an apparent message to France, Austria and other Western countries and those who embrace and empower Muslim Brotherhood groups and figures. The group warned that Islamists have succeeded in implementing their political projects in non-Muslim countries under the umbrella of training mosque preachers and funding Islamic charities.

Several other prominent Arab and Muslim media personalities and political analysts advised the Europeans to be wary of the financial and political support the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated groups receive from Turkey, Iran and Qatar.

Faisal Abbas, editor-in-chief of Arab News, said that the "malicious hands" of Turkey are aiding the Muslim terrorists in Western countries.

"The misuse of religion to score points has always been the preferred method of these malicious regimes, and perhaps Iran is a professional in this field," Abbas commented. "They are using religion for political gain and to stir hate and incitement. "We are living through difficult and dangerous times."

Abbas's warning about the role of Turkey, Iran and Qatar in financing and supporting Islamist groups and individuals in Western countries was shared by Tunisian writer Al-Habib al-Aswad, who wrote that "terrorism has turned into an industry run by Islamists aspiring to rule the world and who still think in the logic of Islamic conquests and infidels."

Al-Aswad warned that Turkey and Qatar have been funding Islamist organizations, militias and media outlets in the West and said: "We are nearing a new wave of terrorism that could be more violent than the previous ones."

We are now seeing a large number of Arabs and Muslims warning about the clear and present danger Islamism poses to many different societies. These individuals are demonstrating courage and conviction in taking this public stance. Their advice, that Western states must eradicate Islamist organizations in Europe, is vitally important. Further appeasement of terrorists will have a direct result: more beheadings and murders on the streets of European capitals and cities.

  • Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on Twitter


Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at Gatestone Institute.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Jason Whitlock brilliantly explains how white liberals keep blacks subordinate and dependent on Democrats - Thomas Lifson


​ by Thomas Lifson

The essence of this argument is that by capitalizing "Black," white libs make skin color the controlling attribute for African-Americans.

I confess that my jaw actually dropped in wonderment last night when Jason Whitlock appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight (yes, still essential viewing — on Fox News) to explain the recent push to capitalize "Black" but not "white," as the Associated Press now demands.  I had plenty of reasons to scorn this move, but Mr. Whitlock was miles ahead of me, seeing the really big picture, making my understanding (a way of ritually humiliating whites) both incorrect and trivial in comparison.

This man is a genius — and, for the racialists who seek to keep African-Americans poor and loyal to the Democrats, the most dangerous man in America.

Take six minutes and watch this:


In case the video is deleted, the essence of his argument is that by capitalizing "Black," white libs make skin color the controlling attribute for African-Americans.  The justification the AP uses for its insistence on capitalizing is consistent with this.  Whites, Asians, and others, by contrast, define themselves by loving God, being intelligent, taking care of their family, or anything else that is the focus of their lives.  Only blacks (or Blacks, if you will) are defined by skin tone.

What makes this so pernicious is that the entertainment and news media define "Black" in extremely destructive ways, as exemplified by rap music, gangsta culture, and the like — modes of behavior guaranteed to keep 99% of those practicing them unsuccessful.

Jason Whitlock, I salute you!  You changed my mind, and I am grateful.

Photo credit: YouTube screen grab


Thomas Lifson 


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Changing Attitudes Toward Religiosity: A Double-Edged Sword for Arab Rulers - Dr. James M. Dorsey


​ by Dr. James M. Dorsey

The changes attach greater importance to adherence to individual morals and values and less to formal observance of religious practice.


BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 1,815, November 13, 2020

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Public opinion polling in the Arab world suggests that autocratic leaders like Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman and his UAE counterpart, Muhammad bin Zayed, have gotten some things right. Both men have to varying degrees replaced religion with nationalism as the ideology legitimizing their rule and sought to ensure that countries in the region broadly adhere to their worldview.

The worldview of Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman and his UAE counterpart Muhammad bin Zayed rejects any political expression of Islam, propagates a religious duty to obey the ruler without exception, represses freedom of expression and dissent, yet leaves unchallenged religious concepts such as notions of infidels and slavery that are viewed by Muslim reformers as well as significant segments of Arab youth as obsolete.

The crown princes’ similar worldviews are, in part, a response to changing youth attitudes toward religiosity that are evident in public opinion polls and in mass anti-government protests in countries like Lebanon and Iraq.

The changes attach greater importance to adherence to individual morals and values and less to formal observance of religious practice. They also represent a rejection of sectarianism, which is a fixture of governance in Lebanon and Iraq as well as the Saudi kingdom’s past religious ultra-conservatism.

The problem for rulers like the Saudi and UAE crown princes is that the loosening of social restrictions in Saudi Arabia, including the emasculation of the kingdom’s religious police, the lifting of a ban on women driving, less strict implementation of gender segregation, introduction of Western-style entertainment, greater professional opportunities for women, and a degree of genuine religious pluralism in the UAE are only first steps toward responding to the aspirations of young people.

Subjugation of religious establishments that turns clerics and scholars into regime parrots fuels scepticism among young people toward religious institutions and leaders. It is also void of a credible theological effort to recontextualize Muslim concepts that no longer apply in a modern and changing world.

“Youth have…witnessed how religious figures, who still remain influential in many Arab societies, can sometimes give in to change even if they have resisted it initially. This not only feeds into Arab youth’s scepticism towards religious institutions but also further highlights the inconsistency of the religious discourse and its inability to provide timely explanation or justifications to the changing reality of today,” said Gulf scholar Eman Alhussein in a commentary on the latest Arab Youth Survey.

The survey found that despite 40% of those polled defining religion as the most important constituent element of their identity, 66% saw a need for religious institutions to be reformed.

“The way some Arab countries consume religion in the political discourse, which is further amplified on social media, is no longer deceptive to the youth who can now see through it,” Ms. Alhussein said.

2018 Arab Opinion Index poll suggested that public opinion may support the reconceptualization of Muslim jurisprudence. Sixty-eight percent of those polled agreed that “no religious authority is entitled to declare followers of other religions to be infidels.”

Similarly, 70% of those surveyed rejected the notion that democracy was incompatible with Islam, while 76% viewed it as the most appropriate system of governance.

What that means in practice is less clear.

Arab public opinion appears split down the middle when it comes to issues like separation of religion and politics or the right to protest.

Michael Robbins, director of the Arab Barometer, cautioned in a commentary in The Washington Post co-authored with international affairs scholar Lawrence Rubin that recent moves by the government of Sudan to separate religion and state may not enjoy public support.

The transitional government brought to office last year by a popular revolt that topped decades of Islamist rule by ousted President Omar Bashir agreed in peace talks with Sudanese rebel groups last month to a separation of religion and state.”

The government also ended the ban on apostasy and consumption of alcohol by non-Muslims and prohibited corporal punishment, including public flogging.

Robbins and Rubin noted that 61% of those surveyed on the eve of the revolt believed Sudanese law should be based on sharia (Islamic law), defined by two-thirds of the respondents as ensuring the provision of basic services and freedom from corruption.

The researchers nonetheless also concluded that youth favored a reduced role for religious leaders in political life. They said youth had soured on the idea of religion-based governance because of widespread corruption during the reign of Bashir, who professed an adherence to religious principles.

“If the transitional government can deliver on providing basic services to the country’s citizens and tackling corruption, the formal shift away from sharia is likely to be acceptable in the eyes of the public. However, if these problems remain, a new set of religious leaders may be able to galvanize a movement aimed at reinstituting sharia as a means to achieve these objectives,” Robbins and Rubin warned.

It is a warning that is as valid for Sudan as it is for much of the Arab and Muslim world.

Asked in a recent poll conducted by The Washington Institute of Near East Policy whether “it’s a good thing we aren’t having big street demonstrations here now the way they do in some other countries”—a reference to the past decade of popular revolts in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Algeria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Sudan—Saudi public opinion was split down the middle. Forty-eight percent of respondents agreed and 48% disagreed.

Saudis, like most Gulf Arabs, are likely less inclined to take grievances to the streets. Still, the poll indicates that they may prove to be more empathetic to protests should they occur.

Taken together, the various polls suggest that at a time of economic downturn and inevitable transition that puts a premium on delivery of public goods and services as well as good governance, Arab and Muslim leaders could find changing attitudes toward religiosity to be a double-edged sword.

Performance could turn it into an asset, but that would have to involve greater independent bottom-up civil society engagement for which there is more often than not little scope. A failure to deliver could turn it into a threat.

View PDF


Dr. James M. Dorsey a non-resident Senior Associate at the BESA Center, is a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University and co-director of the University of Würzburg’s Institute for Fan Culture. 


 Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Israel uncovers King David-era fortress in occupied Golan - France24


​ by France24

The 3,000-year-old fort, found near the Jewish settlement of Hispin ahead of works to build a new neighbourhood, is believed to have belonged to the Geshurites, King David's allies.

Israeli archaeologists unearth the remains of a 3,000-year-old fort in the occupied Golan Heights that they believe was built by an ally of the Biblical King David
Israeli archaeologists unearth the remains of a 3,000-year-old fort in the occupied Golan Heights that they believe was built by an ally of the Biblical King David MENAHEM KAHANA AFP

Archaeologists on Wednesday unveiled a fortified structure from the time of the King David on the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights that sheds light on the borders of a Biblical Israeli ally.

The 3,000-year-old fort, found near the Jewish settlement of Hispin ahead of works to build a new neighbourhood, is believed to have belonged to the Geshurites, King David's allies.

Locally quarried basalt boulders form the metre-and-a-half (five-foot) thick walls of the hilltop complex.

Barak Tzin, who directed its excavation for the Israel Antiquities Authority, estimated that it covered more than 1,000 square metres (a quarter of an acre).

Diggers found a large stone with an engraving of two horned figures stretching out their arms and a statuette of a woman holding a musical instrument, possibly a drum.

"That also links us to finds from the Iron Age," Tzin said, noting similar artefacts uncovered in Bethsaida, "a site linked to the capital of the Geshur kingdom" that lies west of Hispin on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee.

Tzin said there is source material indicating "family ties" between the Geshur kingdom and the kingdom of David.

The Hispin fortress, the first of its kind to be excavated, adds a rare "piece to the puzzle" of Golan archaeology, Tzin said.

"This phenomenon might be more widespread that we know. Golan research is not yet at a high level... We're only beginning to rediscover the Golan now."

Future finds might help define clearer boundaries for the Geshurite kingdom, while the Hispin fortress "fills out its middle," he said.

"We believe (the kingdom) spread to Syria -- it fills in the space between," he said of the Hispin site.

"The picture is beginning to get a bit more clear."




Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Friday, November 13, 2020

Concede Nothing -- There IS No ‘President-Elect’ Yet - Marc Sheppard


​ by Marc Sheppard

It is NOT over -not by a long shot!

The media continue to build upon the shaky foundation they poured on Saturday when they prematurely called the 2020 Presidential Election for Joe Biden. Rising from the traditional “nothing to see here” to the admonishing “all votes have been counted” and ultimately to Whoopi Goldberg’s incendiary “suck it up,” it seems clear that the plan is to make the election over simply because they say the election is over. 

And, despite Hillary’s strong suggestion that Biden not do so under any circumstances, the mask-muffled screams from Trump-haters of all persuasions demand that the president accept that Election 2020 is over and concede that he’s lost.  Lost, believe it or not, to a bumbling, poorly scripted automaton in the throes of rapidly creeping dementia.

Except that it’s not over.  Not by a longshot.

Not with ongoing ballot counting in key states, a fast-growing number of serious legal challenges pending in previously “called” states and an even faster-growing number of sworn (under penalty of perjury) fraud allegations, it’s not.

And more to the point, it’s not over until at least 71 million Trump-voting Americans (that we know of) who have every reason to smell yet another big fat Democrat Rat have been at least somewhat convinced it’s over.  Not by dismissive acceptance speeches or talk of transition teams and task forces and ridiculous cabinet choices from Joe Biden.  Not by the celebratory dancing of blathering woke-parvenus playing endless games of virtue-signal-tag in the playground of social media.  

But rather by reasonable and irrefutable facts, dished out in helpings of very viable responses to very viable accusations of widespread systemic election fraud.  Accusations which continue to grow in number, scale, variety and, most importantly, credibility.

In just the past few days, fresh news stories of widespread and wide-ranging vote-rigging schemes, particularly in vital swing-states, have broken as fast as Pro-Joe Media can ignore them and Twitter can block them.  To name just a few, I offer ballot-scanner misreads and software “glitches,” all miraculously changing Trump votes to Biden votes as well as dozens (and growing) of sworn affidavits by eyewitnesses of magically appearing Biden ballots and mysteriously disappearing Trump ballots, often at the hands of corrupt election officials.

Speaking of whom, have you heard the story of Richard Hopkins, a Pennsylvania postal employee who blew the whistle on Postmaster Rob Weisenbach's order to backdate late ballots to Nov. 3?  News of Hopkins’s conversations with federal investigators apparently prompted the WaPo to publish a hit-piece on him, wrongfully claiming he had recanted his allegations --  something he fervently denies [video].  In a word: Wow.

And there’s more:  More late ballot backdating, more mass-voter-fraud by Detroit officials, fabricated proof of residence data for illegal and deceased voters, sudden huge swaps in county Trump and Biden tallies, apparently by intentional injection, and even an alleged link between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and the company responsible for the data-manipulating voting machines, which have added hundreds of thousands of bogus Biden votes nationwide (See herehere,  here, here and here).

These incredibly credible whistleblower reports continue to roll in, adding further evidence to the attempted coup and substance to the lawsuits ahead.

Team Trump got that ball rolling on Monday, filing a lawsuit [PDF] in Pennsylvania seeking an emergency injunction to stop officials from certifying Joe Biden’s victory due to “potentially fraudulent votes being counted without proper verification or oversight.”

Trump spokespeople have promised a slew of similar filings, and, given the recent increased inflow of sworn voter fraud complaints, there’s little reason to doubt them.

Yet, by far the strongest of Team Trump’s court challenges is not one of voter fraud, but rather judicial fraud.  In March of this year, the 5-to-2 Democrat Pennsylvania Supreme Court bowed to leftist pressure and, purportedly in response to COVID-19, extended the mail-in ballot deadline by an arbitrary three full days.  Not due to ambiguities or unconstitutionality, as is usually the case, but simply because after declaring coronavirus a "natural disaster," they felt empowered to just throw out the existing law and write a new one, effectively changing election day in Pennsylvania. 

This one will surely be re-decided quickly by the Supreme Court.  SCOTUS had previously passed on the case by a 4-4 pre-Amy Coney Barrett vote, a decision so outrageously bad that one intrepid Justice, Samuel Alito, broke with tradition by making it his personal project to revisit it after the election.  Indeed, this one will most certainly go Trump’s way.

So what impact will these allegations, sworn or not, together with well-targeted and favorably adjudicated lawsuits, have on who resides at 1600 Penn for the next 4 years?  Check this out.

Image Credit -- Real Clear Politics website screen shot   

As of this writing (11/11/2020 02:00 EST) Real Clear Politics has NOT called Pennsylvania or awarded its 20 votes to anyone, media reports to the contrary notwithstanding. Nor Alaska (3), North Carolina (15), Georgia(16) or Arizona (11) – All too close to call.  In fact, the renowned and highly respected aggregator of election statistics has Biden 11 electoral votes short of the 270 required to substantiate the dubious title of “president elect” he’s been bestowed. 

Indeed, until all votes are not only counted but also verified (and State certified), there is no president-elect.  Sure, Sleepy Joe can call himself whatever floats his boat, be it Joe, Jill, or, during particularly demented moments, even Hunter.  And so long as the media dutifully parrot his choice, he can lay claim to whatever title his demented mind desires, including president-elect. 

And speaking of counting votes, why not do some vote counting of your own – electoral votes that is?  RCP has Trump at 214 and Biden at 259.  270 wins; winner takes it all.  65 votes still up for grabs.  Oh, and Michigan, which was called blue, has 16.  Any guesses why I mention that?

Heads exploded everywhere on Monday when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo responded to an impudent question about his employees’ preparations to engage with Joe Biden’s transition team by declaring with a smile, “There will be a smooth transfer of power … to a second Trump administration.” 

How dare he suggest it’s not over and that Trump may still emerge the victor?  Did that smile suggest he knows something we don’t?

Finish the math yet?

Image credit: PxHere public domain


Marc Sheppard is a data analyst, software engineer, and writer.  He's been a frequent contributor to American Thinker and welcomes your feedback.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter