Friday, September 3, 2021

Bringing in Afghan Refugees with All of Their ‘Luggage’ - Dr. Stephen M. Kirby


by Dr. Stephen M. Kirby

What's not being talked about.


Afghanistan has fallen to the Taliban and American forces are withdrawing.  As with such ventures, this has resulted in tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees fleeing their own country.  And as night follows day, this has also resulted in calls by many American individuals and organizations to bring in as many of those refugees as possible, because we “owe” it to the Afghans.

To hear such claims, one would think that these many thousands of refugees will immediately become part of America, sharing our values and ideas, and contributing to our communities.

What is not being talked about are the values, ideas, and culture those refugees are bringing with them.

In order to better understand the people many are calling to be brought in by the tens of thousands, let’s look at some considerations about the society from which these refugees are coming.

National Security

There are two national security issues that must be acknowledged.

First, a 2019 study found that 13% of Afghans had a lot of (4%) or a little (9%) sympathy for the Taliban.[1]  This means that for every 100,000 Afghan refugees brought into the United States, we could expect about 13,000 of them to have varying degrees of sympathy for the Taliban.

Then we need to take into consideration that 39% of Afghans think that “suicide bombing” in defense of Islam is often or sometimes justified.[2]  If we use the 4% number for those with a lot of sympathy for the Taliban, this means that out of every 100,000 Afghans we could have up to about 1,560 Afghans believing that “suicide bombing” could often be justified.[3]

Combining these two issues means we could be bringing in a potentially significant base of support for a jihadist group; and that base of support could include a large number willing to engage in jihadist attacks in the United States using explosives.

History of Violence

Then there is Afghanistan’s violent history.  What is the impact of this history on many of those refugees we are bringing in?  Consider this 2018 article:

…Afghanistan is home to nearly two generations that have grown up knowing only conflict and war. As a result, violent and aggressive behavior—particularly from young men—has become an accepted norm of Afghan society…a significant number of Afghan youth have become involved in organized crime or other illegal—and often violent—activities to fulfill their perceived obligations and duties to family…In many parts of Afghanistan, displays of aggression and intimidation represent a rite of passage for adolescent boys and a symbol of manhood for men. The social acceptance of such behavior, however, heightens the risk that intolerance of diversity and interpersonal violence, including violence against women and children, become an everyday fact of life.  A 2009 report…described violence as “an everyday occurrence in the lives of a huge proportion of Afghan women.”…a majority of Afghans are exposed to violence beginning at an early age, including physical abuse at home by parents and relatives as well as the liberal use of corporal punishment at mosques, madrassas, and schools. Children witness their mothers and sisters being violently abused at the hands of family members, which comes to be accepted as a social and cultural norm, resulting in the acceptance of violence as a first—and sometimes only—option for resolving conflicts.[4]

We are importing from a culture of violence.

Rights of Women

What is the attitude many of these refugees have toward women?  Here are two assessments:

Women and girls in Afghanistan continue to face widespread discrimination and human rights abuses. The country ranks among the least favourable on the Gender Inequality Index and the literacy rate for women is among the lowest in the world. Violence against women and girls is rife and the majority don’t go to school.[5]


About two-thirds of men thought women in Afghanistan had too many rights and that women were too emotional to become leaders, compared to less than a third of women.  And while nearly three quarters of women said a married woman should have equal rights with their partner to work outside the home, only 15 percent of men agreed.  More than half of men also agreed with the statement that “more rights for women mean that men lose out”.[6]

Wife-beating is largely acceptable in Afghanistan:

Overall, 92 percent of women in Afghanistan feel that a husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife for at least one of these reasons: going out without telling the husband, neglecting the children, arguing with the husband, refusing sex, and burning the food. Seventy-eight percent of women believe that going out without telling the husband is justification for beating, while 31 percent think the same about burning the food…The Afghanistan survey added an additional question to reflect local attitudes—wearing inappropriate clothes. Sixty-three percent of Afghan women feel a husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife if she wears inappropriate clothing.[7]

94% of Afghans completely or mostly agree that a wife must always obey her husband,[8] and two-thirds of Afghan men agree or strongly agree with the statement, “Women in Afghanistan have too many rights.”[9]

Considering the information in this and the previous section, it is not surprising to hear this warning from Pierre-Marie Seve, the director and spokesman of the French think tank Institute for Justice.  He noted that migrants are over-represented in nearly all categories of crime [in France] and stated that Afghans, in particular, commit more crimes than asylum seekers from other countries.[10]

Prepubescent Marriage

Prepubescent marriage is acceptable in Afghanistan.  In 2016, the Pew Research Center released a report titled “Many countries allow child marriage.”[11]  An appendix to that report titled “Marriage Laws around the World” provided this interesting information about approaches to child marriage in Afghanistan:[12]

Despite a law setting the legal minimum age for marriage at 16 (15 with the consent of a parent or guardian and the court) for girls and 18 for boys, international and local observers continued to report widespread early marriage… By law a marriage contract requires verification that the bride is 16 years of age, but only a small fraction of the population had birth certificates…some girls as young as six or seven were promised in marriage, with the understanding the actual marriage would be delayed until the child reached puberty.  Reports indicated, however, that this delay was rarely observed and young girls were sexually violated by the groom or by older men in the family, particularly if the groom was also a child.

Will instances of prepubescent marriage soon be coming to your community or to a community nearby?

Sharia as the official Law of the Land

Afghans almost uniformly agree (99%) that Sharia should be the official law of the land.[13]  And among those Afghans who say Sharia should be the law of the land, 61% say it should apply to all citizens.[14]

81% of the Afghans who support Sharia as the official law of the land favor corporal punishments for theft; 85% favor stoning as the punishment for adultery, and 79% favor the death penalty for apostasy.[15]

In terms of honor killings for pre- or extra-marital sex, 60% of Afghans believed honor killings of women were often or sometimes justified; 59% believed the same about killing men in those circumstances.[16]

These are majority views among Afghans that are incompatible with American values and laws.

Integrating into American society

The Afghan values and beliefs mentioned above are major hurdles to the idea of Afghans integrating as a group into American society.  In addition, only 5% of Afghans speak English,[17] and the adult literacy rate is only about 43% (although the numbers vary).  66% of Afghans believe Western popular culture harms morality in their country,[18] and 96% believe that trying to convert others to Islam is a religious duty.[19]

These are not harbingers of widespread social/cultural integration by these refugees into American society.


Those on the side of bringing tens of thousands of Afghan refugees into the United States have been able to rely on noble sounding rhetoric and emotional arguments to confront those who are not as enthusiastic about that venture.

However, the facts presented in this article show that in reality these refugees are coming from a culture and a land whose values and history are completely different from, and largely incompatible with, those of the United States.

What is being generally overlooked is that there are more socially/culturally compatible countries for these refugees that actually border Afghanistan.  Perhaps what we might “owe” these refugees is assistance in finding refuge in those neighboring countries.

Dr. Stephen M. Kirby is the author of six books about Islam. His latest book is Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials.

[1]           “A Survey of the Afghan People, Afghanistan in 2019,” The Asia Foundation, p. 315,

[2]           “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society,” Pew Research Center, April 30, 2013, pp. 29 and 70,

[3]           For why it is not accurate to use the term “suicide bomber” in these circumstances, see my article “Suicide or Paradise?” Arutz Sheva 7 – Israel National News, June 7, 2017,

[4]           Belquis Ahmadi and Rafiullah Stanikzai, “Redefining Masculinity in Afghanistan,” United States Institute of Peace, February 15, 2018,

[5]           Gender Focus, UNICEF, accessed on August 27, 2021,

[6]           Sonia Elks, “Afghan men oppose more women’s rights; elders less hardline,” Reuters, January 29, 2019,

[7]           Donna Clifton, “Most Women in Afghanistan Justify Domestic Violence,” PRB, September 13, 2012,

[8]           “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society,” Pew Research Center, April 30, 2013, p. 93,

[9]           “Afghanistan Flash Surveys on Perceptions of Peace, Covid-19, and the Economy: Wave 1 Findings,” The Asia Foundation, 2020, p. 43,

[10]         Chris Tomlinson, “French Think Tank Warns Afghan Migrant Increase Means Increased Crime,” Breitbart, August 28, 2021,

[11]         Aleksandra Sandstrom and Angelina E. Theodorou, “Many countries allow child marriage,” Pew Research Center, September 12, 2016,

[12]         “Marriage Laws around the World,” Pew Research Center,

[13]         “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society,” p. 15.

[14]         Ibid., p. 48.

[15]         Ibid., pp. 52, 54 and 55.

[16]         Ibid., p. 89.

[17]         “A Survey of the Afghan People, Afghanistan in 2019,” p. 336.

[18]         “The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics and Society,” p. 136.

[19]         Ibid., p. 112.


Dr. Stephen M. Kirby


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Eternal Jihad - Raymond Ibrahim


by Raymond Ibrahim

Understanding what really happened in Afghanistan.


Although August 15, 2021 will forever live in infamy as the date when the Taliban reconquered Afghanistan, for over 13 centuries that date was famous for another event—Constantinople’s defeat of the caliphate, August 15, 718.  While these two events separated by exactly 1,303 years are vastly different in nature—not least that in 718 Islam lost, while in 2021 it won—they both confirm one irresistible point that the confident West should take to heart: the tenacity of Islamic jihad—this relentless snake of war that always bides its time, even if by remaining coiled for many centuries, before striking.

Consider the first event.  In 718, the Eastern Roman Empire (“Byzantium”) repulsed, in dramatic fashion, the Arabs.  It was such a spectacular victory, and Muslim losses were so bad, that, for many centuries, the caliphates never dared make another attempt against the walls of Constantinople.

Put differently, for many centuries after the year 718, anyone living in Constantinople would have thought—and would have apparently been justified for thinking—that the Islamic threat, whatever it was elsewhere, was well behind them.

And yet, in the early 1400s—700 years after the people of Constantinople had thought they’d seen the last of jihad—it was back again besieging them, with the city finally falling to Islam on May 29, 1453.

More significantly, those who besieged and conquered Constantinople in 1453 had little to do with those who besieged it in the eighth century.  The latter were Arabs, under the Umayyad caliphate centered in Damascus.  Those who actually conquered Constantinople were Turks, whose capital was Adrianople (now Edirne).

On the surface there is no connection or continuity between those who in the eighth century tried to conquer, and those who in the fifteenth century did conquer, Constantinople—except, of course, for one thing: both were Muslims, and both articulated their hostility for and need to conquer Constantinople in distinctly jihadist terms: like every other infidel, the Christian kingdom had two choices before it: submit to Islam—which it rejected—or fight.

Thus, while the jihad was down in the eighth century, it was never out for the final count.  It bided its time, even as empires rose and fell, and finally manifested itself again in the guise of the latest newcomers to the stage of world conquest, the Turks (who, even more ironically, were greater devotees and practitioners of jihad than even their Arab predecessors).

Seen this way, Constantinople’s mortal enemy was never really the Arabs or Turks; it was Islam, which, while experiencing highs and lows in the intervening centuries, still transformed its adherents, first Arabs then Turks, into existential enemies devoted to the slaughter and subjugation of infidels, whenever possible.

Now consider how this “ancient” and “distant” history applies to recent events.  At the height of U.S. victory in Afghanistan in 2005, when both al-Qaeda and the Taliban had been all but rooted out, Ayman al-Zawahiri (current leader of al-Qaeda) was asked about the statuses of those two organizations’ leaders, who were missing in action.  His response, which follows, has, in the aftermath of August 15, 2021, proven true:

Jihad in the path of Allah is greater than any individual or organization. It is a struggle between Truth and Falsehood, until Allah Almighty inherits the earth and those who live in it. Mullah Muhammad Omar and Sheikh Osama bin Laden—may Allah protect them from all evil—are merely two soldiers of Islam in the journey of jihad, while the struggle between Truth [Islam] and Falsehood [non-Islam] transcends time (Al Qaeda Reader, p.182; emphasis added).

Similarly, consider what Muhammad Arif Mustafa, a Taliban commander, just said last week:

One day mujahedeen will have victory and Islamic law will come not just to Afghanistan, but all over the world. We are not in a hurry. We believe it will come one day. Jihad will not end until the last day [emphasis added].

When one considers the state of the world, the current military and economic dominance of the West, and the general weakness of the Muslim world, surely such claims sound laughable.  As seen, however, time has a way of switching the tables, making what once seemed impossible imminent.

In short, as long as Islam exists, the jihad may be down but it is never out for the count.  It may take years, decades, and centuries; its name and guise may morph and change from eighth century Arab caliphates, to fifteenth century Turkish sultanates, to the twenty-first century’s loose amalgam of ISIS, al-Qaeda, Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, Boko Haram, al-Shabaab, etc.—but it is always there, often lying dormant, yes, though ever ready to strike at the first opportunity.

What will it be called, what guise will it take, and what new inroads will it have made in the decades and centuries to come?


Raymond Ibrahim, author of Sword and Scimitar, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump’s Save America PAC is out with another savage anti-Biden ad - Andrea Widburg


by Andrea Widburg

As before, there’s a lot of material to work with but it’s put together in an incredibly powerful way. (Plus, is this chaos what Biden really wanted?)

Once again, Donald Trump is hinting—hard—that he’ll be running in 2024. A week ago, he put out an epic attack ad against Joe Biden that could serve no other purpose than to weaken Biden substantially before the next election. As the awful facts about the Afghanistan retreat have unfolded, there’s even more material for an ad, and Trump’s Save America PAC didn’t hesitate to use it.

While the first ad, from last week, had nods to inflation, the open border, and Biden’s tyrannical plans around COVID, before turning its attention to Afghanistan, this new ad hones in immediately on the debacle in Afghanistan. What makes the ad especially powerful is that, to the extent news stories are interspersed with Biden’s dishonest, indeed, delusional statements about events there, those news stories aren’t from Fox. Instead, they’re from mainstream outlets that normally live to prop up Democrats.

I’ll leave you with a parting thought, one that is only delicately touched upon in the video: On his Wednesday night broadcast, Tucker Carlson gave voice to an idea that I’m seeing more frequently in the many emails that pass before me. That idea is that what happened in Afghanistan wasn’t simply because the people in charge were too stupid or dishonest to know better. Instead, what happened in Afghanistan was deliberate.

Fundamentally, the Biden administration wanted to recreate what happened to Europe in 2015; namely, a flood of Muslim immigrants pouring into a Western country. It’s not enough to open the Southern border. If the Democrats are to change the American population to create a permanent Democrat majority, they need to get Third World people in from all over.

These completely unvetted new immigrants are people who are not used to individual liberty and, in the case of Muslims, who don’t even believe in individual liberty. As a reminder, in 2010, when things were relatively peaceful in Afghanistan, 99% of Afghans wanted to live under sharia law.

Democrats are sending these Muslims to swing states. Once there, because conservatives are opposed to mass immigration and mass welfare, the money the taxpayers will fork over to all these new immigrants will come in envelopes that say, in effect, “Courtesy of the Democrat party.”

If I had a crystal ball, I think I would see one of two outcomes: Choice one is that America will be completely changed from a successful, liberty-oriented Western nation into just another Third World hellhole (and no, it wouldn’t be like Europe in the 1970s because Europe’s socialism worked only because America paid all her defense costs during the Cold War). Choice two is that the American people will push back very hard.

Either outcome will be ugly. I hope my crystal ball skills are lousy.

Image: Save America PAC ad. Twitter screen grab.


Andrea Widburg


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Public School Educators’ Obsessive Hatred of Israel - Richard L. Cravatts


by Richard L. Cravatts

Covert campaigns of hate.


While public school teachers and their unions demonstrated a shocking obstinacy during the ongoing pandemic regarding opening up of schools to in-person learning for America’s students, they seemed to have found the energy at the same time to continue their activism and advocacy for teaching children to hate themselves because of the color of their skin, distrust law enforcement, blame white supremacy for systemic racism and the victimhood of marginalized people of color, identify their gender fluidity, and a bucket full of other progressive notions that animate what now currently passes for public education.

While a covert campaign to make critical race theory part and parcel of school curricula has been the most visible part of the activist educators’ efforts to corrupt teaching of America’s children, not far behind has been a troubling, pernicious campaign to demonize Israel and Zionism and to make the Palestinian cause the centerpiece of a campaign to slander the Jewish state and indoctrinate students with lies, contortions of history and fact, and outright propaganda that perpetuates Palestinianism as part of the cognitive war against Israel.

In May, as one troubling example, soon after Israel had initiated its campaign to suppress Hamas’s rocket fire from Gaza during an 11-day conflict, the 6200-member United Educators of San Francisco (UESF) teacher’s union passed a grotesque “Resolution in Solidarity with the Palestinian People” which, in addition to calling on the Biden administration to end all aid to Israel, denounced Israel’s alleged “forced displacement and home demolitions” of Palestinian Arabs in Jerusalem and its imposition of “a regime of legalized racial discrimination.”  The resolution concluded by committing its membership to sign on with the anti-Semitic BDS campaign itself, stating “that UESF endorse the international campaign for boycotts, divestment, and sanctions against apartheid in Israel,” thereby becoming the first K-12 teachers’ union in the United States to endorse the BDS movement.

Not to be outdone by its union brethren further north, chapter chairs of the United Teachers Los Angeles, an affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers and the second largest teacher’s union in the country, also voted overwhelmingly in May in support of a statement, almost identical to the San Francisco version, that expressed its “solidarity with the Palestinian people and call for Israel to end bombardment of Gaza and stop displacement at Sheikh Jarrah . . , [called] on the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden to stop aid to Israel [and endorsed] the international campaign for boycotts, divestment, and sanctions against apartheid in Israel.”

At its annual meeting this summer, though the measures were defeated, the 13- million member National Education Association (NEA) voted on two anti-Israel resolutions, New Business Item 29, which claimed that "The Arab population of Palestine has again risen up in a heroic struggle against military repression and ‘ethnic cleansing' by the Israeli state and extreme nationalist forces in Israeli society" and New Business Item 51, which urged members to “recognize the existence and sovereignty of Palestine and Palestinian children and families and their human right to access a quality education and live freely as outlined in United Nations Declaration of Human Rights”—even committing the union to spend over $70,000, of all causes on earth, to promote programmatic activities in support of the Palestinian cause.

California teachers have also been embroiled in a contentious five-year process by which the state created its ethnic studies curriculum to serve as a way of indoctrinating students on aspects of critical race theory and how, allegedly, systems of oppression serve to maintain a white power structure over oppressed people of color. Jewish critics of the proposed curriculum, and there have been many of them (with some 100,000 public comments being submitted during the drafting of different versions of the curriculum) were particularly alarmed that the Jewish experience was ignored in the initial drafts and that rather than being presented as an oppressed minority themselves, Jews were said to enjoy white privilege and, therefore, part of the white hierarchy which has social, economic, and political control over people of color.

As it happens, the controversial first draft of California’s Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum was drafted by activists who created an educational organization called the Liberated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum Institute (LESMC), a California-based educational consulting group for K-12 schools. Prominent on its website (revealed by the AMCHA Initiative, a campus anti-Semitism watchdog group) is a section named “Preparing to Teach Palestine: A Toolkit,” which, unsurprisingly, is replete with anti-Israel slanders, lies, and contortions of history and fact—part of a continuing campaign to prepare teachers to indoctrinate students on the predations of Israel, Zionism, and, by extension, Jews.

“In California,” the organization’s toolkit page proclaimed defensively, “attacks by Zionist and other right-wing organizations on the inclusion of Arab American studies—and specifically Palestine—in the CA Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum (ESMC) have shone a spotlight on Palestine and importance of including it in ethnic studies curriculum.” Moreover, because critics of pro-Palestinian rhetoric and behavior regularly point to the sometimes-blatant anti-Semitism just under the surface of anti-Israel activism, the organization tried to push back against such charges, absolving them of any responsibility for their bigotry. “The vicious attacks that equate any mention of Palestine with antisemitism,” they claimed, “have pushed teachers, unions, and districts to understand that honest discussion of Israel’s role in the oppression of Palestinians is not antisemitism.” Not only are they innocent of hatred against Jews, but it is the Zionists themselves who are oppressive. How so? According to LESMC, “. . . Zionists are organizing to police curriculum on Palestine. They often try to isolate and attack individual teachers to scare other educators away.”

The resources offered to teachers in these pages are animated with the leftist, radical language of progressivism, with parts of the “liberated curriculum” including the typical slanders against Israel which describe it as a rapacious colonial oppressor of an innocent indigenous people, and the belief that Zionism is a racist ideology with a foundational lust for as much Arab land as it can illegally attain, completely divorced from anything to do with Judaism itself.

And, using the language and ideology of intersectionality—the commonality of victimhood among oppressed people everywhere—the toolkit suggested that teachers “Integrate Palestine into your curriculum so it’s not a ‘multicultural add-on’ but an illuminating comparison.” And to help students draw comparisons between suffering close to home and that alleged despair of the Palestinians at the hands of Israel, the resource suggested that teachers use as examples the “impact of continuing colonial control on water resources at the US/Mexico border and in Gaza, using statistics to look at forced removals in your city and East Jerusalem, impact of ideology comparing Manifest Destiny to the Promised Land, efforts to bury history and the struggles to resurface those histories,” all of which pointing to the perfidy and malignant nature of the Jewish state.

In August, Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) sent a letter to U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, New York Education Commissioner Betty A. Rosa, and New York City Department of Education Chancellor Meisha Porter in which he described his alarm at a statement issued on July 11th by a pro-Palestinian teacher’s group, New York City Educators for Palestine. Zeldin correctly noted that the letter accused Israel of “terrorism, ethnic cleansing and other talking points all too commonly used to fuel violent attacks on and discrimination against Jews” and that if teachers recklessly use such anti-Israel rhetoric in schools it “will only escalate and embolden anti-Semitic attacks and vitriol throughout our country.”

Parroting the dozens and dozens of virtue-signaling statements that flowed out of universities and associations after the latest Gaza offensive, the NYCEP statement, of course, ignored completely the 3200 rockets fired by Hamas into Israel for the sole purpose of murdering Jews and bemoaned the precarious state of the Arab Palestinians. “As we teach our students to understand the world and seek respect and justice for all people,” the statement read, apparently not including Jews in that group of people, “we have no choice but to speak out against the injustice being committed against the Palestinian people.”

Predicting that they might be asked why, of all nations on earth, they had decided to condemn the Middle East’s only democracy, the statement claimed that Israel is solely responsible for the conflict, that “We are obligated to respond to the injustice wreaked on historic Palestine. The rights and dignity of Palestinians are equivalent to that of all humanity.”

It is one thing for teachers to commit to a cause they believe in personally; it is another thing, however, when they seek to indoctrinate their students with a one-sided, biased ideology aimed at slandering and libeling Israel, and particularly when that teaching includes falsehoods, distortions, and no historical context. For example, the statement included the mendacious claim that “Palestinian land has been colonized for over seven decades,” that is, for the entire period of Israel’s existence. Any group that suggests that Israel-proper is a colony built on Palestinian land is recklessly and delusionally ignoring history and fact.

It is inexcusable that educators in America’s public schools have decided to become pro-Palestinian activists; that they have decided it is appropriate and productive to bring that activism to the classroom and include false history and contortions of fact in school curricula; that the Palestinians are perennial guiltless victims of Israel’s oppression; that Israelis—and by extension, Jews—have become part of white supremacy and colonial oppression; and that educators have decided it is critical to push this propaganda and bigotry down the throats of impressionable students and teach it as fact.

The naked anti-Semitism lurking behind the statement showed itself when these Israel-hating educators “also call on unionized educators to have their unions endorse BDS, a movement that aims to put non-violent pressure to end the Israeli regime of settler colonialism, apartheid and occupation over the Palestinian people.”

Even more disgusting is the suggestion in the statement that aid to Israel should cease and that the aid is an example of Jews depriving New Yorkers of funds that might be spent domestically. “Over $3.8 billion yearly of taxpayer money funds the purchase of weapons by the Israeli military,” the statement read. “New York City alone gives almost $145 million dollars [sic] a year to the Israeli military . . . . This is money taken from the families of New York City by a nuclear power with one of the most technologically advanced militaries in the world. We simply cannot be silent while money for our families and children here go instead to terrorizing families and children abroad,” in other words, Jews are taking money from New Yorkers to randomly terrorize “families and children” without justification. And any necessity for Israel defending itself from the many foes who wish it harm is simply ignored, as if the military aid the U.S. gives Israel every year is not based on the fact that homicidal Arab aggression against Israel has been a fact of life since the Jewish state’s birth.

Apparently, too, these woke educators have no issue with the billions of U.S. aid given annually to such countries as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, and Jordan, countries which are far less friendly to the United States and not reliable strategic and diplomatic partners (not to mention the fact that almost all U.S. aid to Israel is spent on American military equipment).

The American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) periodically conducts surveys to assess college graduates’ knowledge of American history. The results are dismal. “Over one-third of the college graduates surveyed,” ACTA found, “could not place the American Civil War in its correct 20-year time frame.” Moreover, almost “half of the college graduates could not identify correctly the term lengths of U.S. senators and representatives . . . Nearly half of respondents failed to identify the correct term lengths for the houses of Congress,” and, suggesting at least some pop culture awareness, “Ten percent thought that Judith Sheindlin —‘Judge Judy’—is on the Supreme Court.”

Public schools are clearly failing in their effort to educate children in the basic facts of history, not to mention the necessary math and writing skills they will use later in their lives. So while test scores continue to fall and achievement in American schools compares poorly to that in other countries, teachers who are failing in their basic duties have nevertheless become social activists, progressives with a radical agenda to sexualize children, indoctrinate students about supposed systemic racism and white supremacy, scare students into mistrusting purportedly racist law enforcement, and, as part of the notion of intersectionality, elevate the Palestinian cause and lying to children to make them believe that Jews and Israelis are the sole oppressors in the Middle East, malign forces that deprive an indigenous people of the human and civil rights and whose self-determination, in the form of Zionism, should be discredited and crushed and the Jewish state destroyed.

Even if this campaign were not based on lies, slanders, distortion, and falsehoods, it is not the role of public-school educators—who are neither subject experts nor unbiased observers—to propagate this corrosive and malignant ideology.


Richard L. Cravatts, Ph.D., a Freedom Center Journalism Fellow in Academic Free Speech and President Emeritus of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, is the author of Dispatches From the Campus War Against Israel and Jews.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

California Dems Bet On Identity Politics to Save Newsom - Daniel Greenfield


by Daniel Greenfield

What happens when Dems can’t scare minorities with the “white supremacy” of Larry Elder?


"Larry Elder is the black face of white supremacy. You’ve been warned," a Los Angeles Times column blared. It was the latest low point in the desperate bet on identity politics that had come to define the Democrat strategy for saving Gov. Gavin Newsom from a recall election.

What had Larry Elder done that made him the face of white supremacy? The popular talk show host and gubernatorial candidate blamed the police defunding movement for rising crime.

A shocked LA Times reported that Elder had said, “When you reduce the possibility of a bad guy getting caught, getting convicted and getting incarcerated, guess what? Crime goes up.”

Elder’s criticism of the pro-crime movement would be a non-issue outside California. Eric Adams, New York City’s likely next mayor, Chicago Police Superintendent David Brown, and D.C. Police Chief Robert Contee, all of them black Democrats, have said similar things. Polls show that black people are far more likely to oppose police defunding than white lefties.

But while reality has caught up with the East Coast and even the loopiest parts of the West Coast, like Portland and Seattle, California Democrats have built a reality-free echo chamber in which what’s left of the state media pretend that crime is caused by inequality, junkie tent cities are the fault of capitalism, and forest fires and blackouts are caused by global warming.

And attacks on elderly Asians by young black men are blamed on President Trump’s “racism”.

"California has a unique place on the planet. It's been a place of dreams," Governor Jerry Brown used to rhapsodize. The dream became reality when Democrats built a one-party state around election rigging and demographic change powered by wealthy Hollywood and Big Tech donors. 

Now the dream is in danger. It’s not threatened by the inherent irrationality of the one-party state which advocates for both an unreliable power grid based around solar panels and windmills along with electric cars that are likeliest to be charged in the evening when that grid fails to deliver power. Nor is it caused by the billions of dollars sunk into solving the “homeless crisis” only for it to go to building $700,000 apartments, $100,000 sheds, and $2,600 a month tents.

Reality isn’t a problem when you’re living in a world of ideological dreams financed by lotus eater billionaires who made their money selling virtual worlds to the public. Or marrying them.

The TV ads defending Newsom and attacking Republicans are funded by the CEO of Netflix.

But the problem is that enough Californians might actually vote to throw Newsom out. And the Democrat establishment was so arrogant that it never came up with a Plan B.

There’s only the Plan A of identity politics or calling Larry Elder a white supremacist.

California Democrats, most of them white, had assumed that their supremacy was assured once the demographic changes boosted the Latino and Asian populations to high enough numbers. When combined with ballot harvesting and community organizing, a majority-minority state seemed like a place where Democrats, and more importantly, radical lefties could always rule.

This has been the Democrat model for permanent power, not only in California, but nationwide.

And yet it’s Latinos and, increasingly, Asian voters who are turning on Newsom. The rise of the Sage from South Central as a leading candidate only adds insult to identity politics injury.

The entire Democrat strategy for generations has been based around the idea that what minorities respond most to is identity politics. And yet identity politics has failed in California. 

Newsom tried to compensate for his weak poll numbers among Latinos by picking Alex Padilla to replace Kamala Harris in the Senate. But it turned out that most Latinos didn’t care which race of political crony he picked, what they cared about was being able to go to work and keep their businesses open. Once the reopening of the state was reversed, Newsom’s approval numbers among Latinos tanked. And it’s too late for Newsom to reopen California yet again.

Asians have seen a rise in violent crime, falsely blamed on Trump supporters, the legalization of shoplifting, and the destruction of the pathway of their children to great colleges and careers. Immigrant families are willing to work 20-hour days and face robberies so that their children get ahead. The racist assault on merit in education has been too much for many Asian families.  

Asians know perfectly well that while they’re being scolded about making way for more deserving minorities, white Democrat elites are bribing their kids into USC and other schools.

Neither group is likely to go Republican in any sizable number, but given the chance to kick out the most visible member of the Democrat elites that are ruining their lives, they may just take it.

And that’s what has California Democrats terrified.

Democrats built their identity politics plantation around the construct of a menacing GOP ready to deprive minorities of all their rights. In California, where Governor Newsom and his local party men deprive you of your rights (while he parties at the French Laundry), that narrative is hollow. 

When they’re reduced to threatening minorities with the white supremacy of Larry Elder, it’s because they’ve monopolized power for so long and recited the same hollow cliches in the echo chambers of their one-party state that they no longer realize how stupid they sound.

Latino and Asian shopkeepers aren’t worried about “white supremacy”, they’re afraid of being shut down by Newsom and robbed by the criminals empowered by Newsom’s donors, like Reed Hastings, the CEO of Netflix, whose own big product conveniently can’t be shoplifted.

Hastings plowed $3 million into the campaign to save Newsom. But such campaigns are dependent on money from wealthy white tycoons being used to manipulate minorities. That worked brilliantly in Georgia where Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg tilted the odds, but that strategy may be hitting a wall in California despite all the money and the community organizing.

The Democrats have never really considered what might happen if they achieve their majority-minority state only for the minorities to become dissatisfied. Their models, until now, have been cities, urban ghettos ruled by generations of corrupt politicians, welfare voters in the thrall of identity politics grousing about what they might have if it weren’t for the white people. 

The recall is a warning sign that California isn’t Newark or Detroit. And that the same old lies aren’t working anywhere the way they used to except among the white lefties who tell them.

Black voters in New York City picked Eric Adams over the lefty candidates. Latino and Asian voters may deliver a shocking defeat to the Democrat machine on the other side of the country.

The common denominator is the widening gap between the wokes and the working class, between the concerns of Latinos and the elites who call them Latinx, between people who think in ideological terms and those who focus on whether they can pay their bills on Thursday.

The Democrats call this “populism”. But it’s trickier to inveigh against populism when it doesn’t involve white men in red caps, but minority voters and a black candidate. They’ll still do it, as the Los Angeles Times showed us, but by then it’s no longer a narrative, it’s sweaty desperation.

The real question that has Democrat strategists sweating bullets in California isn’t whether their party will temporarily lose control over the governorship. The real power isn’t in Sacramento, much as it isn’t in the Oval Office, and that’s why leftists can rule just as well from any branch of government they hold or from the deep administrative state of the bureaucracy.

What really has them terrified is the broader implications for their entire political strategy. 

The Democrat machine is run by generations of strategists who polished the national identity politics coalition machine to perfection in the Clinton and Obama eras. It’s all they know and it defines everything about how the Left now functions. Bernie Sanders, who briefly proposed actually talking to the white working class, reducing immigration, and letting go of gun control, was quickly revamped into an identity politics candidate with AOC as his handpicked successor. 

And yet there are two political insurgencies among Democrats. The former are liberals who oppose cancel culture while the latter are hard lefties who want less identity politics and more class warfare. Various figures from these insurgencies, whether it’s Bari Weiss or Glenn Greenwald, have become celebrities for opposing the conventional wisdom of the Dems.

A defeat in California will force a severe reckoning about the Democrat political worldview.

If identity politics isn’t a magic bullet for a one-party state, there will have to be a rethink. And the establishment may opt for either a more centrist strategy or class warfare over race. Either one will lead to a showdown with AOC and the Squad, not to mention generations of minority apparatchiks whose only value has been to serve as the black, Latino, and Asian faces of the “white supremacy” that put Newsom, Biden, and other corrupt figures like them in power.

If California Democrats can’t scare minority voters with the white supremacy of Larry Elder, what hope is there for a party that made identity politics its brand, its strategy, and its future?

The Newsom recall has the potential to not only change California, but America.


Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

When it comes to Lt. Col. Scheller, our leadership class is going full Soviet - Ed Timperlake


by Ed Timperlake

It turns out that, in the modern era, all tyrannical rulers use the same tactics to destroy those who dare criticize them.

In the late 1960s, the Beatles spoofed the Beach Boys' music with their parody entitled "Back in the USSR."  Now that the USSR, which President Reagan accurately branded as the "Evil Empire," is rendered kaput, the song is an interesting historical musical artifact.  There's a distinctly Soviet feel in America today, though, because the Democrats' approach to Marine lieutenant colonel Stuart Scheller is reminiscent of the way the Soviet Union used mental health as a tool to suppress dissidents.

By now, many Americans — whether those in uniform, veterans, or non-military citizens — are all horrified at the colossal military blunder that the deeply flawed Biden administration committed as its endgame in Afghanistan.  And when it comes to calling for accountability for those responsible, perhaps no one has put more on the line than Lt. Col. Scheller:

Marine Corps Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller, who was relieved of command after a video of him criticizing senior U.S. officials for "failures" in Afghanistan went viral, said Sunday that he will be leaving the Marine Corps after 17 years.

"All I asked for was accountability of my senior leaders when there are clear, obvious mistakes that were made," he said in a video posted on LinkedIn this weekend.

"I am not saying we can take back what has been done; all I asked for was accountability," he said, adding that he could have remained silent for three more years to reach the 20 years of service required for full pension, but that he opted to speak out instead.

Scheller said leaders accepting "accountability" for a harried U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan could have a more significant effect on service members "with post-traumatic stress or struggling with purpose" than any other "piece of paper or message."

In my Marine community, aviators wanted command of a squadron while our fellow grunts achieved their great career success and professional validation in becoming commanding officers of a battalion of Marine grunts.  As he worked his way up to his battalion command, Lt. Col. Scheller paid significant Afghan combat dues, in addition to also having served in Iraq.  This is taken from his Marine bio:

In 2010 LtCol Scheller sought out an Individual Augment deployment to Afghanistan.  He was the Counter-IED team leader for the organization JIEDDO. He spent a year in Paktika and Ghanzi provinces while supporting the Army's 101st Infantry Brigade.  He was the infantry subject matter expert for EOD and Route Clearance Platoon operations.   


In June 2021 LtCol Scheller checked into the School of Infantry East, Advanced Infantry Training Battalion, as the commanding officer.

The mission statement of Scheller's Battalion is unambiguous and direct, demanding dedication and focusing on combat and battlefield responsibilities: 


Scheller took seriously his responsibilities and went viral when he challenged those in command of the Afghanistan debacle to take seriously their responsibilities...and failures.  And that's where we find ourselves turning back in time to what the Soviet Union did when people dared dissent.  Wikipedia, although now notoriously inaccurate because of its leftism, is actually correct about what was going on in the Soviet Union:

There was systematic political abuse of psychiatry in the Soviet Union, based on the interpretation of political opposition or dissent as a psychiatric problem. It was called "psychopathological mechanisms" of dissent.

During the leadership of General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev, psychiatry was used to disable and remove from society political opponents[.]

Perhaps Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller heard a distant echo of the Beatles' "Back in the USSR" resonating in today's America when he learned how Democrats were approaching his righteous indignation at the massively bungled Afghanistan draw-down:

The U.S. Marine Corps officer who was relieved of his command over a battalion for chastising his bosses over the botched Afghan withdrawal has revealed that he was ordered to undergo a mental health screening.

"When I went into work this morning, I was ordered by my commanding officer to go to the Hospital for a mental health screening," Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller wrote on Facebook on Monday.

In other words, in one week, Scheller is the trusted commanding officer of a very, very prestigious command; the next week, after speaking out, demanding accountability, he is given a "Psych Eval."  Trust me when I say that a psych eval is not a friendly move. 

Essentially, the national command authority, from the president on down, when confronted by an honest Marine, decided that the best tactic would be to put a mental health cloud over him.  Who would have thought President Biden and his team would ever channel their inner Brezhnev?  But they did just that.

LtCol Ed Timperlake (ret.) was C.O. of VMFA-321, a reserve Marine fighter/attack squadron, The Hell's Angels.

Image: Stuart Scheller's official portrait.  Public domain.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.


Ed Timperlake


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iranian Mullahs' Torture Epidemic: UN, EU, Biden Administration Continue Appeasing Anyhow - Majid Rafizadeh


by Majid Rafizadeh

The UN, instead of doing its job, appears to have granted the Iranian regime's leaders full impunity. For how long are the UN, the European Union and the Biden administration going to continue appeasing the mullahs of Iran instead of holding them accountable for their crimes against humanity?

  • While the Biden administration and other members of the United Nations Security Council continue to push for the resuscitation of the disastrous nuclear deal -- granting Iran nuclear weapons and global legitimacy -- they have turned a blind eye to the mullahs' ever-increasing violations of human rights.

  • There are reports of slow public hangings-to-death on cranes, amputations of fingers by special guillotines, electric shocks, floggings and rape....

  • One can also regrettably assume that neither of these men, nor any of the multitudes of others treated in a similar way, was given a fair trial or anything close to a legal defense. According to the Center for Human Rights in Iran, "Three more human rights attorneys in Iran were handed unjust prison sentences in July 2021 amid an ongoing campaign to eliminate due process for activists and dissidents by intimidating the lawyers who defend them...."

  • The UN, instead of doing its job, appears to have granted the Iranian regime's leaders full impunity. For how long are the UN, the European Union and the Biden administration going to continue appeasing the mullahs of Iran instead of holding them accountable for their crimes against humanity?

There are reports from Iran of slow public hangings-to-death on cranes, amputations of fingers by special guillotines, electric shocks, and rape, in addition to various methods of torture such as flogging, amputation, beating detainees with cables, sticks, rubber hosepipes, knives, batons, punching and kicking and forcing political prisoners into stress positions for a long period of time, and depriving them of water, food and medical care. (Image source: iStock)

While the Biden administration and other members of the United Nations Security Council continue to push for the resuscitation of the disastrous nuclear deal -- granting Iran nuclear weapons and global legitimacy -- they have turned a blind eye to the mullahs' ever-increasing violations of human rights.

Recently, a hacking group calling itself Edalat-e Ali (Ali's Justice) leaked videos of Iran's prisons, some of which revealed abuse, including beatings and other unspeakable treatment of detainees carried out by the Iranian authorities at the notorious Evin Prison, where political prisoners are held. "We will continue to expose the oppression," that the Iranian government is "inflicting on people," the group said.

There are reports of slow public hangings-to-death on cranes, amputations of fingers by special guillotines, electric shocks, and rape, in addition to various methods of torture such as flogging, amputation, beating detainees with cables, sticks, rubber hosepipes, knives, batons, punching and kicking and forcing political prisoners into stress positions for a long period of time, and depriving them of water, food and medical care. Navid Afkari, the champion wrestler who was executed last year, wrote in a letter:

"For around 50 days I had to endure the most horrendous physical and psychological tortures. They would beat me with sticks and batons, hitting my arms, legs, abdomen, and back. They would place a plastic bag on my head and torture me until I suffocated to the very brink of death. They also poured alcohol into my nose."

In another instance, a man was tied to a tree in public and flogged 80 times for having drunk alcohol a decade earlier, when he was 14 or 15. An accused thief, who allegedly stole some livestock, saw his hand cut off.

One can also regrettably assume that neither of these men, nor any of the multitudes of others treated in a similar way, was given a fair trial or anything close to a legal defense. According to the Center for Human Rights in Iran:

"Three more human rights attorneys in Iran were handed unjust prison sentences in July 2021 amid an ongoing campaign to eliminate due process for activists and dissidents by intimidating the lawyers who defend them, the Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI) has learned... At least four defense lawyers were imprisoned in the country on trumped-up charges as of August 2021 (Nasrin Sotoudeh, Mohammad Najafi, Soheila Hejab, and Giti Pourfazel), and at least two additional lawyers (Farzaneh Zilabi and Mohammad Hadi Erfanian-Kaseb) were prosecuted on false charges in June 2021."

Amnesty International, which has analyzed 16 leaked video clips, stated:

"Leaked surveillance footage from Evin prison showing appalling abuse of prisoners serves as a chilling reminder of the impunity granted to prison officials in Iran who subject those in their custody to torture and other cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment".

It came as a surprise, after the videos were leaked, that the Iranian regime actually admitted to the abuse. The head of the regime's prisons, Mohammad Mehdi Hajmohammadi, acknowledged:

"Regarding the pictures from Evin prison, I accept responsibility for such unacceptable behavior and pledge to try to prevent any repeat of these bitter events and to deal seriously with the wrongdoers. I apologize to God Almighty, our dear leader [Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei], the nation, and honorable prison guards, whose efforts will not be ignored due to these mistakes."

It is important crucial to point out, however, that this is not an isolated case of extreme abuse the Iranian regime has been caught red handed in carrying out; this is in fact just small preview. The regime conducts systematic abuse and torture. Heba Morayef, Middle East and North Africa Regional Director at Amnesty International, pointed out:

"This disturbing footage offers a rare glimpse of the cruelty regularly meted out to prisoners in Iran. It is shocking to see what goes on inside the walls of Evin prison, but sadly the abuse depicted in these leaked video clips is just the tip of the iceberg of Iran's torture epidemic."

Children, women and men are routinely tortured during interrogations and behind bars, they are forced to confess, they are denied due process and access to lawyers, medical care, and family visits. According to Amnesty International:

"Away from public view, Iranian security officials routinely subject men, women and children behind bars to torture or other ill-treatment, particularly when undergoing interrogations in detention centres run by the ministry of intelligence, the Revolutionary Guards, and the investigation unit of Iran's police (Agahi)."

The Iranian regime, according to a recent Human Rights Watch report, has also long been one of the world's leading executioners,. In 2020 alone, Iran's regime executed more than 230 people -- including individuals who had committed their alleged crimes when they were children. To execute political prisoners, Iran's judiciary brings up vaguely defined charges, called "national security crimes," against the defendants. These "crimes" include moharebeh ("enmity against God"), ifsad fil arz ("sowing corruption on earth"), and baghi ("armed rebellion").

Both the number and the nature of the executions are alarming. From 2020 until March 2021, executions have involved juveniles, women and individuals from ethnic and religious minority groups. Although Iran ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Iranian regime has made no effort to alter the country's Penal Code, which also allows girls as young as nine to be executed.

The regime, presumably to impose fear among those who criticize and oppose the mullahs, has for decades resorted to punishments of torture and death. Torture is administered both physically and psychologically. According to Amnesty International:

"The organization's research found that victims were frequently hooded or blindfolded; punched, kicked and flogged; beaten with sticks, rubber hosepipes, knives, batons and cables; suspended or forced into holding painful stress positions for prolonged periods; deprived of sufficient food and potable water; placed in prolonged solitary confinement, sometimes for weeks or even months; and denied medical care for injuries sustained during the protests or as a result of torture."

The UN, instead of doing its job, appears to have granted the Iranian regime's leaders full impunity. For how long are the UN, the European Union and the Biden administration going to continue appeasing the mullahs of Iran instead of holding them accountable for their crimes against humanity?


Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a business strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US foreign policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Does history teach us nothing? - Doron Matza


by Doron Matza

The catastrophic failure of the 1993 Oslo Accords has proven that placating terrorists with territorial or financial sacrifices will not guarantee peace for Israel.

The death of Border Police officer Barel Hadaria Shmueli at the hands of a Hamas terrorist on the Gaza border does not only reflect a tactical error made by the defense forces but a broader erroneous policy.

Israel is looking to come to an arrangement with Hamas, not unlike the United States with Iran. And similarly to Washington, our government is also chasing a dream, at the core of which is the faulty understanding of Yasser Arafat and his Palestine Liberation Organization and Palestine Liberation Front.

In 1991, the Israeli government adopted an approach of diplomatic arrangement. The assumption – which turned out to be wrong – was that giving up Israeli territory to the Palestinians would placate their hostilities.

The catastrophic failure of the Oslo process following the Second Intifada – after Arafat rejected Israel's generous offer of a permanent agreement and backed the anti-Israel violence – showed that the Palestinian national movement never viewed its conflict with Israel in classical terms of political agreements based on territorial compromises, but as a long-term campaign to wipe Zionism off the face of the earth.

Almost 30 years later, Jerusalem insists on making the exact same error, only this time with regard to Hamas. Instead of a diplomatic agreement, this time it is an economic one, and instead of territory in return for peace, it is economy, funds, and partial lifting of "the Gaza siege" in return for security.

Such an outlook has become the cornerstone of Israeli policy in recent years. It boded well with the government's lack of desire to begin a military campaign in Gaza.

It has gotten so bad that lawmakers have begun blindly viewing terror acts committed by Hamas as "rebelliousness" that does not represent the organization's main goal.

Not even the recent 11-day war in Gaza changed the government's mind. On the contrary, it solidified the assumption that the fighting has created an opportunity for coming to an agreement, without realizing that just like Arafat and the PLO that never wanted to reach a compromise with Israel, neither does Hamas.

History teaches us that not only are Hamas and the PLO fundamentally the same but that diplomatic sacrifices by Israel will not guarantee peace for the Jewish state.


Doron Matza


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter