Saturday, May 28, 2022

A Series Of Critical Failures Led To The Uvalde Tragedy - Ted Noel


​ by Ted Noel

Leftists want gun control and Republicans want mental health funding but it’s naïve to point to only one pivotal cause or moment when there were really several.


With all the noise about the massacre in Uvalde, Texas, it’s easy for the voice of reason to be lost. Gefühl über alles! Emotion above all! The only thing that matters is our anger. That’s how Hitler launched the Holocaust. He demonized non-Germans and non-Aryans, stirring massive hatred that led to the deaths of millions. And hatred is all that the Left is purveying in the wake of the evil manifested in Texas. However, a critical analysis reveals that a gun was only the last cause, not the only one.

This isn’t the place to recite statistics on gun ownership, gun crime, and defensive use of firearms. Those are well handled elsewhere. We have a classroom full of innocent children lying on slabs in the local morgue, not due to any actions by an AR-15, but by the actions of a demented eighteen-year-old, made possible by a chain of critical incidents. This is where we should look. But first, an illustration of the process.

On December 29, 1972, around midnight, Eastern Airlines flight 401 from New York crashed into the Everglades, killing 101 of the 176 people on board. The National Transportation Safety Board investigated the crash and slowly assembled the sequence of events that led to it.

As the plane descended into Miami, the crew noticed that the indicator light for the nose gear being “down and locked” was unlit. Landing without nose gear would be a major hazard, so the crew took manual measures to ensure that the gear was down. The light stayed dark, though, because it was burned out, not because the gear wasn’t down. So, the plane entered a holding pattern over the Everglades to sort out the problem. The crew engaged the autopilot to reduce workload.

While crew members were in the avionics bay below the cockpit, the autopilot changed modes when the pilot gently leaned on the yoke as he turned to discuss the gear difficulty with the copilot. The jet slowly drifted down toward the surface. No one noticed, partly because it was late at night and there were no lights on the ground. When the crew finally noticed a problem with the plane’s altitude, there was no time to correct it.

There were a number of steps in this daisy chain of disaster that, had any one of them been effectively interrupted, would have seen the plane land safely. Each error had to be in the critical incident chain, or nothing bad would have happened. Let’s put that in plain English: Any single change in the critical events would have saved 101 lives. And that includes having the senior, highly experienced pilot fly the plane instead of leaning on the yoke accidentally.

This process is “critical incident analysis.” It identifies every moment when someone can “put a finger in the dike” to prevent a bad event. So, let’s start with the screaming lefties. They want “common sense gun laws” and other pablum. Space prevents a full discussion but they don’t offer a single reason why any of their nostrums would change a single step in the chain. So, their approach must be discarded out of hand.

This leads us to the predictable Republicans. “He was mentally disturbed. We need more mental health services.” And so on. Perhaps the much-touted but unconstitutional Red Flag laws would have helped? Texas doesn’t have a Red Flag law but the Texas Health and Safety Code Chapter 573 allows a police officer to detain someone who appears to be mentally unstable and a likely danger to others. Any weapons can be put into lockup. But no one bothered to tell the cops that the future shooter was coco-loco. They saw his posts, and he was a known bad apple, but this link in the chain didn’t get broken.

By not breaking that link, the shooter was able to buy guns because he didn’t have any red flags in the NICS database. This isn’t the first time that’s happened. Dylann Roof bought his gun “legally” because a police department didn’t report his arrest on a drug charge. Nine people died at Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, because that link was still intact.

Details remain unclear, but the shooter in Uvalde drove to the school and then crashed his vehicle. An eyewitness reports that he fired on nearby people as he left the truck. It was twelve minutes before he entered the school. It’s unclear why either the police or the school did not get the message that he was headed to the school. Had that message been passed on, the school could have locked down, preventing his entry. This isn’t new, since Uvalde schools get locked down almost every week due to violence related to illegal immigration. Another link in the chain remained intact.

Related to this link is the fact that the back door of the school was unlocked. Had entry been restricted to one or two monitored points, his gun would never have been pointed at defenseless children. And that brings us to the last link in this critical incident chain.

Image: Gunman entering through the unlocked back door. YouTube screen grab.

No one was armed inside the school. Uvalde is a high threat environment, as we see from all the lockdowns. It is criminally negligent not to prepare to meet the threats. But Texas law allows local school districts to declare themselves “Gun Free Zones,” thereby becoming the favorite target of mentally disturbed mass murderers. Sandy Hook, Marjorie Stoneman Douglass High School, and Umpqua Community College should make this abundantly clear. Someone intent on mayhem knows that no one will be able to stop him in a gun-free zone.


So now we have multiple links in the chain. First, no one dropped a dime on this kid when he was known to be trouble. Next, the message that a man was shooting a rifle and heading to the school got lost. That left the school wide open to invasion and, finally, no one inside the school had the means to protect the most vulnerable in our society.

These are four easily identified places where this tragedy could have been averted. Political “solutions” that only tackle one are doomed to fail. But there is an example we can emulate. Israel has armed guards at its schools and both staff (some of whom are also armed) and students are taught to be proactive to defend themselves. No students are ever harmed, even though Arab violence is an everyday problem. The final common path of evil is met with overwhelming force, so bad guys look elsewhere.

It’s obvious that steps will fail from time to time. So, it’s essential to have defense in depth. Schools can easily be hardened so that shooters have considerable difficulty entering. But that may fail, so shooters must know that they will suffer acute lead poisoning promptly administered should they enter. That requires a significant percentage of the staff to carry arms on their person at all times. Schools with such defense don’t get shot up, and their charges go home safely.

It’s time to shut off the noise and do serious after-action critical event analysis. Maybe there were even police failures that can be fixed. But remember, when seconds matter, the police are only minutes away.


Ted Noel, MD is a retired Anesthesiologist/Intensivist who podcasts and posts on social media as DoctorTed and @vidzette. His DoctorTed podcasts are available on many podcast channels.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden Admin's Iran Nuclear Policy is Disastrous, Misinformed and Dangerous - Majid Rafizadeh


​ by Majid Rafizadeh

Malley declined to say what the administration is asking for from the Iranian regime to de-list the IRGC from the terrorist list.

  • During a critical Senate hearing on May 25, 2022, Robert Malley, President Joe Biden's special envoy for Iran, defended the administration's efforts to revive the nuclear deal with the ruling mullahs of Iran.

  • Although there is a report that the Biden administration will not be removing Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from the terrorist list, Malley clearly suggested that the IRGC's removal from the terrorist list is not off the table: "We'd made clear to Iran that if they wanted any concession on something that was unrelated to the JCPOA – like the FTO designation – we needed something reciprocal from them that would address our concerns."

  • But Malley declined to say what the administration is asking for from the Iranian regime to de-list the IRGC from the terrorist list.

  • Malley also suggested that the Biden administration will submit a final draft of the nuclear deal to the Congress for review. This proposal, however, is most likely an attempt by the Biden administration to pacify the Congress so they will let their guard down. We should recall that the Obama administration, in which Biden was the Vice President, also said that the Congress would get a chance to review the nuclear deal. But Obama went ahead and reached a deal with Iran without Senate approval. The nuclear deal was reached through executive order, not through the Senate.

The Biden administration seems to be investing all its political capital in reviving the nuclear deal with the ruling mullahs of Iran, while it seems clear that Iran's theocratic establishment is only buying time to defiantly advance its nuclear program and has now reached the point where it is close to the nuclear threshold. (Image source: iStock)

The Biden administration seems to be investing all its political capital in reviving the nuclear deal with the ruling mullahs of Iran; the Iranian regime has been defiantly advancing its nuclear program, stepping up its uranium enrichment, working on 1,000 more centrifuges, gaining irreversible knowledge in nuclear development while "negotiating" with the P5+1.

It seems clear that Iran's theocratic establishment is only buying time to advance its nuclear program and has now reached the point where it is close to the nuclear threshold. The Islamic Republic is thought to be only weeks away from obtaining the weapons-grade materials necessary for a nuclear weapon. Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz warned on May 17, 2022:

"Iran continues to accumulate irreversible knowledge and experience in the development, research, production and operation of advanced centrifuges... Today, the prices for tackling the Iranian challenge on the global and regional levels are higher than they were a year ago and lower than they will be within a year".

The New York Times also acknowledged that the regime is only weeks away from going nuclear:

"Iran has come within roughly a month of having enough material to fuel a single nuclear weapon, crossing a threshold that may raise pressure on the US and its allies to improve the terms of a potential deal to restore the 2015 nuclear agreement."

It is totally contradictory that the Iranian regime is progressing its nuclear program at a high speed while participating in global negotiations, the main purpose of which is ostensibly to curb the Islamic Republic's nuclear program.

This crisis comes at a time when more Iranian leaders have acknowledged that the regime's nuclear program was, after all, designed to manufacture nuclear weapons from the outset, and not for peaceful purposes as the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has claimed.

Former Iranian Prime Minister Ali Motahari stated on April 20, 2022:

"To do enrichment directly creates the illusion that we want to make a bomb... From the very beginning, when we entered the nuclear activity, our goal was to build a bomb and strengthen the deterrent forces but we could not maintain the secrecy of this issue, and the secret reports were revealed by a group of hypocrites."

On November 29, 2021, the former head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, Fereydoon Abbasi-Davani, was the first Iranian official to admit that his work was part of a nuclear "system" designed to develop nuclear weapons:

"When the country's all-encompassing growth began involving satellites, missiles and nuclear weapons, and surmounted new boundaries of knowledge, the issue became more serious for them."

Despite these revelations, all the Biden administration seems to do is appease the mullahs in order to reach a deal. The Biden administration first told the Iranian leaders not only that the U.S. was willing to lift nuclear-related sanctions, but also that it was considering lifting non-nuclear related sanctions. That was followed by the first concession toward Iran's proxy militia group, Yemen's Houthis.

Even as the evidence — including a report by the United Nations — showed that the Iranian regime was delivering sophisticated weapons to the Houthis in Yemen, the Biden administration suspended some of the anti-terrorism sanctions on the Houthis that the Trump administration had imposed. Soon after, on February 12, 2021, the Biden administration revoked the designation of the Houthis as a terrorist group. A few weeks after that, in June 2021, the Biden administration lifted sanctions on three former Iranian officials and several energy companies. Then, in a blow to the Iranian people and advocates of democracy and human rights — a few days after the Iranian regime hand-picked a purported mass murderer, Ebrahim Raisi, to be its next president — the Biden administration announced that it was also considering lifting sanctions against Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

During a critical Senate hearing on May 25, 2022, Robert Malley, President Joe Biden's special envoy for Iran, defended the administration's efforts to revive the nuclear deal with the ruling mullahs of Iran.

Although there is a report that the Biden administration will not be removing Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from the terrorist list, Malley clearly suggested that the IRGC's removal from the terrorist list is not off the table:

"We'd made clear to Iran that if they wanted any concession on something that was unrelated to the JCPOA – like the FTO designation – we needed something reciprocal from them that would address our concerns."

But Malley declined to say what the administration is asking for from the Iranian regime to de-list the IRGC from the terrorist list.

Malley also suggested that the Biden administration will submit a final draft of the nuclear deal to the Congress for review. This proposal, however, is most likely an attempt by the Biden administration to pacify the Congress so they will let their guard down. We should recall that the Obama administration, in which Biden was the Vice President, also said that the Congress would get a chance to review the nuclear deal. But Obama went ahead and reached a deal with Iran without Senate approval. The nuclear deal was reached through executive order, not through the Senate.

And later, it was revealed that the administration made multiple secret deals with Iran's ruling mullahs. One of the secret deals consisted of allowing the Iranian regime to have access to US dollars by sidestepping sanctions. "The Obama administration misled the American people and Congress because they were desperate to get a deal with Iran", said Senator Rob Portman (R-OH), who chaired the Senate panel conducting the investigation at the time. The Obama administration also secretly agreed to remove sanctions on several Iranian banks, including Bank Sepah and Sepah International. In addition, according to a previous report by the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security, the Obama administration agreed "'in secret' to allow Iran to evade some restrictions" in the last year of the nuclear agreement. David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector, stated that "The exemptions or loopholes are happening in secret, and it appears that they favor Iran." These are only few examples of the secret deals conducted with the Iranian regime to appease it.

While "negotiating" to reach a nuclear deal, the ruling mullahs of Iran continue to advance their nuclear program and inch closer to obtaining a nuclear bomb, the missiles to transport them, and to attack and seemingly, when possible, to take over their neighbors. The Biden administration's weak leadership is only enabling Iran's regime to destabilize the region even further while making it even harder, with a deal, to hold Iran accountable for the mayhem it could well be planning.


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

Israel bracing for violence, rocket fire on Jerusalem Day - Anna Ahronheim


​ by Anna Ahronheim

Hamas called on Palestinians to protect our Islamic and Christian holy sites and to raise the Palestinian flag everywhere to "emphasize the Arab identity of the land and Jerusalem."


Israelis celebrate Jerusalem day at the Western Wall as blaze is seen in the background at the al-Aqsa mosque compound in Jerusalem Old City, May 10, 2021. (photo credit: MENDY HECHTMAN/FLASH90)
Israelis celebrate Jerusalem day at the Western Wall as blaze is seen in the background at the al-Aqsa mosque compound in Jerusalem Old City, May 10, 2021.
(photo credit: MENDY HECHTMAN/FLASH90)

Security forces are on high alert ahead of Jerusalem Day today, readying for possible rocket fire from both Gaza and Lebanon as well as violent clashes with Palestinians in the capital and the West Bank.

The IDF is also prepared for possible terror attacks and is particularly concerned about an outbreak of violence on the Temple Mount.

A final security assessment will be held by senior officials later ahead of the flag march, a central part of Jerusalem Day festivities.

Prime Minister Naftali Bennett approved the march’s route on Friday, which is expected to pass through the Old City’s Damascus Gate and Muslim Quarter and from there to the Western Wall, where it will end.

Israeli officials have stressed that marchers will not enter the Temple Mount area and that the route is the same as it has been for 30 years.

 Right-wing activists prepare for flag march at Safra Square in Jerusalem, April 20, 2022 (credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM) Right-wing activists prepare for flag march at Safra Square in Jerusalem, April 20, 2022 (credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)

The march celebrates Israel’s victory in the Six Day War, when it captured the eastern half of the capital, including the Old City, from the Jordanians, who had banned the entry of Jews into the city.

A spiral of violence

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke with Foreign Minister Yair Lapid “regarding the importance of Israelis and Palestinians working to maintain calm,” the State Department said on Friday.

“I am deeply concerned about the spiraling cycle of violence that has taken too many Palestinian and Israeli lives in recent weeks,” United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Tor Wennessland said on Saturday.

“As we approach May 29, I call upon all sides to exercise maximum restraint and make wise decisions to avoid another violent conflict that will only claim more lives,” he said. “The message of the international community is clear: to avoid such an escalation. I have been in contact with all concerned parties and urge their leaders to heed this call.”

Dozens of violent riots broke out across the West Bank over the weekend, including in the areas of Hebron, Qalqilya and Nablus, as well as in the villages of Hurrawa and Beita.

On Friday night, a Palestinian teenager was killed by Israeli troops in the village of El-Khader near Bethlehem after throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails towards the forces, which was providing security at an intersection near the West Bank settlement of Efrat.

According to the Palestinian Health Ministry, 15-year-old Zaid Muhammad Ghnaim was hit by fire in the neck and back.

The military said that a number of suspects hurled stones and Molotov cocktails at troops, who then chased after the assailants. During the chase, more stones and Molotov cocktails were thrown and troops responded with live fire.

The military identified one Palestinian being hit, the military said, adding that “Israeli forces gave first aid at the scene, and he was later evacuated by the Palestinian Red Crescent.”

Ghnaim was the third Palestinian youth to be killed by Israeli forces this week.

On Wednesday, 16-year-old Riat Rafik Amin was killed by Israeli troops after being shot in the head during clashes at Joseph’s Tomb in the city of Nablus. Last Saturday, 17-year-old Ahmed Fayed was killed in clashes with Israeli security forces in Jenin. Fayad, who was said to have been shot several times in his upper body, was later identified as being a member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

The clashes come as the IDF continues to crack down on Palestinians suspected of being involved in terrorism, following a spate of deadly attacks that claimed the lives of 20 people. The Israeli military has blamed religious incitement by groups like Hamas for the violence.

In a video statement, Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) Maj.-Gen. Ghassan Alian stressed that the status quo in Jerusalem remains the same for all religions and has not changed in over 30 years.

“We are in a period where attempted incitement is on the rise. I see the lies and stories and I am here to clarify: The flag march has been taking place for more than 30 years – this is not new. The parade takes place on Jerusalem Day – this is not new. And the route of the flag march is also not new,” he said in a video statement on the unit’s Facebook page.

“And what else isn’t new? The interests of elements looking to ignite the area, and their disregard for the consequences of an escalation,” he said, adding that Israel “won’t allow it to be harmed – for anyone.”

Explaining that Israel has been “expanding” its civilian-economic policy both in the West Bank and the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, Alian warned that “undermining the security stability will harm these efforts, and the accomplishments so far.”

Hamas threaten Jerusalem

Hamas on Saturday called for a “broad mobilization” of Palestinians to “defend” Jerusalem and its holy sites during the flag march planned for Sunday.

The terrorist group and other Palestinian groups called on Palestinians to protest against the march by holding their own flag parade in Jerusalem and the West Bank.

“Hamas calls on the Palestinians to protect our Islamic and Christian holy sites and to raise the Palestinian flag everywhere to emphasize the Arab identity of the land and Jerusalem,” the Gaza-based terror group said in a statement. “Let tomorrow, Sunday, become a public revolt for our people in defense of Jerusalem and the Aqsa Mosque.”

It called on all Arabs and Muslims to consider Sunday a “holy day” during which all efforts are devoted to thwarting Israeli plans to “Judaize” Jerusalem.

“This is a historical responsibility of our heroic Palestinian people and our great Arab and Islamic nation,” Hamas said. “We are partners in defending the Aqsa Mosque and liberating the land from the brutal Zionist occupation.”

Palestinian factions and activists urged worshipers to converge on the Aqsa Mosque compound on Sunday morning to stop Jews celebrating Jerusalem Day from “storming” the site.

The factions have falsely claimed that Jews celebrating Jerusalem Day are planning to raise Israeli flags at the Temple Mount, warning that Israel would be held responsible for the consequences of such an action.

Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal, who is based in Qatar, said on Saturday that Israel was “fighting the Palestinian flag and wants the Israeli flag to prevail so that it could say that the Aqsa Mosque [compound] is under its political and religious sovereignty.”

Mashaal claimed that Israel was planning to “demolish” the Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount.

Hamas’s position, he added, “is clear: Jerusalem and the Aqsa Mosque belongs only to the Palestinians and to the Arab and Islamic nation.”

Mashaal urged the Arabs and Muslims to take to the streets in solidarity with Palestinians “defending” the mosque in Jerusalem. He also called on Arab and Islamic governments to assume “historical responsibility” toward what is happening at the holy site and Jerusalem.

Some Hamas officials, meanwhile, continued to issue belligerent statements regarding the flag march.

One official, Mohammed Hamadeh, said that Hamas won’t allow Israel to “emerge victorious” in Jerusalem.

Israel was “playing with fire” by allowing Jews to organize the flag march at Damascus Gate, he said.

“Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa are a redline and the march will not pass,” Hamadeh cautioned, arguing that the flag march illustrates the extent of Israel’s “confusion.”

Another senior Hamas official, Haroun Nasser el-Din, said that his group’s response will be “decisive and firm” if Israel tries to harm the Aqsa Mosque.

Palestinian Authority Minister of Jerusalem Affairs Fadi al-Hidmi warned of the repercussions of the “provocative” flags march, saying it indicated an Israeli desire to escalate the situation in Jerusalem.

“The Israeli occupation government bears full responsibility for the repercussions of this provocative and racist march, and the international community must deal with it accordingly,” al-Hidmi said. “The march serves as an alarm bell to the whole world that it is time for this long-standing occupation to end, and for the city’s residents to enjoy security and peace like all other peoples.”

A group called the Popular Youth Movement in Jerusalem urged the residents of the capital to consider Sunday as Palestinian Flag Day in response to the Israeli flag march.

The group urged east Jerusalem’s residents to raise Palestinian flags on every house in the city.

It also encouraged the residents to try to reach Damascus Gate while carrying Palestinian flags.

The group called on Muslims to converge on the Aqsa Mosque on Sunday to “stand united in the face of the Zionist incursion.”

The PLO’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, for its part, warned that allowing the flag march to take place at Damascus Gate would be considered a “declaration of war.”

Maher Mezher, a senior PFLP official, said: “We are ready to respond.”

Tovah Lazaroff contributed to this report.


Anna Ahronheim


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

How Joe Biden and the I.R.S are Performing Criminal Acts - David Horowitz and John Perazzo


​ by David Horowitz and John Perazzo

To dismantle our borders and destroy our country.


In an earlier article about Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg’s efforts to fix the 2020 presidential election, we observed that the root cause of America’s current problems, beginning with broken borders and off-the charts urban violence – is lawlessness.[1] We also observed that this lawlessness originates in the White House, and includes the Justice Department, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Executive Branch generally.

Discussions of the border problem often touch on the criminal element that violates our unenforced border laws beginning with drug dealers, sex traffickers, and migrant smugglers. But the crime problem is vastly understated in these references which give the impression that it is largely confined to the countries they have left, and has no impact on the country they have invaded. In July 2018, the Government Accountability Office issued a report containing “Criminal Alien Statistics,”[2] which serves to correct this false impression.  Among its conclusions, the report states that one in five federal prisoners in the United States is a criminal alien. And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

The G.A.O. report covered the period between 2011 and 2016. During that time frame, approximately 2 million foreigners crossed the border into the United States illegally – which is just about the number of unvetted foreigners whom border officials predict will cross the border illegally this year alone. In that same time frame there were more than 730,000 criminal aliens in U.S. prisons, federal and state, and local jails. Criminals are not usually arrested the first time they commit a crime, and are often released with minimal time served when they are. So while there were 730,000 criminal aliens in U.S. prisons, they accounted for 4.9 million arrests and 7.5 million offenses – which would translate into a 10 times greater number of victims than offenders. 

The offenses of these criminals, according to the report, included more than 1 million drug crimes (number of victims unknown); 500,000 assaults; 133,800 sex offenses (number of actual victims who may have been reluctant to report the crimes also unknown); 24,200 kidnappings; 33,300 “homicide-related events:” and “1,500 terrorism-related crimes.”

How many lives were damaged or destroyed by these aliens who entered the country illegally and should never have even been here in the first place, will never be known, and yet the lawless Biden administration which will not enforce existing immigration laws is planning to continue the outrage and pile up the victims at an even greater rate.

And worse. On July 14, 2021, Fox News Channel host Tucker Carlson revealed the Biden Administration had suborned the U.S. military to ship tens of thousands of illegals into cities across the country at taxpayer expense. Laughlin Air Force Base in Texas was used as the platform from which to secretly board illegals and fly them, under dark of night, to locations across the U.S.  Many other illegals were being sent to occupy the American interior, also at taxpayer expense, but by bus rather than by jet. In the words of Center for Immigration Studies fellow Todd Bensman, “a conveyor belt of commercial and charter buses … are carrying tens of thousands, sight unseen, from Texas, Arizona, and California borderlands northward, and they are dropping their Haitian, Venezuelan, Cuban, and Central American family units in Florida and New Jersey, Tennessee, Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and to large cities in Texas such as Dallas and Houston.”

The fact that the Biden administration chose the middle of the night to ship illegals secretly is a clear indication that the White House was quite aware it was conducting an illegal operation. Its goal, as Tucker Carlson claimed was “changing the electoral map” of the United States and enacting “demographic transformation in our country, without our consent, and in violation of our laws.” Former Trump White House advisor Stephen Miller explained on the same show: “[W]hat is happening now is unprecedented…. This is not about an administration that is unable to protect the border. This is about an administration that in a very purposeful, planned, deliberate, painstaking fashion has turned our Border Patrol and I.C.E. [Immigration & Customs Enforcement] agencies into resettlement agencies…. This is a planned resettlement. The largest of its kind, I would suggest, perhaps in the history of the world in terms of the number of illegal border crossers being resettled into the interior of our country in violation of plain law.”

In a similar vein, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis reported in early November 2021 that, over the course of the preceding summer, dozens of flights had transported groups of illegals from America’s southern border to Jacksonville, Florida in the middle of the night. “Over 70 air charter flights [on] jetliner airliners coming from the southwest border have landed at Jacksonville International Airport,” said Larry Keefe, DeSantis’s public safety spokesman. “On average, there’s 36 passengers on each of these flights,” added Keefe. “And that has been going on over the course of the summer through September…. Who is facilitating this travel? How are they getting here? Who are the support people? Who are the sponsors?” 

To answer Keefe’s questions, the support people and sponsors of the aforementioned flights were, in many cases, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that have long enjoyed tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. This status permits donors to give money to NGOs while claiming their donations as tax deductions. In many cases, the cost of the midnight flights was paid in full by faith-based and open-border NGOs that had contracted with, and were being paid by, the federal government.

Using tax-exempt foundations to defraud taxpayers into subsidizing an illegal invasion of the United States was only possible because of the collusion of the White House and the I.R.S. in supporting this subversion of the American immigration system. And this was only the big picture lawlessness. The smaller details were also full of improprieties. As reporter John Binder notes, these illegal aliens often received special privileges unavailable to American citizens and legal residents:

“All of the border crossers and illegal aliens used Department of Homeland Security (DHS) forms as their proof of identification, as Biden has allowed them to bypass standard TSA [Transportation Security Administration] rules where American citizens must show photo identification to board commercial flights. Most shockingly, perhaps, the forms border crossers and illegal aliens are allowed to use as official forms of identification for TSA include arrest warrants, deportation orders, Notices to Appear (NTA) in immigration court, and federal custody booking records. In addition, TSA officials confirmed that border crossers and illegal aliens boarding domestic commercial flights do not have to undergo health screenings beforehand.”

The obvious injustice of such an arrangement is greatly compounded by the fact that the very activities in which the NGOs are complicit amount to the willful provision of assistance to countless thousands of people who have intentionally broken American immigration laws. Such NGO activities are clearly in violation of the legal requirements that govern 501(c)(3) nonprofits, requirements that explicitly prohibit support for unlawful actions. As the Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) states without ambiguity:

  • “[Tax-]exempt purposes may generally be equated with the public good, and violations of law are the antithesis of the public good. Therefore, the conduct of such activities may be a bar to exemption.”
  • “Not only is the actual conduct of illegal activities inconsistent with exemption, but the planning and sponsoring of such activities are also incompatible with charity and social welfare.”
  • “Violation of constitutionally valid laws is inconsistent with exemption under IRC 501(c)(3).”
  • “[A]ll charitable organizations, regardless of their form, are subject to the requirement that their purpose may not be illegal or contrary to public policy.”

It is impossible to read this Code without concluding that the Internal Revenue Service itself is not only derelict in its duty but has operated with criminal intent to violate its own statutes, indeed its own mission – and on a massive scale.

An enormous amount of money flows from the federal government to the various NGOs that help illegal aliens make their way to their ultimate destinations across the United States. The most recent year for which an accurate dollar figure is available is 2020, the final year of Donald Trump’s presidency. Even under the immigration policies of President Trump, which were far more restrictive than those of his successor, the federal government in 2020 alone distributed more than $1.5 billion among 42 separate nonprofit organizations that provided housing, educational, medical, and legal services for illegals. The leading recipient of this government largesse in 2020 was an Austin, Texas-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit named Southwest Key Programs, which received $400 million in taxpayer funds. The second-leading recipient was BCFS Health & Human Services, a San Antonio-based 501(c)(3) which took in at least $253.1 million from the federal government.

In short, aiding and abetting people who break America’s immigration laws has become a very lucrative enterprise for these NGOs, thanks to the contempt the Biden White House and its bureaucratic agencies have for the law itself.

Another Texas-based 501(c)(3) organization, the Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition (VVBHC), processes large numbers of illegal aliens for airline flights or bus trips from Texas to places like Florida, Indiana, New York, Tennessee, and Utah. It also provides those passengers with basic necessities such as food, drink, and access to shower facilities. Moreover, VVBHC is assisted in these endeavors by two additional 501(c)(3) nonprofits, the Salvation Army and the United Methodist Committee on Relief.

In a similar spirit, Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley (CCRGV) plays an active role in providing food and shelter to illegal migrants who have been released from federal custody, before they make their way to their final destinations in various locations across the United States. CCRGV also collaborates with a fellow 501(c)(3) nonprofit named Team Brownsville to provide such items as food, clothing, and diapers — as well as assistance in coordinating travel plans — for illegal aliens in Brownsville, Texas.

Also in Texas, Mercy Ministries works with fellow 501(c)(3)s like Catholic Charities and the Holding Institute to shelter illegal migrants in Laredo.

The Biden Administration has quietly flown enormous numbers of illegal alien minors from Texas to New York between the hours of midnight and 6:30 a.m.  Many of those illegals are then dropped off at the Syosset, Long Island campus of MercyFirst, a 501c3 nonprofit sponsored by the Sisters of Mercy, a fellow Catholic 501(c)(3 nonprofit. From there, they are helped to find permanent homes.

On July 28, 2021, Texas’ Republican Governor, Greg Abbott, issued an executive order barring all citizens and residents of that state from providing transportation services for any migrants who had crossed the southern U.S. border illegally. Abbott’s order sparked the ire of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network Inc. (CLINIC), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit that characterized the governor’s edict as “an affront to human dignity and morality.” “It promotes racial profiling and punishes organizations, including CLINIC affiliates, for providing vital, life-saving services to immigrants,” said Viviana Westbrook, CLINIC’s state and local advocacy attorney. “This order, its origins and its goals,” she added, “are a direct attack on all of us, undermining the core value shared by Catholics and other people of faith across this country — we can and must welcome.”

These sentiments may seem noble, but even the Church must obey the law, as its Divine Authority famously said, “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and unto God what is God’s.” Sedition is not a holy obligation or rite.

Republican Congressman Lance Gooden of Texas has warned that in collaboration with the Biden Administration, tax-exempt NGOs are not only “facilitating human smuggling and child trafficking in our country,” but are also “allowing these migrants, many of whom are unknown to U.S. law enforcement agencies, to board commercial aircraft, creating one of the greatest threats to U.S. national security since September 11, 2001.”

In February 2022, Rep. Gooden introduced The Stop Federal Funding for Human Trafficking and Smuggling Act, legislation designed to deny the flow of government dollars to nonprofit organizations that help facilitate illegal entry into the United States. As Gooden said in a statement: “The Biden administration is working with nonprofits, U.S. corporations, and international agencies to operate an illegal immigration network that spans from South America to every community in the United States. Taxpayer dollars should not be subsiding a mass invasion of our country, and it is time to put a stop to this corrupt operation.”

Former White House Office of Management & Budget Director Russ Vought, who now serves as president of Citizens for Renewing America, lauded Gooden’s bill: “Many NGOs openly encourage the flaunting of our border and immigration laws, providing ‘how-to’ guidance on how to come to the United States illegally, and then reward such activity by facilitating and funding housing, food, utilities, and legal support. The net effect of these activities either directly promotes or provides cover for human trafficking operations, and the exploitation of men, women, and children at the border under the guise of ‘helping’ migrants. I support Rep. Gooden's efforts to make sure groups that facilitate these activities are no longer funded with the hard-earned tax dollars supplied by the forgotten men and women of America.”

When Chris Cabrera, chief of the National Border Patrol Council in South Texas, was asked in February 2022 whether open-borders NGOs “are working at cross purposes to you,” he replied: “Most definitely. And they should not be allowed to, but our government allows it. And that’s a problem. And it’s one reason [Border Patrol] morale is so low.”

Like Texas, California is another state that serves as a destination for countless thousands of illegal border crossers from Mexico and Central America. California-based nonprofits like the San Diego Rapid Response Network (SDRRN) and Jewish Family Service of San Diego (JFS) — both of which receive significant funding from American taxpayers — have helped the Biden Administration fly illegal aliens into the U.S. interior at no cost to them, while allowing them to evade normal airport-security requirements. Indeed, the illegals are asked to do nothing more than pledge that they will check in with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency at some future date — a pledge that is almost always broken.

The San Diego Rapid Response Network — which was launched in 2017 by two California ACLU chapters, the San Diego Organizing Project, and SEIU Local 221 — professes to combat “dehumanizing immigration enforcement activities, including checkpoints, raids, arrests, and harassment, occurring in San Diego County.”

In other words, the lawlessness of the Biden administration has spawned a mentality that is seditious and insurrectionary, and thanks to the complicity of the I.R.S. funded by taxpayer donations that were never intended for such illegal and subversive purposes.

Jewish Family Services is a tax-exempt NGO that colludes with the Homeland Security Department to provide illegal aliens with shelter services. Moreover, JFS furnishes illegals with information packets that explain how they can: find an immigration attorney, apply for asylum, get past TSA agents at airports without showing proof of ID, get free access to high-quality hotels, contact immigration NGOs that can help them break the law, and enroll their children in U.S. public schools. “We … stand with all Dreamers and their families,” JFS proclaims, “and all estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants who consider the United States to be their home.” So much for the rule of law.

In November 2021, Just The News reported that Jewish Family Services, in its most recent financial statement, indicated that it had received more than $16 million in government support during the preceding fiscal year.

JFS’s subversive attacks on U.S. immigration law pre-date the Biden demolition project. JFS opposed virtually all Trump-era immigration policies, including the so-called Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), a government action stipulating that foreign individuals traveling northward through Mexico and seeking asylum in the U.S. without proper documentation, could be required to remain in Mexico while waiting for their asylum hearings in America to eventually make their way onto a court calendar. Prior to the implementation of MMP, American border agencies had been required to release such illegals into the country’s interior, on the shaky expectation that they would someday show up for their asylum hearings. By JFS’s calculus, MMP was a “cruel and inhuman” policy. JFS is entitled to its opinion, but not to subverting the law and abusing taxpayer monies to implement its own agendas.

Other California-based 501(c)(3) nonprofits that help illegal aliens access free food, hotel rooms, and commercial flights into the American interior include Catholic Charities of San Diego and the Los Angeles-based Shapiro Foundation. In San Diego, many illegals have been housed at hotels including The Four Points by Sheraton, where rates start at $159 per night. Elsewhere in southern California, various nonprofit NGOs have negotiated arrangements with the Biden Administration and the state to provide illegals with hotel rooms costing $71 to $90 per night — again, all courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer, and a derelict I.R.S.

Another center of illegal entry into the Unites States is Arizona, where, between March 2021 and March 2022, a 501(c)(3) non-profit called the Regional Center for Border Health helped more than 16,700 illegal migrants obtain food, clothing, and transport to far-flung locations across the United States where they could provide a demographic basis for future Democrat majorities – at least according to the assumptions of their Democrat sponsors.

Catholic Charities, meanwhile, has operated regular shuttle buses to Arizona’s Yuma International Airport, where illegal aliens are provided free commercial flights to their ultimate destinations. Many of those flights are paid for by Miles4Migrants, a tax-exempt NGO that uses donated air-miles to cover the costs.

No account of nonprofit organizations’ complicity in lawbreaking would be complete without some mention of what was done in 2018 by Pueblo Sin Fronteras (PSF, “People Without Borders”), a Chicago-based organization founded in 2001 by Roberto Corona, a Mexican-born activist dedicated to promoting the rights of illegal aliens in the United States. PSF is a project of another Chicago-based nonprofit, the now-defunct La Familia Latina Unida (“The United Latin Family”). Describing itself as “a collective of friends” who stand “in permanent solidarity with displaced peoples,” PSF has led numerous caravans of migrants and refugees from Central America to the U.S. The organization not only pledges to “provide humanitarian aid and legal advice” for such sojourners, but also candidly declares that its overriding objective is to “abolish borders” and facilitate the free, unregulated movement of Central American migrants into the United States. It proposes to do this by dismantling the immigration system and legal order that made America such a desirable destination in the first place, and replacing it with the lawless attitudes and practices that made Central America a slum.

In the spring of 2018, People Without Borders helped organize a caravan of hundreds of people from Central America seeking to enter the United States illegally. The co-organizer of that caravan was the CARA Family Detention Pro Bono Project, a coalition composed of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, the American Immigration Council, the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, and the American Immigration Lawyers Association. Three of those four coalition members are tax-exempt NGOs.[3]

On March 23, 2018, People Without Borders publicized the caravan by issuing a press release demanding that Mexico and the United States “respect our rights as refugees and our right to dignified work to be able to support our families”; “open the[ir] borders to us because we are as much citizens as the people of the countries where we are and/or travel”; and end all “deportations which destroy families.” Notice that everything in this statement is an unsubstantiated claim beginning with the presumption that the caravan members are refugees with rights. Asylum seekers do have rights, but only because America honors them, and the current crisis at the border is in large part the result of would-be asylum seekers failing to show up for the court appointments designed to establish that they are indeed asylum seekers and not just liars seeking the bounties that the rule of law made possible before the Biden progressives began destroying them.

In mid-October of 2018, People Without Borders spearheaded an effort to overwhelm America’s border-control apparatus when it helped launch yet another large caravan — composed of several thousand people from Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador — that began migrating northward for the declared purpose of breaking America’s immigration laws and occupying the United States.

In an October 21, 2018 press release, People Without Borders accused President Trump and the U.S. of using “repressive tactics” to inflict “fear and racism” on the people of Central America. These preposterous claims indicate what little chance there is that such people would make a positive contribution to American life should they succeed in their malign agenda. This agenda was made clearer in the statement of one of its funders, Freedom For Immigrants, an Oakland, California-based tax-exempt advocacy group which claims that America’s “immigration detention system is built upon a long history of white supremacy, capitalism, and imperialism.” Sure, that’s what America needs – more racist Marxists who want America to look like Communist Cuba.

The I.R.S. is the patron saint of a movement to break America’s immigration laws, occupy its cities, bilk its taxpayers, overwhelm its health, welfare and education services, fill its prisons, and destroy its constitutional order. By their words and actions alike, this movement had shown its utter contempt for America’s integrity as a sovereign nation, and for the hard-won principles that made it the object of their envy. The I.R.S. has abandoned its responsibilities and betrayed its mandate in order to turn a blind eye to its own brazen complicity in advancing chaos and lawlessness through the length and breadth of a once proud nation.

David Horowitz is the founder of the David Horowitz Freedom Center and the bestselling author of I Can't Breathe: How a Racial Hoax is Killing America.

John Perazzo is the editor of—an encyclopedic guide to the political Left and a project of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is the author of Black Lives Matter: Marxist Hate Dressed Up As Racial Justice.



David Horowitz and John Perazzo


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Our Economic Misery Isn’t an Accident, It’s the Plan - Daniel Greenfield


​ by Daniel Greenfield

The Left doesn’t want you to be able to drive, buy a home, or enjoy a burger.


Americans can’t afford to buy a used car or even gas because the Left doesn’t want them to drive. They can’t buy homes because the Left wants to destroy the suburbs and force everyone to live in megacities. They have trouble buying meat because the Left wants them to eat soy.

The same is true for the whole exercise in planned economic misery that we’re experiencing.

Take Hoover's "A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage" and reverse it. That's the goal. What we’re living through is not an unintentional accident: it’s the American Holodomor.

The Left doesn’t want you to be able to drive, buy a home, or enjoy a burger.

Naive Republicans will say that, “Biden is not paying enough attention to the border” or “Biden is not paying enough attention to inflation”.

That’s like saying Jack the Ripper wasn’t paying enough attention to cutting up prostitutes.

2 million illegal aliens are expected to invade America because the Biden administration is paying a whole lot of attention to keeping the border open. That’s why it’s busy fighting in court to dump Title 42 so that every illegal alien who crosses the border will be sure to come here.

When an administration makes increasing the flow of illegal aliens a core legal priority for the DOJ, that means it’s paying a whole lot of attention to it. Much like Jack paid a lot of attention to ladies of the evening. The Biden administration doesn’t believe that there should be a border.

That’s why the border is open wider than Biden’s brain on a Tuesday night.

There are predictions that gas will hit $6 a gallon nationwide by the summer because the Biden administration has worked hard to raise energy prices and create artificial shortages. Biden’s people just got through once again sabotaging oil and gas leases because they want higher energy prices. $6 a gallon is not the result of political inattentiveness, that is the plan.

Inflation isn’t an unintentional accident either. The Left spends like drunken sailors to feed its agenda, but also because spending is an innate good in the Cloward-Piven sense. Devalue money and you wipe out the middle class. Then you can reboot the economy on new terms.

Biden wasted trillions of dollars and is busy blaming “corporate greed” for high prices.

Meanwhile, inflation is doing what it’s meant to do, wiping out savings, and triggering retaliatory interest rate hikes to “cool down” the economy. The middle class ends up poorer and more vulnerable, government dependency rises and social mobility falls. Socialism starts looking better every day. That’s how it worked in the twentieth century and still works today.

All of this is terrible for Biden’s poll numbers, but that’s only a problem for Hunter Biden and whatever Chinese, Ukrainian or American oligarchs are paying his crack bills this week..

Picking a dementia patient for the presidency was always a suicide mission. Republicans are somewhat right in that Biden really isn’t paying attention to the economy or much of anything else. On a good day he can mumble his way through a teleprompter and then go back down to the basement for some ice cream. It’s the radical leftists around him who call the shots.

Putting Senator Elizabeth Warren in the White House would have led to the same programs, but the blame would have been directed at the Left. This way, the Left gets its agendas through while the blame falls on the most out-of-it leader of a major world power since King George III.

The Left is wearing Biden like a skin suit and will casually discard him when it’s done. That’s why the media is suddenly interested in that “Russian disinformation” about Hunter’s laptop.

Biden was dumb enough to think he had finally made it, when he was just the Left’s fall guy.

And while he may be incapable of paying attention to anything, his administration is cheering every price increase. The worse life gets for us, the closer the Left gets to its core agendas.

High gas prices aren’t “Putin’s price hike”, but they’re not even “Biden’s price hike”, they’re the “Left’s price hike”. Car and gas prices are meant to squeeze Americans out of car ownership. It’s such an unsubtle ploy that administration members will actually boast about it. And then they’ll urge Americans to buy $60,000 electric cars that they know people can’t afford.

The utterly blatant goal is to eliminate millions of cars by making it too expensive to drive.

And Democrats are working on this on multiple ends, from environmental and safety regulations, to raising gas prices, to artificial car shortages. Even those who can afford an electric car or get a government subsidized one will be kept off the road by high power rates.

Home prices? The Left has spent generations trying to kill the suburbs and the housing market. Much as it’s worked very hard to wipe out private sector medicine by using the stresses of the system against it. Making the private market for a good or service completely inaccessible for the vast majority of people paves the way for nationalizing it. The Left does not want people living in smaller communities. It has plainly said that everyone should have to live in cities.

Taking out the home and car markets are both means of limiting mobility and forcibly concentrating populations in dense urban clusters under their panopticons. These are the same strategies used by the Soviet Union and Communist China. And have the same intended end.

Food prices? The Left has been equally adamant that ordinary people must stop eating meat. Replacing traditional staples like bread and meat, milk and eggs, is another agenda item and was once again pursued through a combination of regulations, environmental, safety and animal rights measures, and more artificial shortages that are meant to transform the American diet.

You won’t be able to eat, drive or have a home to live in… and you will be told to be happy.

Or else.

This is not a conspiracy theory. The only assumption being made here is that the Left is achieving its stated goals as the result of a plan rather than a series of accidental coincidences.

Too many Republicans are failing to hold the Left accountable by refusing to state what is going on. Hanlon’s Razor, “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity” is fine when it’s not being applied to an ideology that is achieving its objectives through its actions.

That’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s policy.

Pasting Biden’s “I Did It” stickers on gas pumps is fine, but he’s completely expendable.

If Americans don’t understand that our misery isn’t an accident or incompetence, but part of a plan then the downward cycle will continue to play out with increasingly worse outcomes.

Until the Left finally gets what it wants. And then the rest of us won’t have anything left.


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

The FBI is on the November Ballot - Lloyd Billingsley


​ by Lloyd Billingsley

The incoming Congress could stop the FBI’s warrantless spying on more than three million Americans.


As the midterm election approaches, the Annual Statistical Transparency Report Regarding the Intelligence Community’s Use of National Security Surveillance Authorities shows why the Federal Bureau of Investigation is also on the ballot.

One of the few to give this document the attention it deserves was historian Matthew Guariglia, a policy analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation and affiliated scholar at the University of California’s Hastings School of Law.

The report “provides statistics and contextual information concerning how the Intelligence Community uses the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act  and certain other national security authorities to accomplish its mission.” The Act authorizes the U.S. government to engage in mass surveillance of foreign targets.

As Guariglia discovered, FISA is “still being abused by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to spy on Americans without a warrant.” This abuse takes place under Section 702, an amendment to FISA.

Between December 2020 and November 2021, Guariglia notes, the FBI potentially queried the data of more than three million Americans without a warrant. Collection of the data, from telecom and internet providers, renders conversations described as “incidental,” but they aren’t. Each intelligence agency’s rules on “targeting” and “minimization,” Guariglia shows, allow access to access to the communications of Americans caught in  the “702 dragnet.”

The 18-member U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) “lobbied for Section 702 as a tool for national security outside the borders of the U.S., but at its core is instead the ability to conduct domestic, warrantless surveillance on Americans, including for run-of-the-mill crimes. This is the government’s favorite feature of Section 702 – it’s not a bug.”

The IC abused FISA to spy on candidate and President Donald Trump, and several of his campaign aides, George Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Paul Manafort, plus Gen. Michael Flynn.

The reason for the FISA campaign, the charge that Trump was colluding with Russia, was a product of the Hillary Clinton campaign.  That is now emerging in John Durham’s case against Clinton officials such as Michael Sussman.

In 2020, the Biden campaign took a hit when Hunter Biden’s laptop reveals that the “Big Guy” got a piece of the action from his son’s dealings with the Chinese regime.  A full 51 former IC officials, including CIA bosses such as John Brennan, claimed this was “Russian disinformation.” As the New York Times, Washington Post and others have now verified, the laptop has no existential problem and was not Russian disinformation.

FBI boss Christopher Wray targets “domestic terrorism” and angrily denied that any “spying” had taken place against Trump. Former FBI boss James Comey was a Clinton crony going back to his days as a U.S. attorney. In 2016, Comey abused FISA to spy on candidate and President Trump, but like his FBI colleague Peter Strzok, Comey has escaped prosecution. The measures that empowered such lawlessness are still in place, but there may be hope.

“The authorities for Section 702 are scheduled to sunset if they are not legislatively renewed by the end of 2023,” Guariglia notes. “This means lawmakers have a chance to end the many years of overreach by the intelligence community and close warrantless ‘backdoor’ access to our data.” In 2020, Congress let Section 215 of the Patriot Act expire for similar reasons.

“The tools it provided were invasive, illegal and did not produce information that could not be acquired with other insidious tools,” Guariglia explains. With renewal of Section 702 on the line, “it’s time lawmakers stepped up to close this backdoor access to data law enforcement once and for all.”

The FBI and IC, Guariglia warns, “will try to scare lawmakers by giving a rundown of all of the crises that could be averted by maintaining its backdoor.” Lawmakers  and all “U.S. persons” might recall the crises the FBI and IC failed to avert.

The IC and FBI failed to stop Islamic terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in 1993 and 2001. With the newfound Department of Homeland Security aboard, the IC failed to stop terrorist attacks at Fort Hood, Texas in 2009, the Boston Marathon in 2013; San Bernardino, California, in 2015; and Orlando, Florida, in 2016, and many others.

From 1995 to 2016, there were 620 terrorist attacks in the United States totaling 3,393 deaths. Many of those failures can be attributed to a change of policy. The composite character president David Garrow described in Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama, ignored Islamic terrorism and branded his domestic opposition as terrorists. That continues under the Biden Junta, which has ramped up warrantless spying on U.S. citizens.

“In total, queries against U.S. citizens came out to a jaw-dropping 3,394,053 searches,” the Epoch Times notes. “By comparison, only 1,324,057 such queries were made in 2020, representing around a 250 percent increase” during Biden’s first year in the White House. FBI spying on Americans less than worshipful of Joe Biden is certain to surge as the election approaches.

U.S. persons across the nation might request their candidate’s position on Section 702. Should the grounds for warrantless searches be eliminated? Or should Congress turn back the clock to 2016? On November 8, as Trump likes to say, we’ll have to see what happens.


Lloyd Billingsley


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Real Purpose of the Iran Nuclear Deal - Soeren Kern


​ by Soeren Kern

Elevating your enemy to the same level as your ally means that your enemy is no longer your enemy, and your ally is no longer your ally." — Lee Smith, Middle East analyst, Tablet magazine.

  • Many analysts argue that the nuclear deal — original and revised — is primarily about legitimizing Iran's nuclear program. The deal, they say, is designed to strengthen, not weaken, the Islamic Republic.

  • Statements by Obama and his senior foreign policy advisors, the same people who are now advising President Biden, reflect a belief — a naïve one, many say — that if Iran were stronger, and traditional American allies — Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey — were weaker, the Middle East could achieve a new balance of power that would result in more peaceful region.

  • "The catch to Obama's newly inclusive 'balancing' framework was that upgrading relations with Iran would necessarily come at the expense of traditional partners targeted by Iran — like Saudi Arabia and, most importantly, Israel. Obama never said that part out loud, but the logic isn't hard to follow: Elevating your enemy to the same level as your ally means that your enemy is no longer your enemy, and your ally is no longer your ally." — Lee Smith, Middle East analyst, Tablet magazine.

  • "The Realignment rests on, to put it mildly, a hollow theory. It misstates the nature of the Islamic Republic and the scope of its ambitions. A regime that has led 'Death to America' chants for the last 40 years is an inveterately revisionist regime. The Islamic Republic sees itself as a global power, the leader of the Muslim world, and it covets hegemony over the Persian Gulf — indeed, the entire Middle East." — Tony Badran and Michael Doran, Middle East analysts, Tablet magazine.

  • "After oil, the Islamic Republic's major export item is the IRGC-commanded terrorist militia — the only export that Iran consistently produces at a peerless level. Malley and Sullivan got it exactly wrong when they argued, in effect, that allies are suckering the United States into conflict with Iran. It is not the allies but the Islamic Republic that is blanketing the Arab world with terrorist militias, arming them with precision-guided weapons, and styling the alliance it leads as 'the Resistance Axis.' It does so for one simple reason: It is out to destroy the American order in the Middle East." — Tony Badran and Michael Doran.

U.S. Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley confirmed this week that the Biden administration is seeking a new nuclear deal with Iran that is "shorter" and "weaker" than the original deal. Malley also admitted that the Biden administration does not have a back-up plan to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Pictured: Malley, testifies at a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations on May 25, 2022, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

U.S. Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley has confirmed that diplomatic efforts to revive the Iran nuclear deal originally signed by U.S. President Barack Obama are at an impasse. "We do not have a deal with Iran, and prospects for reaching one are, at best, tenuous," Malley told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during a hearing on May 25.

Malley also admitted that the Biden administration is seeking a new deal that is "shorter" and "weaker" than the original deal. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, during his confirmation hearing in January 2021, promised that the administration would pursue a new deal that is "longer" and "stronger."

When asked if he knew about efforts by Iran to hide its prior nuclear work from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Malley responded: "Senator, did Iran lie? Of course. Did Iran have a covert nuclear program? Absolutely. That's the reason why prior administrations imposed such crushing sanctions on Iran."

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez (D-NJ) asked: "Why is it that we are still keeping the door open? What is your Plan B?" Malley admitted that the Biden administration does not have a back-up plan to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

The negotiations to revive the 2015 agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), have been stalled since March 2022. The main stumbling block to a final deal is Iran's demand that the Biden administration delist the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), an elite branch of the Iranian military, as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO).

U.S. President Donald J. Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in May 2018 and reimposed sanctions because the deal gave Iran a pathway to nuclear weapons. In April 2019, the Trump administration designated the IRGC and its elite Quds attack force as an FTO because of Tehran's support for terrorist activities. In March 2020, Joe Biden, as a presidential candidate, pledged to rejoin the 2015 deal if he were elected president.

Although the Biden administration says it has no intention of delisting the IRGC, it has repeatedly lifted sanctions to coax Iran back to the negotiating table. Political observers say there is no reason to believe Biden would not make more concessions if it meant saving the deal — and President Barack Obama's foreign policy legacy.

On April 26, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that "the only way I could see the FTO being lifted is if Iran takes steps necessary to justify the lifting of that designation. So it knows what it would have to do in order to see that happen." He also argued, however, that the FTO designation "does not really gain you much" and may do more harm than good.

On May 25, Malley appeared to say that delisting the IRGC was still a possibility: "We've made clear to Iran that if they wanted any concession on something that was unrelated to the JCPOA like the FTO designation, we need something reciprocal from them that would address our concerns. I think Iran has made the decision that it's not prepared to take the reciprocal steps."

On May 4, the United States Senate passed a non-binding motion prohibiting the Biden administration from revoking the IRGC's designation as an FTO. The resolution, which passed by a vote of 62-33, with 16 Democrats voting in favor, also called for any potential return to the JCPOA to address the "full range of Iran's destabilizing activities, including development of the means of delivery for such weapons (and ballistic missiles), support for terrorism and evasion of sanctions by individuals, entities and vessels in the trade of petroleum products with the People's Republic of China."

The Biden administration has not fixed many of the original deal's main flaws, especially so-called sunset provisions that would have lifted restrictions on Iran's nuclear enrichment program by 2031 or sooner.

Like the original, the revised deal is weak on verification, does not require Iran to dismantle its nuclear infrastructure, and fails to address Iran's ballistic missile program. It also turns a blind eye to the Islamic Republic's human rights abuses and its destabilizing activities in the Middle East and elsewhere.

Why would the Biden administration agree to a revised deal that does not prevent or contain Iran's nuclear program, and actually reduces the so-called breakout time required for Iran to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon?

Why would the Biden administration, or the Obama administration before it, agree to a deal that provides Iran with a clear pathway to nuclear weapons as restrictions on uranium enrichment and plutonium processing end between 2026 and 2031?

Many analysts argue that the nuclear deal — original and revised — is primarily about legitimizing Iran's nuclear program. The deal, they say, is designed to strengthen, not weaken, the Islamic Republic.

Picking Up Where Obama Left Off

Statements by Obama and his senior foreign policy advisors, the same people who are now advising President Biden, reflect a belief — a naïve one, many say — that if Iran were stronger, and traditional American allies — Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey — were weaker, the Middle East could achieve a new balance of power that would result in more peaceful region.

One of the first previews of Obama's Iran policy was in an October 2013 opinion article — "Obama's Diplomatic Opportunity" — published by The Washington Post. Columnist David Ignatius (once described as someone Obama used as a "public messaging instrument") wrote that Obama wanted to "create a new framework for security in the Middle East that involves Iran and defuses the Sunni-Shiite sectarian conflict threatening the region."

Ignatius compared Obama's Iran policy to "the way President Richard Nixon (with Henry Kissinger) shaped the opening to China in the early 1970s and Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush (with Brent Scowcroft and James Baker) managed the end of the Cold War in the late 1980s." He added:

"In the world that's ahead, Iran must temper its revolutionary dreams of 1979, just as Saudi Arabia must stop hyperventilating about the 'Shiite crescent.' What's around the corner is a new regional framework that accommodates the security needs of Iranians, Saudis, Israelis, Russians and Americans."

In a January 2014 interview with The New Yorker, Obama said that his ultimate goal was "a new equilibrium" in the Middle East between the Sunni and Shia sects of Islam:

"If we were able to get Iran to operate in a responsible fashion — not funding terrorist organizations, not trying to stir up sectarian discontent in other countries, and not developing a nuclear weapon — you could see an equilibrium developing between Sunni, or predominantly Sunni, Gulf states and Iran in which there's competition, perhaps suspicion, but not an active or proxy warfare."

In an April 2015 Politico article — "Why I Like the Iran Deal (Sort Of)" — Admiral Mike Mullen, the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote:

"A nuclear deal would also more fairly rebalance American influence. We need to re-examine all of the relationships we enjoy in the region, relationships primarily with Sunni-dominated nations. Détente with Iran might better balance our efforts across the sectarian divide."

In an April 2016 interview with The Atlantic, Obama called for Saudi Arabia to "share the neighborhood" with Iran:

"The competition between the Saudis and the Iranians — which has helped to feed proxy wars and chaos in Syria and Iraq and Yemen — requires us to say to our friends as well as to the Iranians that they need to find an effective way to share the neighborhood and institute some sort of cold peace. An approach that said to our friends, 'You are right, Iran is the source of all problems, and we will support you in dealing with Iran' would essentially mean that as these sectarian conflicts continue to rage and our Gulf partners, our traditional friends, do not have the ability to put out the flames on their own or decisively win on their own, and would mean that we have to start coming in and using our military power to settle scores. And that would be in the interest neither of the United States nor of the Middle East."

A short time later, Obama's former Middle East Advisor Philip Gordon wrote that "greater engagement between Iran and its current adversaries could ultimately contribute to some sort of positive domestic change and a regional modus vivendi."

Modus vivendi is a Latin phrase — modus means "way," vivendi means "of living" — meaning an agreement between those who differ in opinions ("agreeing to disagree"). The term is "sometimes used to refer to a preliminary, provisional, or interim agreement between contending parties pending the final settlement," according to Oxford University Press.

In other words, Gordon was saying, apparently, that Israel and the Sunni Muslim world would have to learn to live with a more aggressive and powerful Iran.

U.S. Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley was appointed to the position on January 28, 2021, after having served in the same capacity under President Barack Obama. He was closely involved with negotiating the original Iran nuclear deal.

In a December 2019 Foreign Affairs essay, Malley wrote that Obama's "ultimate goal" was to achieve a "more stable balance of power" in the Middle East. He also lashed out at Trump's support for traditional American allies:

"In a sense, his [Obama's] administration was an experiment that got suspended halfway through. At least when it came to his approach to the Middle East, Obama's presidency was premised on the belief that someone else would pick up where he left off. It was premised on his being succeeded by someone like him, maybe a Hillary Clinton, but certainly not a Donald Trump.

"Instead of striving for some kind of balance, Trump has tilted entirely to one side: doubling down on support for Israel.... withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal and zealously joining up with the region's anti-Iranian axis. Indeed, seeking to weaken Iran, Washington has chosen to confront it on all fronts across much of the region: in the nuclear and economic realms...."

In a May 2020 Foreign Affairs essay — "America's Opportunity in the Middle East" — Jake Sullivan, who is now National Security Advisor to President Joe Biden, argued that the United States should use its leverage to achieve "a new modus vivendi" among the key regional actors in the Middle East. Sullivan, whose secret meetings with Iranian officials during the Obama administration led to the 2015 nuclear agreement, also criticized "maximalist regional demands" by Israel and Saudi Arabia to constrain Iran's nuclear program.

In a June 2020 interview — "U.S. Grand Strategy in the Middle East" — with the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, Sullivan again called for "a rebalance or recalibration" away from traditional American allies in the Middle East. He also said that he believes that Israel and Iran are morally equivalent:

"I think Israelis across the board genuinely believe that Iran poses an existential threat to Israel. I think Iranians across the board, at least in the government, believe that Israel really is trying to overthrow the Islamic Republic."

Sullivan placed strict conditions on the America's future relationship with Saudi Arabia, but he did not hold Iran to the same standard:

"Our strategic dialogue with Saudi Arabia, having at the highest levels a consistent message that says that the strength of our relationship will depend on progress, on questions related to human rights and political and economic reform....

"Now, can we move Saudi Arabia from where it is now to where we want it to be on a political and human rights basis overnight? No. But should we basically say, 'In part, our long-term support for your country is going to be bound up in the directionality of progress and reform?' I think we should....

"We are going to need more shows of some progress on the political front in order for the current leadership in Saudi Arabia to establish credibility...."

The Iran nuclear deal has variously been described as a "cornerstone" of Obama's legacy, Obama's "signature foreign policy initiative" and Obama's "prize foreign policy win."

Anglo-American author Toby Harden, in a Sunday Times article — "Obama All Out for Iran Deal" — wrote that Obama wanted the Iran nuclear deal to secure his legacy as one of the giants in global diplomatic history:

"Both present and former American officials describe Obama as being obsessed with carving his mark on history by restoring diplomatic relations with Iran after decades of animosity and possibly even visiting Tehran next year."

Expert Commentary

Writing for the Washington, D.C.-based Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Yigal Carmon and Alberto Miguel Fernandez, in an essay — "Obama's Strategy of Equilibrium" — noted:

"Examining the strategy of equilibrium requires the recollection of some basic information. Within Islam's approximately 1.6 billion believers, the absolute majority — about 90% — is Sunni, while Shiites constitute only about 10%. Even in the Middle East, Sunnis are a large majority.

"What does the word 'equilibrium' mean in political terms? In view of the above stated data, the word 'equilibrium' in actual political terms means empowering the minority and thereby weakening the majority in order to progress toward the stated goal. However, the overwhelming discrepancy in numbers makes it impossible to reach an equilibrium between the two camps. Therefore, it would be unrealistic to believe that the majority would accept a policy that empowers its adversary and weakens its own historically superior status.

"Considering the above, the implications of the equilibrium strategy for the region might not be enhancing peace as the President well intends; rather, it might intensify strife and violence in the region....

"Moreover, this strategy might have adverse implications for the United States and its interests in the Sunni Muslim world: those countries that feel betrayed by the strategy might, as a result, take action against the United States....

"It is worth noting that the first Islamic State created in the Middle East in the last 50 years was not the one created in the Sunni world in 2014 and headed by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Rather, it was the Islamic Republic of Iran created in 1979 by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and currently ruled by his successor, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who maintains — even following the Iran deal — the mantra 'Death to America,' continues to sponsor terrorism worldwide, and commits horrific human rights violations."

Middle East analyst Lee Smith, in an October 2015 essay — "Reading Obama's Mind" — noted:

"To reach a deal, Obama decided he needed to show Iran that he was in earnest about a new beginning. That meant granting the mullahs their nuclear weapons program a few years down the road and hobbling Iran's enemies. Obama sought to weaken Israel and Saudi Arabia, America's traditional allies, not to punish them, but as part of his grand strategy for the Middle East, a 'new geopolitical equilibrium' that would bring more stability to a volatile part of the world....

"A new geopolitical equilibrium in the Middle East would rein in America's troublesome partners and bring Iran in from the cold. It was precisely because none of them liked each other that the idea was so attractive. Obama would ensure a region where there was no victor and no vanquished. This wouldn't eliminate war from the Middle East, but it would calm things down considerably and let America go home."

Middle East expert Tony Badran, in a November 2019 article — "Malley in Wonderland" — parsed Obama's realignment strategy:

"America's allies are a problem, Malley, Biden, and other Obama administration policy kingpins — starting with Obama himself — have publicly stated, because of their capacity to involve the U.S. in a costly regional entanglement with Iran. In other words, America's allies are actually our enemies. In particular, Saudi Arabia, with its reckless war in Yemen, and Israel, with its aggression against Iranian assets in Syria, Iraq, and throughout the region, represent the 'war' side of the equation — while Iran, the enemy of our allies, represents 'peace.' The U.S. has a set of choices for how to engage the region: 'diplomatically or militarily, by exacerbating divides or mitigating them, and by aligning itself fully with one side or seeking to achieve a sort of balance.'

"In other words, if our allies are strong, then America should seek to weaken them until 'balance' is achieved, which will help bring about more 'peace.' If Iran were stronger, and Israel and Saudi Arabia were weaker, then peace would therefore be more likely. American policy, in the present moment at least, should therefore be to strengthen Iran at the expense of Israel and the Saudis.

"The goal of achieving 'balance' in America's posture in the Middle East is how Obama presented his strategy of realigning American interests with Iran. For Obama, it was not in America's interest to lead a regional alliance system which stands in opposition to Iran, and which therefore threatens to move the U.S. closer to war. Rebalancing away from traditional allies means moving closer to Iran, and away from the security architecture in which America had formerly been invested."

In May 2020 essay — "How Russiagate Began with Obama's Iran Deal Domestic Spying Campaign" — Lee Smith detailed Obama's obsession with threat that retired general Michael Flynn posed to his foreign policy legacy:

"Barack Obama warned his successor against hiring Michael Flynn. It was Nov. 10, 2016, just two days after Donald Trump upset Hillary Clinton to become the 45th president of the United States. Trump told aide Hope Hicks that he was bewildered by the president's warning. Of all the important things Obama could have discussed with him, the outgoing commander in chief wanted to talk about Michael Flynn.

"The question of why Obama was so focused on Flynn is especially revealing now....

"The answer is that Obama saw Flynn as a signal threat to his legacy, which was rooted in his July 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran — the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Flynn had said long before he signed on with the Trump campaign that it was a catastrophe to realign American interests with those of a terror state. And now that the candidate he'd advised was the new president-elect, Flynn was in a position to help undo the deal. To stop Flynn, the outgoing White House ran the same offense it used to sell the Iran deal — they smeared Flynn through the press as an agent of a foreign power, spied on him, and leaked classified intercepts of his conversations to reliable echo chamber allies....

"For Obama the purpose of Russiagate was simple and direct: to protect the Iran deal, and secure his legacy....

"The nature of the agreement was made plain in its 'sunset clauses.' The fact that parts of the deal restricting Iran's activities were due to expire beginning in 2020 until all restrictions were gone and the regime's nuclear program was legal, showed that it was a phony deal. Obama was simply bribing the Iranians with hundreds of billions of dollars in sanctions relief and hundreds of billions more in investment to refrain from building a bomb until he was safely gone from the White House, when the Iranian bomb would become someone else's problem. The Obama team thought that even the Israelis wouldn't dream of touching Iran's nuclear program so long as Washington vouchsafed the deal. They called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu 'chickenshit.'

"If Obama was just kicking the can down the road, why did he expend so much effort to get the deal? How was it central to his legacy if it was never actually intended to stop Iran from getting the bomb? Because it was his instrument to secure an even more ambitious objective — to reorder the strategic architecture of the Middle East....

"The catch to Obama's newly inclusive 'balancing' framework was that upgrading relations with Iran would necessarily come at the expense of traditional partners targeted by Iran — like Saudi Arabia and, most importantly, Israel. Obama never said that part out loud, but the logic isn't hard to follow: Elevating your enemy to the same level as your ally means that your enemy is no longer your enemy, and your ally is no longer your ally."

In a May 2021 essay — "The Realignment" — Middle East analysts Tony Badran and Michael Doran, concluded:

"A consensus reigns inside the [Biden] administration, not just on the JCPOA but on every big question of Middle East strategy: Everyone from the president on down agrees about the need to complete what Obama started — which means that the worst is yet to come.

"Obama dreamed of a new Middle Eastern order — one that relies more on partnership with Iran....

"This project to create a new Middle Eastern order, which now spans two presidential administrations, deserves a name. The 'Obama-Biden-Malley-Blinken-Sullivan initiative' is quite a mouthful. Instead, we hereby dub it 'the Realignment.' That it should fall to us, and at this late date, to name a project on which many talented people have been working for the better part of a decade is more than a little odd. Typically, presidents launch initiatives as grand as this one with a major address, and they further embroider their vision with dozens of smaller speeches and interviews. One searches in vain for Obama's speech, 'A New Order in the Middle East.'

"Obama, it seems clear, felt his project would advance best with stealth and misdirection, not aggressive salesmanship. Biden, while keeping Obama's second-term foreign policy team nearly intact, is using the same playbook. He and his aides recognize that confusion about the 'ultimate goal' makes achieving it easier. Indeed, confusion is the Realignment's best friend....

"Let's start with what the JCPOA does not do. Contrary to what its architects have claimed since 2015, the JCPOA does not block all the pathways to an Iranian nuclear weapon. How could it? The deal's so-called 'sunset provisions' — the clauses that eliminate all meaningful restrictions on Iran's nuclear program — will all have taken effect in less than a decade; some of the most significant restrictions will disappear by 2025. By 2031, the Islamic Republic will have, with international protection and assistance, an unfettered nuclear weapons program resting on an industrial-scale enrichment capability. On the basis of this fact alone, the best one can possibly say about the deal is that it buys a decade of freedom from Iranian nuclear extortion....

"The deceptions surrounding the JCPOA have a clear purpose: to make the administration appear supportive of containment when, in fact, it is ending it. But why are officials like Blinken and Sullivan so comfortable with such duplicity? Answering this question requires entering the Realignment mentality. The Foreign Affairs articles certainly offer one way in, but the most direct route is through the mind of Barack Obama, the author of the policy that Blinken and Sullivan are glossing.

"By disguising the JCPOA as a nonproliferation agreement ... the deal was a sneak attack on a traditional American foreign policy. It was and remains a Trojan horse designed to recast America's position and role in the Middle East. Sullivan and Blinken's task is to wheel the Trojan horse into the central square of American foreign policy and, by brandishing their 'centrist' political credentials, sell it as an imperfect but valuable vehicle of containment.

"The doctrine of Realignment builds on the erroneous assumption that Iran is a status quo power, one that shares a number of major interests with the United States. According to this doctrine, conservative Americans and supporters of Israel fixate on Iran's ideology — which is steeped in bigotry toward non-Muslims in general, and which advertises its annihilationist aspirations toward the Jewish state in particular — but it is not useful as a practical guide to Tehran's behavior. That's what professor Obama taught us in a 2014 interview, when he claimed that Iran's leaders "are strategic," rational people who "respond to costs and benefits" and "to incentives."

"According to the Realignment doctrine, America will help its allies protect their sovereign territory from Iranian or Iranian-backed attacks, but not compete with Iran beyond their borders. In the contested spaces of Syria, Yemen, and Iraq, the United States will force others to respect Iran's "equities," a term Obama once used to describe Iran's positions of power. Thus, in practical terms, America will use its influence to elevate the interests of Iran over those of U.S. allies in key areas of the Middle East.

"Now that we can see past the cute tricks that hide the Realignment's true goals, we can state its four strategic imperatives in plain English: First, allow Tehran an unfettered nuclear weapons program by 2031; second, end the sanctions on the Iranian economic and financial system; third, implement a policy of accommodation of Iran and its tentacles in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Lebanon; and fourth, force that policy on America's closest allies. If the United States follows those commandments, then a kind of natural regional balance will fall into place. The United States, so the thinking goes, will then finally remove itself from the war footing that traditional allies, with their anti-Iran agenda, have forced on it. Thereafter, diplomatic engagement with Iran will be the primary tool needed to maintain regional stability.

"The Realignment rests on, to put it mildly, a hollow theory. It misstates the nature of the Islamic Republic and the scope of its ambitions. A regime that has led 'Death to America' chants for the last 40 years is an inveterately revisionist regime. The Islamic Republic sees itself as a global power, the leader of the Muslim world, and it covets hegemony over the Persian Gulf — indeed, the entire Middle East. But the only instrument it has ever had to achieve its objectives is regional subversion.

"Ayatollah Khamenei, the head of this colossal project, is a lord of chaos. After oil, the Islamic Republic's major export item is the IRGC-commanded terrorist militia — the only export that Iran consistently produces at a peerless level. Malley and Sullivan got it exactly wrong when they argued, in effect, that allies are suckering the United States into conflict with Iran. It is not the allies but the Islamic Republic that is blanketing the Arab world with terrorist militias, arming them with precision-guided weapons, and styling the alliance it leads as 'the Resistance Axis.' It does so for one simple reason: It is out to destroy the American order in the Middle East."

Follow Soeren Kern on Twitter and Facebook


Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter