Saturday, April 13, 2024

PhD in Holocaust denial: Abbas' doctoral dissertation revealed in full - Ariel Bulshtein


​ by Ariel Bulshtein

For years, there have been rumors circulating about the research work authored by Abu Mazen in Moscow and his recruitment by the KGB • Now, the entirety of his work, with its outright antisemitic lies, has been exposed.


PhD in Holocaust denial: Abbas' doctoral dissertation revealed in full

Mahmoud Abbas' PhD dissertation | Photo: Courtesy of MEMRI

If Abu Mazen, the chairman of the Palestinian Authority since 2005 – or the President of Palestine, as his friends in various capitals call him – only knew about the bombshell buried in an abstract  Jerusalem office, just a few kilometers from his Muqata compound in Ramallah.  

We shouldn't have any illusions about Abu Mazen. His proven track record includes many years of terrorist activity, direct incitement to murder Jews, and generous funding of murderous terrorists serving time in Israeli prisons, as well as their families. But the world doesn't really take issue with all that. If even the crimes of an arch-terrorist like Yasser Arafat were forgotten and swapped for an especially embarrassing Nobel Peace Prize – what's to be surprised about whitewashing his deputy, who was always the second fiddle?

"Due to his gray personality and lack of popularity, Mahmoud Abbas – Abu Mazen, by his familiar moniker in the Middle East – did indeed lag behind, but with one exception, in which he deserves the title of champion," Yigal Carmon, the founder, and president of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), who previously served as a counter-terrorism advisor to Prime Ministers Yitzhak Shamir and Yitzhak Rabin, says as he lays a plainly bound book on the table before me. "Champions usually take pride in the records they set. Not so Abu Mazen – he actually did everything to conceal his record. Let's help him and present this record in full for the first time, albeit belatedly, after 40 years."

Carmon is right: People tend to publicize their deeds, all the more so when it comes to writing an academic paper to obtain an advanced degree. Abu Mazen's name does appear in Russian on the cover of his doctoral dissertation lying before me, but just above it is written "For Organizational Use Only" – a Soviet code for classified material forbidden from being taken out of a narrow circle of confidants. The Soviet patrons knew full well why they were consigning the "scientific achievement" of the freshly minted Dr. Abu Mazen to eternal safekeeping in a closed, KGB-monitored library. The author himself probably knew too...

The agent

"The close connection between the communist USSR and the Palestinian terror movements began immediately after the Six-Day War, starting with Arafat's secret visit to Moscow in July 1968. It was already clear that within a few months, he would become the head of the PLO, and that the PLO would become an umbrella organization for all the terrorist groups," recounts Professor Michael Laskier , a Middle East expert on the Arab world and its relations with the superpowers.

"The Soviet leadership was persuaded by the efforts of Egypt's ruler Nasser to begin providing aid to the PLO and its member organizations, mainly Fatah. At first, it was light weapons, and later the aid grew to heavier weapons and issues beyond weaponry. Previously, the PLO had mainly enjoyed the support of China, but under Arafat's leadership it became the primary client of the USSR."

He notes that the Palestinian organizations did not appear revolutionary enough in the eyes of the Soviets. Arafat and his bloodshed comrades lacked a communist ideology. 

Nevertheless, Leonid  Brezhnev and the other Soviet leaders concluded that they could be turned into tools to promote Soviet influence in the Mediterranean basin and the Middle East. It was part of the superpower competition against the US. Unsurprisingly, the mission to aid the terrorists was assigned to the KGB, the all-powerful Soviet secret service.

"In addition to weapons, the Soviets provided money to the PLO, specifically to groups like Fatah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. They took care to train them, either themselves or through client states in the socialist bloc," adds Professor Laskier.

"They hosted the operatives of the terrorist organizations in Moscow, so they could study there in institutions of higher education. The Patrice Lumumba University of Peoples' Friendship, the KGB's university, was the most prominent among them. They taught them propaganda there, and other things deemed useful in the struggle. One of the drives guiding the USSR, as KGB chief Andropov wrote to Brezhnev in a top-secret report, was to control and influence the activity of the terrorist groups and channel it according to its needs, sometimes restraining and sometimes intensifying, in order to promote its interests in utmost secrecy."

The "Mitrokhin Archive" is the name given to a collection of documents from a Soviet defector that was published in Britain a decade ago. It was described as "the most important single intelligence source ever obtained." There, amid the pages, it was revealed that Abu Mazen was recruited during his stay in Moscow in the early 1980s to be a KGB agent. From then on, he appeared in the organization's files as "Agent Krotov."

Abu Mazen's name did indeed appear at that time on the list of graduate students at Lumumba University. The result of his studies was a doctoral dissertation titled "The Connection between the Nazis and the Leaders of the Zionist Movement 1933–1945" prepared by the student Abu Mazen at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow.

At the head of the Institute in those years stood Yevgeny Primakov, an Orientalist by day and a KGB man for special missions by night. Primakov personally appointed his right-hand man, Vladimir Kiselev, as Abu Mazen's academic advisor. Apparently, he was also the one who decided to lock Abu Mazen's "glorious" dissertation behind censorship bars immediately after its submission, so that outside eyes would not discover the views of one who was shaping up to be a Soviet protégé.

Despite the advent of the Soviet "glasnost" (openness) period in the late 1980s and its collapse in the early 1990s, access to Abu Mazen's dissertation was not allowed even then. It is not impossible that this is related to Primakov's appointment as deputy head of the KGB and chief of the post-Soviet Russian foreign intelligence service that arose from the KGB's ashes.

As Abu Mazen subsequently rose in the hierarchy of the Muqata'a in Ramallah, oversight of the explosive dissertation only intensified. Unlike the author himself, the Russians understood that the blood libels stuffed between its pages held the potential for great embarrassment at best, and indictment for Holocaust denial in several European countries at worst. Carmon's undisclosed efforts led to the dissertation's rescue from the secret Moscow basement, and now – to its first full exposure in Israel.

A deal with the devil

Anyone who sits down to read Abu Mazen's full doctoral dissertation would do well to take a hefty dose of anti-nausea medication beforehand. It won't take long - 119 pages of large-font text, including 14 pages of introduction, indicate that the PLO doctoral student was not too industrious, but you'll find there all the antisemitic tropes of Holocaust denial that were invented before him, and some that the future Palestinian Authority chairman can patent himself. A champion, as we said?

"The conclusion that the author leads to is that the Holocaust of the Jews was a joint project of the Nazis and the Zionist movement he so despises," summarizes Carmon. It is worth noting that Kiselev testified in his memoirs that he was in shock after first hearing from his student the subject of the dissertation. "It seemed to me completely unreasonable that there could have been ties, and even, as it later turned out, cooperation, between opposites such as Nazism and the Zionist movement, whose goal was to build a homeland for Jews in the form of a Jewish national home, and later a Jewish state," he wrote years after that meeting.

But Kiselev apparently did not appreciate the full scope of the propaganda skills that Abu Mazen acquired in the lecture halls of Lumumba University, or perhaps he was just naive. The Soviet propaganda arsenal contained diverse tools, and Abu Mazen dove into it with gleeful delight. 

Manipulation was his primary tool," observes Carmon. "A significant part of the dissertation deals with the 'Transfer Agreement' – an agreement signed in the summer of 1933 between the Nazi authorities and the Jewish Agency to allow Jews in Germany to sell their real estate, goods, and other property under Nazi rule before being expropriated by the Nazi authorities, and transfer the proceeds to Palestine in goods purchased in Germany.

"The agreement sparked intense controversy at the time it was made and raised difficult moral questions. Circles within the Zionist movement and outside it opposed it, but it takes great manipulation and audacity to present it as cooperation between the Nazis and the Zionists. This is cooperation between a rapist and the raped, or between a hangman and his victim, who seeks to postpone the end. Even after the persecution against them began in 1933, German Jews had difficulty realizing that the future held annihilation in store for them, and hesitated to emigrate from Germany because Nazi laws prevented them from taking property. The 'Transfer Agreement,' with all the moral dilemmas of a deal with the devil, allowed them to leave. Without this agreement – how many thousands of German Jews would have remained there until the gates closed on them?"

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas holds up a Vision for Peace map while speaking at the United Nations Security Council on February 11, 2020, in New York City (Credit: Spencer Platt/Getty Images/AFP)

A few pages after the distortion of the "Transfer Agreement," Abu Mazen employs the opposite manipulation: This time he claims that in late 1942, the possibility arose to rescue 70,000 Transylvanian Jews by shipping them on ships under Vatican flags. According to Abu Mazen, all that was required was a payment of $50 per person, totaling $3.5 million, but the American Zionists denied the existence of the offer and prevented the funds from being raised to redeem their brethren.

Here too, Abu Mazen's factual claims are pulled out of thin air, but that is not the main point. What matters is that through them one can see his way of thinking and his view of the Jewish people: If the Zionists pay money to their persecutors to redeem their brethren – in his view this is cooperation with the murderers. If they do not pay the money – according to Abu Mazen, this is again cooperation with the murderers. That's how it is when you have predetermined to vilify Zionism – the facts will not stop him.

Abu Mazen sprinkles vague hints and statements throughout the text, implying that the Zionists could have saved the Holocaust victims had they wanted to – he just does not specify how. Instead, he fabricates an outrageous false claim, writing the following: "Zionist emissaries were given free access to the concentration camps in order to find suitable people, and abandon other unsuitable people who were not supposed to leave the concentration camps alive." The naive reader is left with the impression that the Zionists conducted the selections in the Nazi camps and decided who would live and who would die, and that the Nazis themselves assisted them in organizing the emigration of young Jews suitable for settling in Palestine. Of course, nothing of the sort ever happened.

In order to reinforce for the reader the sense that the Zionists had an interest in increasing the suffering of their brethren –he invents another story, claiming that in 1943 "the opportunity arose to send food, medicine and clothing parcels to the Jewish ghettos in Europe." The rest of the story is not hard to guess. Abu Mazen claims that the Zionists derailed the initiative, even though the International Red Cross was willing to undertake it.

This outrageous accusation, of course, does not accord with historical research. The only place the Nazis allowed parcels to be sent was the Theresienstadt ghetto, the showcase of Nazi propaganda, which was intended to mislead world public opinion – and indeed the delegations of the International Red Cross fell into the trap when they visited it. They were impressed by the Nazis' smokescreen of lies, and returned after being convinced that the Germans were not harming Jews – and certainly not exterminating them.

The Soviet Submarine

This is not the only example of Abu Mazen's lies in his attempt to "prove" the conspiracy that the Zionist movement – with its various factions – hatched, according to him, against the Jewish people. Other lies amount to actual blood libels. Abu Mazen tried to develop a thesis that the Zionists deliberately murdered Jews who tried to flee the Nazis as part of the illegal immigration to the Land of Israel, which the Zionists themselves organized. To reach the desired conclusion, Abu Mazen chooses two incidents in which the sailing of refugee ships ended in tragedy: the Patria disaster in Haifa and the Struma tragedy in the Black Sea.

This is not the only example of Abu Mazen's lies in his attempt to "prove" the conspiracy that the Zionist movement - with its various factions - plotted, according to him, against the Jewish people. Other lies amount to actual blood libels. Abu Mazen tried to develop a thesis that the Zionists deliberately murdered Jews who tried to flee the Nazis as part of the illegal immigration to the Land of Israel, which the Zionists themselves organized. In order to reach the desired conclusion, Abu Mazen chooses two incidents in which the sailing of refugee ships ended in tragedy: the Patria affair and the Struma affair.

The Patria affair occurred in November 1940. The British authorities loaded Jewish refugees who arrived in the country without permits onto the ship in Haifa, intending to deport them to Mauritius. To prevent the deportation, it was decided in the Haganah organization to plant a bomb on the ship to disable it. Unfortunately, the timing and force of the explosion were not calculated correctly. The explosion tore a hole in the ship's hull, and it tilted to the side and sank quickly. Most of the people on deck were rescued, but many others – between 260 and 300 people – perished in the disaster.

MEMRI President Yigal Carmon (Photo credit: Efrat Eshel)

The Struma disaster overshadowed the Patria tragedy in its scope. The Struma set sail for Palestine from Constanta, Romania on the Black Sea in December 1941, with nearly 800 Jewish refugees on board. Due to engine failures, the ship was stopped and towed from place to place by the Turkish authorities, until on February 24, 1942, a Soviet submarine fired a torpedo at it and sank it with all its passengers, who all perished except for one survivor.

These are the facts about the two horrific tragedies. However, for Abu Mazen, they become a conspiracy. In the paper he wrote, he is convinced and tries to convince his readers that the Zionists deliberately sank both ships. It is clear that in the Soviet Union of the 1980s, it was forbidden to mention the Soviet responsibility for sinking the Struma, even though all the information about its fate was in the hands of the Soviet authorities shortly after the event. Yet there was the false blaming of the victims – the Zionists who led the Struma's rescue journey from occupied Europe – while whitewashing the true perpetrators requires outright diabolical cynicism.  

Cynicism alone is not enough, as even Abu Mazen could not ignore a logical flaw – why would the Zionists want to sink the ships after they had made efforts and taken risks to launch them on their way and bring them to the Land of Israel? To overcome this, Abu Mazen invents an "explanation" that in other circumstances would be laughable. According to him, on the Patria and the Struma, there were "improper Jews" who were not chosen by the Zionists and did not fit their plans for the settlement of the Land.

Abu Mazen was familiar with the pseudo-scientific rules that prevailed in the Soviet Union, and which were enforced even more strictly on doctoral students who came to Moscow from the Third World. As expected, his dissertation includes selected quotes from Karl Marx and Lenin (without which no academic work could exist in the Soviet reality), but not only theirs.  

The doctoral fellow in Holocaust denial understood quite well which side his bread was buttered on. Primakov and his organization provide you with patronage, supply weapons, and money, and arrange a doctorate for you? You must return the favor to Primakov. And so, we find Abu Mazen citing the following false quote from Primakov, whom he calls a "Soviet researcher": "During World War II, the Zionists did not take an active part in the struggle against fascism. History has no facts about the mass recruitment of Zionists to fight German fascism."

What about the many uprisings in the large and small ghettos, most of which were led by Zionist youth? What about the mass enlistment of members of the Jewish community in the Land of Israel in the British army, precisely at a time when many in the Arab population of the country, and certainly its leaders such as the Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, sided with the Nazis?

"The myth of Jewish passivity and cowardice in the face of destruction was cultivated in the Soviet Union, which sought to instill in its citizens the idea that the Jews could only be saved thanks to the Soviet proletariat that came to their aid," Carmon explains. But Abu Mazen not only turns a blind eye to the Jewish resistance, which was based on Zionist movements of all streams. In the end, he fabricates another conclusion and claims: "The leaders of the Zionist centers aspired to conceal the facts of Jewish resistance from public opinion," and in the same breath writes that the Zionists did so in order to participate in post-war peace negotiations. Their goal, he claims, was to demand their share of the spoils of the Allies' victory. Did you miss the all-too-familiar antisemitic motif that Jews will do anything for money? You got it from Abu Mazen.

Distorting Hilberg

"Although the dissertation ostensibly deals with the Holocaust of the Jews, from Abu Mazen's point of view it was impossible not to include another motif from Soviet propaganda – the claim that denies the uniqueness of the Holocaust and seeks to explain that the Nazis treated everyone the same way," Carmon adds. "Perhaps Abu Mazen drew on this from other Soviet propagandists, but here he writes in his dissertation, in black and white, 'The entire population of areas occupied by the Nazis (Jews and non-Jews) was under the influence of the same cruel Nazi military machine'."

Carmon draws my attention to the fact that denying the Holocaust never prevented Abu Mazen from claiming that Israel is committing a holocaust against the Arabs of the country. Just this past summer of 2022, Abu Mazen said that Israel carried out "50 massacres in 50 Palestinian villages, 50 holocausts." A similar statement appears in the dissertation, further seasoned with a hint of an international conspiracy in the style of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. "The policy of genocide against the Arab people of Palestine, conducted by the Zionist Israeli government, with the support of the United States and international Zionist centers, in fact, reenacts the Nazis' crimes against Jews during World War II, and is aimed at establishing its own empire in the Middle East – Greater Israel," he wrote then.

Is Abu Mazen's doctoral dissertation simply a collection of false clichés from the Soviet propaganda mill, and nothing more? The document suggests that he went much further, or rather – sank much deeper. True, most of the components in the work are a rehashing of familiar Soviet lies, but Abu Mazen could not restrain himself and wove into them lies of his own. One of them deals with a favorite topic of Holocaust deniers – the number of Jews annihilated by the Nazis and their accomplices. Soviet propaganda at least did not try to claim that the Jews inflated the number of victims. Abu Mazen, on the other hand, does hint at this, and in an especially devious and wicked way.

"There are no accurate statistical data or well-researched scientific findings regarding the number of these victims," Abu Mazen opens dryly as if regretting that the Nazis did not record all the Jews before shooting or burning them alive for his statistical conclusions. He immediately moves on to an outrageous sentence: "According to data of the English researcher R. Hilberg, who specialized in the study of the Holocaust issue, the number of victims of Hitler's genocide among Jews during World War II was 896 thousand people."

A footnote he added at the bottom of the page purports to cite where Raul Hilberg wrote this: on page 670 of his book "The Destruction of the European Jews" – a seminal work in Holocaust research. I did not hesitate and opened the book to the said page. There was no such number there. Not there, and not in any other source in the book.  

Abu Mazen clearly wanted to convey to his readers the message that the number 6 million is inflated, and in order to lend this false message credibility – he fraudulently attributed it to an authoritative source. And not just any authority: Raul Hilberg, a Holocaust survivor born in Vienna, was one of the greatest historians of the Holocaust. 26 members of his immediate family were murdered by the Nazis. Hilberg himself admitted that this enormous number was one of the motivations for him to study the Holocaust in particular and not another historical topic.

Hilberg's motivation was also influenced by what happened in 1947, when he was a student at Brooklyn College, and he happened to attend a lecture by historian Hans Rosenberg. "The most horrific crimes against a civilian population in modern times were committed during the Napoleonic conquest of Spain," the lecturer claimed at one point, and the young Hilberg, who had already been exposed to the atrocities of the Nazis during his service in the American army at the end of the war, could not remain silent. 

"How can you skip over the murder of 6 million Jews?" he shouted at Rosenberg. Hilberg passed away in 2007 after an illustrious academic career, unaware that Abu Mazen had tried to base his vile lie on him –  precisely him, the man who understood the magnitude of the catastrophe that befell the Jewish people soon after it occurred.

Nevertheless, the similarity between Abu Mazen's exposed doctoral dissertation and some propaganda "works" from the Soviet era raises the hypothesis that Abu Mazen simply lifted portions of the dissertation from his fellow propagandists, with or without their knowledge. Entire passages in the dissertation are identical, word for word, to passages in various articles by his advisor, Kisilev.

"Perhaps in addition to a PhD in Holocaust denial, Abu Mazen also deserves a degree in plagiarism," Karmon quips. "This aspect should have been examined by the committee for advanced degrees in the Soviet Union, but its members undoubtedly received instructions from the higher-ups to award Abu Mazen the degree without unnecessary questions, and to allow him to return to his daily occupation of terrorism as quickly as possible."

"In any case, the hypothesis that the work was partially copied does not absolve Abu Mazen of responsibility for the disgraceful things that appear in it, which should have landed him in the dock on charges of Holocaust denial. Abu Mazen's statements over the years since writing his doctoral dissertation, and especially in recent years, prove beyond any doubt that these are his true and consistent views and that he still stands by them today."

Ariel Bulshtein


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The surreal echo chamber of lies - Melanie Phillips


by Melanie Phillips

As Israel braces for yet more horrors, the world has turned against it.


U.S. President Joe Biden, joined by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, is briefed on the terrorist assault on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, in the Oval Office of the White House.  Credit: Cameron Smith/White House.
U.S. President Joe Biden, joined by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, is briefed on the terrorist assault on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, in the Oval Office of the White House. Credit: Cameron Smith/White House.

Deeply traumatized by the Oct. 7 massacre, the unthinkable plight of the hostages and the relentless uptick of dead and wounded soldiers in this seemingly endless war, Israelis are bracing themselves for even worse.

There are warnings from Israeli and American sources that Iran, whose proxies are already fighting Israel on six fronts, is about to attack Israel directly with ballistic missiles, drones and cruise missiles.

This would be Iran’s revenge for the Israeli missile strike in Damascus last week that killed the key Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps commander Brig. Gen. Mohammad Reza Zahedi, along with other senior Iranian military figures.

No one knows whether Iran will directly strike Israel or use deniable proxies to attack targets such as Israeli embassies or synagogues abroad.

But Israelis are apprehensively hunkering down for an attack that would take the war to a vastly more devastating level.

U.S. President Joe Biden has suggested that, in the event of an Iranian attack, America would come to Israel’s aid. “America’s commitment to Israel’s security against these threats from Iran and its proxies is ironclad,” he said. “We’re going to do all we can to protect Israel’s security.”

Many Israelis are wondering bleakly whether that will really be so. For the Biden administration has been giving every impression that it is working to ensure Israel loses the war in Gaza to Iran’s proxy Hamas.

The White House has repeatedly ordered Israel not to attack Hamas’s last battalions in its Rafah stronghold, which Israel has to defeat if it is to destroy Hamas’s military capability.

It has forced Israel to allow more and more aid into Gaza, even though most of it has been stolen by Hamas to bolster its own military survival.

In a phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Biden reportedly demanded that Israel agree to an immediate and unconditional ceasefire—which would spell victory for Hamas and the abandonment of the hostages. Biden also reportedly threatened Israel with cutting arms supplies unless it admitted yet more aid into Gaza.

With Israel fighting a desperate war of survival against forces bent upon its destruction and the genocide of the Jews, the feeling of betrayal by America is acute. But it’s not just America.

Britain’s Foreign Secretary, Lord Cameron, also threatened to cut off arms sales—although he subsequently backtracked—and has malevolently and unjustly blamed Israel for Gaza’s humanitarian catastrophe.

French Foreign Minister Stéphane Séjourné has suggested imposing sanctions on Israel. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez channeled an ancient antisemitic trope by claiming that Israel’s “disproportionate” response to Oct. 7 poses a threat to world peace.

It seems that the entire Western world has gone through the looking-glass to portray the target of genocidal attack as the aggressor and war criminal, and accordingly apply pressure on Israel to ensure that it loses its war of survival.

The predictable outcome is that a jubilant Hamas is digging in its heels and upping its preposterous demands. The demonization of Israel by Western leaders has further swelled the tsunami of antisemitism to near-pogrom conditions.

Staggeringly, Western government ministers and officials have been parroting Hamas propaganda claims in loud outrage, even though these claims have been steadily revealed as lies.

The Hamas claim of more than 32,000 civilian deaths, of which 70% were women and children, has been demolished by statisticians, so much so that Hamas itself has started to fudge its numbers. Yet the West is still using them to beat up Israel.

A video has been circulating showing captured Islamic Jihad spokesman Tariq Abu Shlouf telling his Israeli interrogators how the terrorist forces in Gaza manipulate the media through false narratives and lies.

He admitted that the explosion at the Al-Ahli Hospital at the beginning of the war—reported by the media as the result of an Israeli strike—was caused by a rocket fired by Islamic Jihad, which chose to lie and blame Israel. Asked which hospitals in Gaza were used by terrorist forces for military purposes, Abu Shlouf replied: “All of the hospitals.”

Yet after having incited murderous hatred of Israel by transmitting false claims of willful slaughter of patients and other civilians, the media have refused to correct the record.

This verbal Western pogrom is the outcome of decades of anti-Israel demonization and lies. This poison has entered the Western bloodstream. An ideological onslaught that was previously confined to universities, cranks and the far-left has become the dominant narrative.

The West thinks the creation of Israel was a mistake and wants it gone. It wants the Jews out of its head, out of its life and out of its world.

In some ways, this is worse than 1939. Back then, the free world fought the enemy of civilization. Now the free world is supporting the enemy of civilization and demonizing its victims.

Set to one side the malice that has erupted against Israel and the Jews. Set aside the unthinking support for a Palestinian state that would be used as a final solution to the existence of the Jewish homeland. Set aside the obsessive desire of Netanyahu’s enemies to project onto him all the evils of the world. Beyond all that, America and the West have made two major errors.

The first is their failure to grasp that the vast majority of Israelis, including those who detest Netanyahu, are rock solid in support of the IDF going into Rafah.

It is the people of Israel, not just Netanyahu, who are demanding that the IDF defeat Hamas. It is the people of Israel, not just Netanyahu, to whom the American proposal for the Palestinian Authority to run post-war Gaza is unthinkable. Because it’s the people of Israel who have now seen, in the most horrific way possible, that there is no Palestinian Arab entity that can be trusted not to slaughter them again and again.  

The West’s second major error is failing to realize that this is not just Israel against Hamas or Iran. Israel is on the front line of the war being waged by the Islamic world against the West.

The West doesn’t get this because it doesn’t understand Islam. Nor, astonishing as this may seem, do the Israelis. Their failure to grasp Hamas’s true intentions lies in their failure to understand the implacable nature of Islamic Jew-hatred.

In a notable interview in Israel Hayom, Professor Moshe Sharon, an adviser on Arab affairs to several Israeli governments, observed that Islam has abhorred the Jews from the time of Islam’s creation, an animosity that is “a continuing sentiment stretching across time from that period until the ‘end of days.’” Islam’s overall objective, he said, is to take over the world. It is enjoying a considerable degree of success in pursuing this goal—in Europe, Canada and America.

None of these countries, however, is prepared even to admit this, let alone do anything about it.

With the IDF pulling most of its troops out of Gaza, commentators both inside and outside Israel are claiming that the Rafah offensive has been abandoned, the war is effectively over and Israel has lost. Netanyahu and top military brass insist that, on the contrary, Rafah will indeed be taken and the war will be won.

Israelis are braced for whatever is to come. Despite the Greek chorus of doom from the Israeli media and despite the despicable manipulation of some of the desperate families of hostages by activists determined to bring Netanyahu down at the expense of Israel losing the war, the spirit of the vast majority of Israelis remains heroically unbowed.

Israel will survive. At its current rate, the West will not.

But in these terrible times, what is very hard indeed for Jews to take is the devastating feeling of being so mercilessly abandoned by a world that has become a surreal echo chamber of murderous lies.

Melanie Phillips, a British journalist, broadcaster and author, writes a weekly column for JNS. Currently a columnist for The Times of London, her personal and political memoir, Guardian Angel, has been published by Bombardier, which also published her first novel, The Legacy, in 2018. To access her work, go to:


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Federal judge rejects Hunter Biden bid to dismiss gun charges in special counsel case - Ben Whedon


​ by Ben Whedon

Special counsel David Weiss has alleged that he lied on a federal gun form about his drug use and that he possessed a firearm while using illegal narcotics.


U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika on Friday rejected a bid from first son Hunter Biden to dismiss gun charges against him.

Special counsel David Weiss has alleged that the now-first son lied on a federal gun form about his drug use and that he possessed a firearm while using illegal narcotics. He has pleaded not guilty.

Noreika rejected the first son's claims that the case was politically motivated in denying the motion for dismissal, according to the Associated Press.

Weiss brought the charges after Noreika expressed skepticism of a proposed plea agreement last year, taking issue with a pre-trial diversion agreement that could have permitted Biden to avoid prison time.

He is expected to face trial on June 3.

Ben Whedon is an editor and reporter for Just the News. Follow him on X, formerly Twitter.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

After Taking Over 3rd Largest Radio Network, Soros Plots to Take 2nd Largest - Daniel Greenfield


​ by Daniel Greenfield

It's not a coincidence that this is happening right before an election.


In February, we reported that Soros was about to take over the third-largest broadcaster in the country, Audacy, along with its stations.

After Audacy was forced to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Soros Fund Management bought hundreds of millions of its debt for 50 cents on the dollar and under a bankruptcy agreement will become its largest shareholder with a potential impact on much of the country and its politics.

Audacy claims to be able to reach 200 million people across the range of its properties which include sports, music and talk radio stations, as well as a large digital platform, and while Audacy is not an inherently conservative company, it owns a number of talk radio stations and the talk radio format caters to commuters, early risers and working people which is to say conservatives. And the Soros takeover will give one of the biggest funders of leftist extremism control over not only conservative talk radio stations but those that are, like WILK, in swing states. That includes two other stations in Pennsylvania and many others across the country.

He’s not stopping.

Soros Fund Management, founded by billionaire investor George Soros, is tightening its grip over the US radio industry after scooping up a majority stake in bankrupt radio company Audacy.

In those talks, Soros’ fund, which is now controlled by the magnate’s nonprofit organization, Open Society Foundations, has privately mulled acquiring other major radio companies, including AM and FM giant Cumulus Media, according to Semafor.

Cumulus Media has been described as the second largest radio network in the country (the New York Post describes Audacy as the third largest), but either way, we are talking about a massive empire.

Audacy claimed over 200 million listeners while Cumulus claims over 250 million.

And it’s not a coincidence that this is happening right before an election.

…a Soros-backed firm played a key role in Univision’s $60 million sale of 17 Hispanic radio stations to a company run by veterans of Democratic politics, per Semafor.

Republicans could have challenged the Audacy takeover. They failed to do so. And Soros will only become more aggressive.

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


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Why the left united around hatred of Israel - Jonathan S. Tobin


​ by Jonathan S. Tobin

Since Oct. 7, woke ideology brought together a diverse coalition of advocacy groups eager to stop the war on Hamas. The Democratic Party will never be the same.


A pro-Palestinian rally in Washington, D.C., one day after the terrorist attacks by Hamas in southern Israel, Oct. 8, 2023. Credit: Ted Eytan via Wikimedia Commons.
A pro-Palestinian rally in Washington, D.C., one day after the terrorist attacks by Hamas in southern Israel, Oct. 8, 2023. Credit: Ted Eytan via Wikimedia Commons.

Something curious has happened in American politics in the last six months. Liberal activist groups on a host of disparate topics ranging from the economy, labor-union organizing, homelessness and housing shortages, “anti-racism,” climate change and support for illegal immigrants have suddenly all been speaking with one voice on an issue totally unrelated to their primary purposes.

They are demanding an immediate end to the war on Hamas that Israel has been waging in the Gaza Strip since the Palestinian terrorist group launched a barbaric attack on 22 Jewish communities and the Nova music festival in southern Israel on Oct. 7. Their rhetoric, tactics and lobbying efforts have made no secret of their intense hostility to the Jewish state and their desire to punish it for its efforts to eradicate a group that perpetrated the largest mass slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.

There’s no denying the considerable political impact of this movement or its potential to ultimately destroy the U.S.-Israel alliance. But at this point—with the full consequences of this extraordinary coming together of a broad coalition of interest groups still yet to be determined—it’s important to ponder why this happened, and what it means for both American public discourse and the future of the Jewish community in this country.

The coalescence of the American left behind what The New York Times is calling in a major explanatory feature the “pro-Palestine movement” is a remarkable turn of events for a number of reasons. It’s not just that they have all rallied around the stands of some of the most extreme positions on the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Nor is it just that the anger of the left has been generated against the response of a democratic nation to an unprovoked attack, including murder, rape, torture, kidnapping and wanton destruction.

Woke origins of a movement

What makes it even more astonishing is that the object of the sympathy of these activists is a radical Islamist group whose values are utterly antithetical to what matters most to left-wingers, including the rights of women and the LBGTQ+ cause. The image of banners proclaiming “Queers for Palestine” may provoke both guffaws and ironic commentary from supporters of Israel, who wryly point out that such persons would be swiftly and cruelly killed by Hamas with the same bloodthirsty fervor that it feels for Jews. But that absurd juxtaposition of opposites is exactly why it’s so important to understand this support for Hamas—and that is exactly what those who advocate for immediate ceasefires in the conflict are doing, whether they want to admit it or not—has gone from marginal to one that is now firmly entrenched in the mainstream of American society.

The ability of radical anti-Israel groups to get virtually everyone on the political left behind them is partly, as the Times explained in its feature on this subject, the result of multi-causation. It happened because Hamas sympathizers are expert manipulators of public opinion and good organizers. It was also made possible by the funding of liberal financiers who are primarily interested in other issues. And there is no underestimating the impact of certain corporate media becoming Hamas’s stenographers by hyping bogus casualty statistics—and almost immediately flipping the narrative of the war from a necessary reaction to unspeakable terrorist atrocities to one about Palestinian victimhood.

The willingness of the left to unite around the cause of preventing the suffering of Hamas and the Palestinians as a result of their decision to launch a brutal war is due to the pervasive influence of what, for lack of a better term, we call “woke ideology.” Without a generation of young liberals being indoctrinated in the toxic ideas behind critical race theory and intersectionality, which falsely identifies Jews and Israel as “white oppressors” and likens the Palestinian war to destroy the Jewish state to the American civil-rights movement, none of this would have happened.

Intimidating Biden

We already know that this movement has shaken up American politics. It has caused President Joe Biden to abandon his initial strong stance behind Israel and agreement in eliminating Hamas. Biden’s threats of aid cuts and no longer preventing the United Nations from turning Israel into a pariah state may well have caused the current pause in the war, just as the administration’s incessant criticisms seemed to have slowed down and imposed restrictions on the campaign to destroy the terrorists in the months that preceded it. Biden has been clearly intimidated by the enormous pushback from Democratic activists both inside and outside his administration, including his campaign staff, with concerns about his ability to win in Michigan, with its large Arab-American and Muslim population at the forefront of his thinking.

This is the result of a general revolt against the backing Biden gave to Israel in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 atrocities. As the Times noted, the left-wing outrage against U.S. support for Israel wasn’t a subsequent reaction to lies about Israeli “genocide” in Gaza since it began in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks and well before the Israel Defense Forces began its counter-offensive.

Nor should we buy the excuse that the anti-Israel fervor is a justified abhorrence for an out-of-control Israeli military campaign or an astoundingly high number of casualties such as had not been seen in a recent war. On the contrary, the Israel-Hamas war is dwarfed by other recent conflicts that took place in Syria or Sudan. And the number of victims is not to be compared to actual genocides such as those that are ongoing in the Congo or the Chinese campaign against Muslim Uyghurs, in which it is estimated that more than a million people have been put into concentration camps. Nor are the losses or the devastation comparable to the slaughter going on in the war between Russia and Ukraine.

What makes this conflict so special is not the scale of the warfare or the especially dire plight of its victims. It’s the fact that the one Jewish state on the planet is one of the combatants. No war involving any European, Arab, Muslim, African or Asian antagonist with no direct American participant has prompted such a response from the American left, including those in which the United States was backing one of the parties, as is frequently the case.

That’s why it is clear that the reason so many Americans who identify with the political left have adopted the Palestinian cause—and forced Biden to abandon Israel—has to do with something other than the objective facts of the conflict. Only by placing the Israel-Hamas war in the context of intersectional ideology and the critical race theory mindset, in which the world is divided into two perpetually warring camps of “white” racist oppressors and “people of color” who are their victims, does this make sense. That’s why virtually every leftist interest group can now be found behind the effort to save Hamas.

The Marxist roots of wokeism also help explain why left-wingers who claim to be against every conceivable kind of prejudice have not only aligned themselves with a vicious and tyrannical hate group like Hamas but also find themselves indifferent to actually supportive of a surge in antisemitism that has blighted American life in the past six months. Despite the persistent attraction of the Jewish left to socialism, Marxist dialectic has, from its origins, viewed Judaism and Jews with suspicion and hostility. The stubborn refusal of Jews to bend to others’ will or simply disappear contradicts the Marxist belief that the homogenization of mankind is part of achieving the dubious goals of its ideology.

And it is the appeal of intersectionality—the false belief that all allegedly oppressed people are part of the same struggle—that has created the ludicrous meme of “Queers for Palestine.”

Soros money behind it

Other factors have contributed to the current shift on the left. As the Times explained, the funding of anti-Israel groups that have taken over the streets of U.S. cities and college campuses by leading liberal philanthropies has been an essential part of this story. Of interest are two major donors leading this effort who have Jewish origins: billionaires Tom Steyer and George Soros.

In recent years, Democrats have denounced any criticism of these two men by Republicans as inherently antisemitic. Soros’s Open Sources Foundation is the largest political donor in the world, and he is personally responsible for a national campaign to elect prosecutors who are against jailing criminals who have rendered American cities unsafe for honest citizens. He has funded anti-Israel groups, including those that engage in open antisemitism and even, as in the case of the mislabeled Jewish Voice for Peace, those who trafficked in blood libels against Israel and its Jewish supporters.

But all the leftist money in the world could not have purchased the impact that came from the conquest of American education by progressives whose long march through its institutions has taken critical race theory from the political fever swamps of the far left to a position where it is the reigning orthodoxy in universities, corporations, journalism, popular culture and the fine arts. Without it, the political phenomena that cowed Biden into trying to rescue Hamas by threatening Israel would have been impossible.

The full impact of this movement has yet to be seen. Should Israel ignore Biden’s diktats and (as it must do if it is to protect its people) finish the job of eliminating Hamas, the storm of left-wing outrage and open antisemitism will only increase. Democrats willing to stand against Jew-hatred will grow even fewer and far between. Notably, the anti-Israel protests at this summer’s Democratic National Convention in Chicago will probably eclipse even the violence seen when the party held its convention there in 1968 during the Vietnam War. The Democratic Party—once a stronghold of support for Israel that had already been drifting away from that position for the past two decades—will likely never be the same.

Biden has often said that he entered the 2020 presidential race because of his supposed outrage over the 2017 neo-Nazi “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Va., which generated the myth that liberals still believe, against all the evidence, that former President Donald Trump claimed was held by “very fine people.” In 2024, the political right has, with few conspicuous exceptions like former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, united behind Israel. The real irony of this election cycle is that it is the political left that has truly united behind the cause of saving a murderous antisemitic terrorist group and its supporters from the consequences of their crimes.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of JNS (Jewish News Syndicate). Follow him @jonathans_tobin.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Absolutely Inane Case in Manhattan - Mike Davis


​ by Mike Davis

And one of the weakest in recent memory.


[Pre-order a copy of David Horowitz’s next book, America Betrayed, by clicking here. Orders will begin shipping on May 7th.]

On Monday, April 15, President Donald Trump will become the first former president and the first major presidential candidate in American history to face a criminal trial. Not only is this unprecedented, it’s happening with one of the weakest criminal cases in recent memory.

The Manhattan District Attorney’s office searched for any way to charge the former president since 2017. The investigation poured over President Trump’s personal and business life, and they settled on charging the former president with 34 felonies for the non-felony of his attorney Michael Cohen settling a nuisance claim.

The case is so weak that The New York Times and The Washington Post both acknowledged that it’s a stretch. The New York Times reported: “The case against the former president hinges on an untested and therefore risky legal theory involving a complex interplay of laws.”

Meanwhile, The Washington Post wrote that the prosecution left some “legal experts . . . scratching their heads” as “they describe it as an unusual case.”

Indeed, it is unusual.

Soros-funded Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg says that President Trump “repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal crimes that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election.”

Bragg’s indictment, however, shows that this is a false accusation from the DA.

The 34 counts of “falsifying business records” all allegedly occurred in 2017, well after the presidential election and when President Trump was already in office.

So, how exactly then did President Trump attempt to hide from everyone “damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election”?

A district attorney lying about the central facts of his case should be a scandal. It’s worth taking a look at the prosecutors who helped assemble this absurd case for Bragg. One of them is Mark Pomerantz, who didn’t hide that the prosecution of Trump was a personal crusade of his. Pomerantz wrote in his 2017 tell-all that Trump “disgusted” him and compared prosecuting Trump to Osama bin Laden. Pomerantz was so excited to prosecute Trump that he joined the DA’s office for no pay, and he wrote that he “would have paid the District Attorney’s Office for the opportunity to prosecute President Trump.”

It’s important to note as well that the prior Manhattan District Attorney (Cy Vance), the Manhattan U.S. Attorney, the Federal Election Commission, and Bragg himself examined Michael Cohen’s alleged payment to Stormy Daniels and declined to prosecute.

Then senior Biden Justice Department political appointee Matthew Colangelo got deployed to Bragg’s office as a “senior counsel” to work on the case months before the indictment. Colangelo is a lifelong Democrat activist who was a senior political appointee for both the Obama and Biden administrations. He was the number three at the Biden DOJ, a senior economic adviser in the Obama White House, and a top aide to Obama Labor Secretary and DNC chairman Tom Perez. Colangelo has never served as a line prosecutor or defense attorney. Colangelo is simply a senior Democrat operative, deployed to Bragg’s office to get Trump.

Alvin Bragg is not trying President Trump because he’s a DA hell-bent on enforcing the “rule of law.” No, Bragg downgraded 60 percent of felony cases last year. Bragg charged hundreds of felonies as misdemeanors, and helped harden criminals avoid serious punishment. And Bragg upgraded a time-barred bookkeeping misdemeanor, at best, into 34 felonies to get Trump.

Have you heard about the wave of women getting randomly punched in New York City? Well, Alvin Bragg set free one of the perpetrators. Violent felons are assaulting New Yorkers while Bragg focuses his resources on targeting Joe Biden’s political opponent.

Everyone understands what this case is about. It’s an election-year assault on the Democrat Party’s number-one enemy.

As even Never-Trumper Jonah Goldberg put it, “if President Trump’s ‘name were John Smith, Alvin Bragg would not be bringing this case.’”

Mike Davis is the founder and president of the Article III Project, which defends constitutionalist judges. As the former chief counsel for nominations to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA), he served as the staff leader for Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Democrats, media starting to admit some mail-in voting problems ahead of 2024 presidential election - Natalia Mittelstadt


​ by Natalia Mittelstadt

Facing mounting evidence, including delayed mail deliveries and ballot harvesting, the issues with mail-in voting are becoming more apparent to Democrats.


Amid delivery delays by the United States Postal Service and mail-in ballot fraud, Democrats and the media are finally acknowledging there are some issues with mail-in voting ahead of the 2024 presidential election. 

As mail-in voting has increased since the 2020 presidential election during the COVID-19 lockdowns, Democrats have advocated for it as an easier method of voting. However, as USPS has experienced delivery issues and ballot harvesting has led to at least one "redo" election, some Democrats and media are noting the issues with the voting method. 

USPS started using a new distribution system last year, which appears to have contributed to delays in mail delivery. This can affect the delivery of mail-in ballots both to voters and back to election departments, about which officials have warned both USPS and voters.

Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., sent a letter to Postmaster General Louis DeJoy regarding the delivery issues impacting elections, noting that “The nature of USPS’s network changes has now raised significant concerns including the potential for degraded rural service due to fewer facilities, delayed delivery of election mail that would be processed at out-of-state facilities, and critical health information such as laboratory tests not being processed same-day due to decreased transportation trips. These changes and lack of transparency have also caused concerns for other Members of Congress, who have asked for similar information and received insufficient responses.” 

In February, general registrar in Richmond, Virginia told voters ahead of the March primary election to drop off their mail-in ballots in ballot drop boxes, rather than sending them through USPS. 

“The reports we’ve been receiving about delayed, misplaced, or even missing mail are deeply troubling, especially as we approach crucial electoral events like the Presidential Election in November,” Richmond General Registrar Keith Balmer wrote in a blog post shared on the election office's X account (formerly Twitter).

USPS told NBC News that, for the November election, it will “employ a robust and proven process to ensure proper handling and delivery of all Election Mail, including ballots.” 

Meanwhile, in Connecticut, after alleged ballot harvesting occurred during the September primary election last year and resulted in a court-ordered "redo" election, the Democratic Secretary of the State Stephanie Thomas advised voters to cast their ballots in person ahead of the Bridgeport mayoral redo primary election in January. 

Thomas said that their election monitors "cannot do it all, and we encourage anyone who can do so to vote in person on January 23rd. If someone voted by absentee ballot but is unsure if they should have done so, they may withdraw their absentee ballot by going in-person to the Town Clerk’s office before 10 a.m. on Election Day, and they may then vote at their assigned polling place.” 

Last year, in a lawsuit to overturn a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling that concluded ballot drop boxes are illegal, a Democratic Party-aligned election law firm argued that U.S. Postal Service mailboxes are in fact “unsecured.” 

The Elias Law Group is suing the Wisconsin Elections Commission on behalf of Priorities USA, the Wisconsin Alliance for Retired Americans, and a voter over the state Supreme Court’s ruling against ballot drop boxes. 

In the legal filing, the firm also appears to argue drop boxes are more secure than mailboxes. 

“By restricting Wisconsin voters’ options for returning their absentee ballots and having those ballots properly counted, the Drop Box Prohibition severely burdens the right to vote,” the filing states. “Without the opportunity to drop off their absentee ballots at drop boxes, voters must instead rely on the U.S. Postal Service – and its unsecured mailboxes – to deliver their absentee ballot and simply hope that the ballot arrives by election day.” 

Elias Law Group was started in 2021 by Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias, who in March 2020 advocated for states to switch to mail-in voting because of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

“It will not be enough for states to simply allow more citizens to vote by mail [original emphasis]. Each state must also provide adequate resources for the printing and distribution of millions of extra ballots and to support with extra funds the officials who are tasked with processing and counting the flood of mailed ballots,” Elias wrote in a March 2020 op-ed for the Washington Post. 

“Most important, for this system to work, states must be prepared to process and count the avalanche of ballots that will be postmarked by Election Day but arrive at election offices in the days afterward,” he also wrote

The federal government has also acknowledged issues with mail-in voting. 

The Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) censored social media narratives about mail-in voting concerns in 2020 despite knowing the risks of vote-by-mail, according to documents released by America First Legal in January. 

America First Legal is suing CISA for 2020 records from its mis-, dis-, and malinformation (MDM) team. According to records obtained by America First Legal from its lawsuit and released on Monday, CISA knew that mail-in and absentee voting are less secure than voting in person. 

Some of those issues included outsourced risks to the United States Postal Service, leading to a greater possibility that problems such as cyber attacks could occur. 

However, CISA still supported the widespread policy change to mail-in voting across the country and censored social media narratives regarding mail-in voting concerns. 

CISA contracted accounting and consulting firm Deloitte to monitor and flag social media posts regarding the 2020 election. These posts included concerns about mail-in voting, such as former President Donald Trump’s Twitter post that there were “big problems and discrepancies with Mail In Ballots.” 

Years before the 2020 election, a bipartisan group analyzed mail-in voting and raised their own concerns. 

In 2005, the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform – which included ex-President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State under President George H. W. Bush, James Baker – highlighted the issues that concerned them about absentee ballots.  

"While vote by mail appears to increase turnout for local elections, there is no evidence that it significantly expands participation in federal elections,” the commission wrote. "Moreover, it raises concerns about privacy, as citizens voting at home may come under pressure to vote for certain candidates, and it increases the risk of fraud."  

"Vote by mail is, however, likely to increase the risks of fraud and of contested elections in other states, where the population is more mobile, where there is some history of troubled elections, or where the safeguards for ballot integrity are weaker," the commission also said

Republicans have warned of the potential insecurities of mail-in voting for years and are looking to secure or ban certain aspects of it, such as ballot harvesting and ballot drop boxes. However, the GOP is now starting to embrace the same tactics this election cycle. 

Last June, the Republican National Committee announced its “Bank Your Vote” initiative, which “will encourage, educate, and activate Republican voters on when, where, and how to lock in their votes as early as possible, through in-person early voting, absentee voting, and ballot harvesting where legal,” according to the RNC’s announcement

Natalia Mittelstadt


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Muslim Convert Planned Ramadan Attack on 21 Idaho Churches - Daniel Greenfield


​ by Daniel Greenfield

“I will use my knives and machete to slit their throats and kill them."


[Pre-order a copy of Daniel Greenfield’s first book, Domestic Enemies, by clicking here. Orders will begin shipping on April 30th.]

Coeur d’Alene, an Idaho city with a population of over 50,000, had too many churches. Alexander Scott Mercurio, a new teen convert to Islam, had a plan to “fix that real soon.”

Ramadan was almost over and Mercurio was unhappy because he believed that he was a bad Muslim who hadn’t even assaulted, let alone killed any Christians, and would go to hell.

“I am a hypocrite who has not even spat in the face of a kafir (non-Muslim),” he complained in online chats. “Let alone spilled their blood and induced terror into their hearts and minds.”

Mercurio wasn’t sure if he could be considered a good Muslim without killing Christians.

“I really don’t want to miss out on the opportunity for jihad in Ramadan,” he worried.

While the bloody Islamic holiday of Ramadan is often used as a pretext to warn America, Israel and other countries to stop fighting Islamic terrorists lest it offend Muslims, it’s actually a time of redoubled terrorism. And Mercurio wanted to get in on that murderous spiritual opportunity.

“I’ve been thinking about Jihad. Well, I always am, but I mean it’s Ramadan,” Mercurio agonized. “I have motivation for nothing but fighting, like some kind of insatiable bloodlust for the life juice of these idolaters, a craving for mayhem and murder to terrorize those around me… primarily against churches.”

There are “three or five churches within walking distance of me” who would be objects of his “insatiable bloodlust: for the blood of non-Muslims.

Mercurio decided that he would strike on “the last few days of Ramadan, probably on Sunday, their special day.”

The special day was April 7th also known as the Octave Day of Easter or the Sunday of Divine Mercy and would have been well known to the Muslim convert who was raised as a Christian by his parents. But Islam has no mercy, certainly not divine and not human either, and neither did Mercurio who fantasized about massacring Christians on “their special day” of mercy.

Alexander Scott Mercurio had started out as a white supremacist before converting to Islam at the age of seventeen. He took on a user name meaning ‘total submission’ in Russian (because of his Russian immigrant mother) and whined about North Idaho and his “very Christian and conservative parents” who “want me to stop being Muslim” while he fantasized about building weapons that would allow him to “heap massacres upon the kuffar (non-Muslims) daily”.

The Muslim convert had been allegedly working on sending cryptocurrency donations to ISIS while taking part in an online group that attacked the Taliban for not being murderous enough.

Mercurio had allegedly begun chatting with a Muslim terrorist in Gaza who was moving money to ISIS, but then his pal, whom the FBI only says was “believed to have died”, presumably in fighting with Israel, went offline and an informant took over the account and became the receptacle for the convert’s fantasies about killing all the Christians.

“Walk to the nearest Church. Stop close by the church, equip the weapon(s) and storm the temple, kill as many as possible…. then burn the temple to the ground, flee the scene, then move onto the next church, rinse and repeat for all 21+ churches in the town until killed.”

Later the Muslim convert elaborated that he would “walk into a church and then start beating people with the ‘baton’; hit them first on the kneecaps and elbows… I will beat them only to incapacitate them, I will use my knives and machete to slit their throats and kill them.”

Then he would set the church on fire.

While Mercurio searched for knives and axes, he really needed something more powerful. After exploring the possibility of building some sort of flamethrower, he decided to get his dad’s guns. Initially he thought about killing or beating his father over the head with a pipe to get the key to the gun safe, and then decided he could just break in and grab the guns while his dad was out.

Mercurio got his ISIS flag, developed his plans and finalized a script for his ‘martyrdom’ video which included responding to the call of the Islamic State by “killing Jews and Christians” and “his message to the disbelievers to go to hell”.

But his plan to massacre churchgoers with guns, knives and fire ended when he was busted.

What had worried Mercurio most of all was not being caught, but having his act of Islamic terror misrepresented by the media. He was concerned that they would “slander me in the media and call me a mentally ill psycho who did this out of desperation and not as an act of religiously motivated terrorism.”

It will be easy for the media to dismiss Alexander Scott Mercurio as a teen who fantasized about killing people, and if he hadn’t done it for Islam, would have done it as a Neo-Nazi or just a random school shooter. And yet the documents released show that he agonized about trying to be a good Muslim. Failing at other traditional Islamic practices and prone to lapsing into pornography, he found the traditional Islamic loophole to get into ‘paradise’ through murder.

Mercurio is one of a growing number of American teens who convert to Islam, often in out-of-the-way places and then get involved in Islamic terrorism. Recent cases include Trevor Bickford, 19, of Maine, who tried to attack NYPD officers in Times Square with a Machete, Xavier Pelkey, 18, also of Maine, who tried to recruit two teens for a terrorist attack in Chicago, Cole James Bridges from Akron, Ohio, Mateo Ventura, a high school student in Wakefield, Massachusetts, and Jonathan Xie, a 20-year-old from a New Jersey suburb.

There is a pattern of teenage boys, resentful of their parents and society, with nothing to aspire to and nothing to believe in, drifting into fantasies of violently terrorizing everyone around them.

Islam, like Neo-Nazism, gave Alexander Scott Mercurio something to believe in and kill for.

“I will not live to see the day that the flag of Tawheed (Islam) flutters over every land, nor the day that the entire Earth is governed by the Sharia of Allah,” he wrote. “I will gladly spill my blood again and again to make that a reality.”

Both Islam and Neo-Nazism offered and offer young men the opportunity to kill and then die for a glorious cause, destroying everything around them so that a new dark order will rule the earth.

This primal evil impulse at the heart of Nazism, Communism, Islam and so many other evils is a perversion of the good impulse to build, uphold and to protect that America once used to offer.

Troubled young men seeking direction used to join the military, but now they find only wokeness there. The culture banishes young men, telling them they suffer from toxic masculinity and they drift into movements like those run by Muslim convert and alleged sex trafficker Andrew Tate or into Islam itself which preaches they can find meaning by killing Christians.

America needs to do more than spy on these young men, it needs to give them something to fight for. Because if it does not, Islam will. And they will become agents of our ancient enemy to kill, burn and bring down America, Europe and the entire civilized world under the flag of Islam.

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


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter