The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.
From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."
Israel on 'high alert' as anti-regime demonstrations across Iran hit two-week mark
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio discussed the possibility of U.S. intervention in Iran, according to a report.
The
two leaders spoke by phone Saturday as Israel is on "high alert,"
preparing for the possibility of U.S. military intervention in Iran,
according to Reuters, citing multiple Israeli sources.
On Saturday, the Iranian regime triggered an internet "kill switch"
in an apparent effort to conceal alleged abuses by security forces and
as protests against it surged nationwide, according to a cybersecurity
expert. The blackout reduced internet access to a fraction of normal
levels.
Secretary
of State Marco Rubio holds his end-of-year press conference at the
State Department in Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2025. (Kevin Mohatt/Reuters)
On Sunday, Iran’s parliament speaker warned that the U.S. military and Israel would be "legitimate targets" if America strikes the Islamic Republic.
Parliament
Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf issued the threat as lawmakers rushed
the dais in the Iranian parliament, shouting, "Death to America!"
according to The Associated Press.
President Donald Trump
offered support for the protesters on Saturday, writing on Truth Social
that "Iran is looking at FREEDOM, perhaps like never before. The USA
stands ready to help!!!"
In
this frame grab from video obtained by the AP outside Iran, a masked
demonstrator holds a picture of Iran's Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi during a
protest in Tehran, Iran, Friday, January. 9, 2026.(UGC via AP)
At a news conference Friday, Trump said Iran was facing mounting pressure as unrest spreads across the country.
"Iran’s
in big trouble," he said. "It looks to me that the people are taking
over certain cities that nobody thought were really possible just a few
weeks ago. We’re watching the situation very carefully."
The president said the U.S. would respond forcefully if the regime resorts to mass violence.
"We’ll
be hitting them very hard where it hurts. And that doesn’t mean boots
on the ground, but it means hitting them very, very hard where it
hurts," he said.
Protests in Iran intensify for the 12th day.(The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) ).
Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department and White House for comment.
Fox News Digital's Emma Bussey, Brie Stimson and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Michael Sinkewicz is a writer for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to michael.sinkewicz@fox.com
Trump has warned Iran’s leadership against repeating past crackdowns, saying the United States would respond forcefully if demonstrators were targeted
The President of the Iranian Parliament, Mohammad Bagher GhalibafAFP
Recommended
Iran warned on Sunday that it
would retaliate against Israel and U.S. military installations across
the Middle East if Washington launches a military attack, as nationwide
protests continue to challenge the country’s leadership.
Speaking
in parliament, Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said any U.S. strike on
Iranian territory would prompt a forceful response, describing Israel
and American bases in the region as “legitimate targets” in the event of
military intervention.
The
warning comes as U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized
Iran’s handling of the unrest and suggested Washington could take action
if Iranian authorities use force against demonstrators. On Saturday,
Trump said the United States stood “ready to help,” a statement that
heightened tensions across the region.
Israeli
officials said the country has raised its state of alert amid concerns
that U.S. involvement could trigger a broader confrontation.
Iran
has been gripped by widespread protests in recent days, with
authorities imposing severe restrictions on internet access, making it
difficult to independently verify conditions on the ground. Iranian
officials have said security forces are acting to restore order and have
blamed foreign powers for fueling the unrest.
Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf warns that any U.S. attack would lead to Tehran striking back against Israel and regional U.S. military bases as "legitimate targets," should Washington intervene militarily amid widespread protests across the country. pic.twitter.com/zNYwAAnhcB
The escalating rhetoric marks a
sharp rise in regional tensions only weeks after a brief military
confrontation between Israel and Iran, during which U.S. forces took
part in strikes alongside Israel.
Trump has warned Iran’s leadership
against repeating past crackdowns, saying the United States would
respond forcefully if demonstrators were targeted. The White House has
said the president is closely watching developments but has not
confirmed whether military options are under active consideration.
"In the past 24 hours alone, at least seven 'dark fleet' oil vessels have turned around to avoid interdiction—because they know we mean business," Parnell wrote on X.
War Department spokesman Sean Parnell said Friday night
that the War Department's blockade in the Caribbean has been effective
in deterring “dark fleet” oil vessels in the past 24 hours.
President Donald Trump ordered
a "complete and total" blockade of oil tankers moving in and out of
Venezuela last month, which has resulted in the seizure of at least five oil tankers.
Parnell said in a social media post that the blockade remains in
effect, even after the United States last week extracted Venezuelan
President Nicolás Maduro from the country, and that it has been "very
effective."
"In the past 24 hours alone, at least seven 'dark fleet' oil vessels
have turned around to avoid interdiction—because they know we mean
business," Parnell wrote on X. "The days of letting criminal activity
run rampant in our hemisphere are OVER thanks to President Trump and
[War] Secretary [Pete] Hegseth.
"The Department of War, alongside our interagency partners, will hunt
down and interdict ALL dark fleet vessels transporting Venezuelan oil
at the time and place of our choosing," he added.
Trump previously claimed Venezuela is using "stolen" oil to finance
itself and to fund actions including terrorism, human trafficking,
murder and kidnapping.
Misty Severi is a news reporter for Just The News. You can follow her on X for more coverage
"Giving Turkey a role in Gaza's future is a strategic mistake that will sooner or later, reborn Hamas or end up with a new militia with Hamas's goals, with another name." — Hamza Howidy, Palestinian journalist, x.com, October 26, 2025.
"Israel is left worse off
than when Hamas managed Gaza, given the sheer power of Turkey (which is
increasing).... The deployment of Turkish forces in Gaza and the sale of
F-35s to Erdogan are not policy ideas but a method: regional management
through personal deals and assurances rather than hard reality. Trump
himself illustrated this approach when he dismissed the issue as if it
were a neighborhood misunderstanding: Israel 'will be fine' and Turkey
'won't use them against you'. This is not policy; it is a dangerous
assumption. In the Middle East, it does not work. — Christine
Douglass-Williams, Frontpage Magazine, January 7, 2026.
"Giving Turkey a role in Gaza's future is a strategic mistake
that will sooner or later, reborn Hamas or end up with a new militia
with Hamas's goals, with another name." — Hamza Howidy, Palestinian
journalist, x.com, October 26, 2025.
Erdogan's regime, however, through its continuous support for
Hamas, has not brought a lasting peace; it has brought lasting
terrorism. Erdogan's own words reveal his intentions.
"In this city, which we had to leave in tears during the First
World War, it is still possible to come across traces of the Ottoman
resistance. So Jerusalem is our city, a city from us." — Erdogan in an
address at the opening of Parliament, October 1, 2020.
"Turkey collaborates with terror organizations on both the
ideological and operational levels. Terrorists working on Turkish soil
establish infrastructures and plan terror attacks against Israel." —
From the report "Hamas' Istanbul Headquarters Has Directed Hundreds of
Terror Attacks Against Israelis and Laundered Millions of Dollars,"
JFCA, December 30, 2021.
"Turkey is a base for the Muslim Brotherhood. There are networks
there that help Hamas with funding, support, religious rulings, and
logistics. Turkey has become a reception point for Brotherhood members."
— Michael Barak, specialist at the International Institute for
Counter-Terrorism on radical Islamist and jihadist movements, JNS, April
24, 2025
"Turkey, under the leadership of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan,
is one of Hamas' most important strategic allies, especially since the
violent events of the Mavi Marmara flotilla in 2010. Turkey hosts senior
Hamas figures, some of whom have received Turkish citizenship, and
provides political, diplomatic and propaganda support, as well as
economic and humanitarian assistance." — From the report "Turkey as a
Center for Hamas Activity," Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism
Information Center, March 2025.
It would not be surprising if Turkey wished for nothing more --
apart from F-35 fighter jets -- than to help bring "peace" to Gaza. As
soon as Trump leaves office, Erdogan would be exquisitely situated to
target Israel in a pincer operation: from Syria in the east -- helped by
Erdogan's protégé, Ahmed al-Sharaa -- and from Gaza in the West.
Anyone investing in the rebuilding of Gaza, in which a role is
played by Turkey, Qatar, Pakistan, the Palestinian Authority, Bangladesh
or the UN (which just allocated a budget of $100 million for targeting
Israel) -- in short, a bouquet of countries that have long wished for
Israel's demise -- should probably expect their bid for a "Gazan
Riviera" eventually to have a disappointing return on investment.
It will be easy for these longtime adversaries of Israel to join
the Abraham Accords and enjoy the benefits as long as they can – just as
it was to sign the Oslo Accords – then, at the earliest opportunity,
tear them up, especially after being so deliciously positioned to attack
Israel when Trump is no longer in office.
No wonder Erdogan and the others must be licking their chops at the prospect of bringing "peace" to the Gazan chicken coop.
Turkey makes no secret of its support for the Hamas terror
organization. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's regime, through
its continuous support for Hamas, has not brought a lasting peace; it
has brought lasting terrorism. Erdogan's own words reveal his
intentions. Pictured: Erdogan (right) honors then Hamas leader Ismail
Haniyeh at the Parliament in Ankara, Turkey on January 3, 2012. (Photo
credit by Adem Altan/AFP via Getty Images)
After supporting the Hamas terrorist group for more than a decade,
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, along with US President Donald
J. Trump, now reportedly plan for Turkey to be part of the international
"Board of Peace" that will operate in Gaza.
"The deployment of Turkish forces in Gaza is bad news," notes journalist Christine Douglass-Williams:
"Consider that Erdogan has referenced Hamas as a 'liberation organization,' hosted its leadership in Ankara, and granted them
Turkish passports. Turkey and Qatar are well-known Muslim Brotherhood
supporters. With Turkey also supporting Syrian jihadist President Ahmed
al-Sharaa, as well as its increased partnership with Iran and the fact that it considers the Taliban a friend, Israel is left worse off than when Hamas managed Gaza, given the sheer power of Turkey (which is increasing)....
"The deployment of Turkish forces in Gaza and the sale of F-35s to
Erdogan are not policy ideas but a method: regional management through
personal deals and assurances rather than hard reality. Trump himself
illustrated this approach when he dismissed the issue as if it were a
neighborhood misunderstanding: Israel 'will be fine' and Turkey 'won't
use them against you'. This is not policy; it is a dangerous assumption.
In the Middle East, it does not work."
"It seems that Turkey, despite its public ties to Hamas,
led by Erdogan, who recently described Hamas as a 'liberation movement,'
will be somehow part of Gaza's ceasefire; trucks with Turkish flags
were spotted today in the Gaza Strip.
"Giving Turkey a role in Gaza's future is a strategic mistake that
will sooner or later, reborn Hamas or end up with a new militia with
Hamas's goals, with another name."
The "Gaza peace deal," brokered by Trump in September, envisions an
international force that will see to it that Hamas is completely
disarmed while effectively presiding over areas now controlled by the
terrorist organization. This means that Trump is actually expecting that
these international countries -- all Hamas's fellow Muslims, Muslim
Brotherhood supporters, and dedicated opponents of Israel – will
actually force Hamas to disarm and live quietly side-by-side in harmony
with Israel, a state that, at some point, they all have indicated they
would like to see destroyed.
In a January 5 interview
with Bloomberg, Erdogan stated that the success of a so-called
international stabilization force in Gaza would "depend on the inclusion
of actors with legitimacy on the ground." From Erdogan's own words, it
should be easy to tell whom he regards as illegitimate. It is not the Palestinians. Erdogan added:
"You will appreciate that, in this sense, it would be
difficult for any mechanism without Türkiye to gain the trust of the
Palestinian people. We are in the position of a key country for such a
mission due to our deep historical ties with the Palestinian side, the security and diplomacy channels we have conducted with Israel in the past [evidently very much in the past, before he began sending flotillas with weapons
to attack Israel. Ed.], and our regional influence as a NATO member
country. Our political will is clear; we stand ready to take on any
responsibility for a lasting peace in Gaza." [Emphasis added]
Erdogan's regime, however, through its continuous support for Hamas,
has not brought a lasting peace; it has brought lasting terrorism.
Erdogan's own words reveal his intentions:
"In this city, which we had to leave in tears during the First
World War, it is still possible to come across traces of the Ottoman
resistance. So Jerusalem is our city, a city from us." (Address at the
opening of Parliament, October 1, 2020)
"May Allah, for the sake of his name 'Al-Qahhar,' destroy and devastate Zionist Israel." (Eid al Fitr prayers, March 30, 2025)
"I do not see Hamas as a terrorist organization; on the contrary, I
see Hamas as people engaged in the struggle to protect their own land
and their own people." (Quoted by Turkey's official Directorate of
Communications X account, May 13, 2024)
"Turkey is a country that speaks openly with Hamas leaders and firmly backs them." (From a speech on March 8, 2024)
Turkey makes no secret of its support for the Hamas terror
organization. Throughout the years, Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and the
head of Turkey's National Intelligence Organization, Ibrahim Kalın, have met Hamas leaders, including the slain leader Ismail Haniyeh, multiple times. On January 29, 2025, Erdogan received
Mohammed Darwish, chairman of the Hamas Shura Council, and a Hamas
delegation at the presidential complex in Ankara. More recently, on
December 24, Fidan met in Ankara with a Hamas delegation headed by Hamas Political Bureau Member Khalil Hayye.
Hamas official Kemal Avn, in an interview with CNN Turk aired on December 18, said:
"The Palestinian resistance has wanted Turkey to be a
mediator in Gaza since the beginning of the war [in 2023]. We want to
see the Turkish military in Gaza... We trust Turkey more than other
states that give us orders."
You bet they want Turkey's military in Gaza. Turkey's alliance with Hamas has been solid for many years. Hamas has offices in Turkey and has taken up money laundering there. The German state broadcaster Deutsche Welle reported
that Hamas is known to have at least one office in Istanbul's
neighborhood of Başakşehir, which they also use for meetings with
journalists. There is, in addition, an association affiliated with Hamas
in the Istanbul neighborhood of Fatih connected to this office. The
Turkish government has even granted some Hamas members Turkish passports.
In 2018, the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA) issued a report entitled "Turkey Embraces Hamas":
"Turkish authorities allow the military wing of Hamas to
operate from an office in Istanbul that deals with planning terror
attacks and transferring funds to the organization's activists in the
West Bank.
"This office is run by the Beirut-based Saleh al-Arouri,
vice-chairman of the political bureau of Hamas, with the assistance of
Hamas activists released under the Shalit prisoner release deal in
2011."
In another report posted the same year, the JCFA wrote that "former terrorist prisoners run the Hamas office in Istanbul."
"The military wing of Hamas maintains an office in
Istanbul, Turkey, which works closely with the West Bank headquarters of
Hamas located in Gaza and directing terror attacks in the West Bank.
One of the operatives involved is Forsan Khalifa, responsible for the
northern part of the West Bank. Khalifa liaised with the terror cell
headed by terrorist Ahmed Nassar Jarrar of Jenin, who murdered Rabbi
Raziel Shevach next to the community of Havat Gilad in Samaria."
In 2021, in a report
titled "Hamas' Istanbul Headquarters Has Directed Hundreds of Terror
Attacks Against Israelis and Laundered Millions of Dollars," the JCFA
wrote:
"Turkey collaborates with terror organizations on both
the ideological and operational levels. Terrorists working on Turkish
soil establish infrastructures and plan terror attacks against Israel.
Hamas senior officials (most former inmates in Israel for terrorism who
were released in a prisoner exchange) are operating from Turkey against
Israel....
"Despite the official Turkish claims, not only Hamas' political
activity is involved. According to the Shabak (Israeli Security Agency),
[aka the Shin Bet], over the years, the Istanbul headquarters, branches
and operatives have directed hundreds of terror attacks and attempted
attacks in Israel and the West Bank in particular."
The report also sheds light on Hamas's companies and money laundering in Turkey:
"The Shabak's investigation revealed extensive Hamas
money laundering in Turkey under the supervision of Zaher Jabarin, with
the authorities turning a blind eye to the source of the funds. The
investigation also found that Hamas operatives owned a company named
Imas, which served Hamas by camouflaging money-laundering activity
involving sums of millions of dollars that were transferred to Gaza and
different countries."
The report named some of the Hamas terrorists who operated in Turkey and even murdered Israelis:
"Mahmoud Atwan, originally from the east Jerusalem
neighborhood of Sur Baher, freed in the Shalit deal, member of the cell
that kidnapped and murdered Border Police officer Nissim Toledano in
1992; Majid Abu Katish, originally from Anata, also a member of that
cell; Taiser Suleiman, expelled in the Shalit deal, murdered an Israeli
soldier; Fahad Sabri Barhan al-Shaludi, appears from time to time on
Turkish television; Walid Zakaria Akel, a founder of Hamas' Izzadin
al-Qassam Brigades, was given 21 life sentences; Haroun Mansour Yakoub
Nasser al-Din, boasted in the past that Turkey grants former Hamas
prisoners full freedom to come and go as they please; Ayman Mohammad Abu
Khalil; Bakri Hanifa, a senior economic figure in Hamas claimed to have
transferred millions of dollars from Qatar to Hamas via Turkey; and
Maher Abid, a member of Hamas' Political Bureau and senior financial
operative, reportedly in charge of Hamas' international relations until
2016."
According to a March 2025 report entitled "Turkey as a Center for Hamas Activity" by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center:
"Turkey, under the leadership of President Recep Tayyip
Erdoğan, is one of Hamas' most important strategic allies, especially
since the violent events of the Mavi Marmara flotilla in 2010. Turkey
hosts senior Hamas figures, some of whom have received Turkish
citizenship, and provides political, diplomatic and propaganda support,
as well as economic and humanitarian assistance.
"Hamas has established one of its most important overseas centers in
Turkey, primarily operated by prisoners released in the Gilad Shalit
exchange deal of 2011. It uses Turkey to plan terrorist attacks and
transfer funds to finance terrorist activities inside Israel, in Judea,
Samaria and the Gaza Strip, and to raise and launder money in support of
its terrorist operations, including the October 7, 2023, attack and
massacre.
"The close relationship between Turkey and Hamas was manifested
during the Gaza Strip War, when Turkey did not condemn Hamas but sharply
criticized Israel, often using antisemitic themes. Throughout the
fighting, political coordination continued between Erdoğan, senior
Turkish officials and the Hamas leadership, including regarding
negotiations with Israel and humanitarian assistance. Turkey also
received Palestinian prisoners who were released from Israeli prisons
and deported."
On March 30, during a Ramadan prayer service, Erdogan declared,
"May Allah, for the sake of his name ... destroy and devastate Zionist
Israel." He also prayed for "mercy upon the martyrs" of Hamas and
Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and wished a "speedy recovery" to their
wounded terrorists.
Despite warnings
from the US government, Hamas's alliance with Erdogan's Turkey remains
strong. Yaakov Lappin, a military affairs correspondent and analyst,
reported for JNS on April 4, 2025:
"A Hamas terror cell in Nablus that received instructions
and funding from the organization's overseas headquarters in Turkey was
dismantled by Israeli security forces in recent weeks in what observers
say is part of a broader pattern of Turkey serving as a permissive hub
for Hamas's terror operations.
"According to a joint statement by the Israel Police and the Israel
Security Agency (Shin Bet) issued on March 25, 'a terror cell from
Nablus was thwarted, which acted under the guidance and funding of Hamas
headquarters in Turkey to carry out shooting and explosive device
attacks.' The statement added that 'an M-16 rifle and tens of thousands
of dollars in cash were handed over during the investigation'....
Michael Barak, senior researcher at the International Institute for
Counter-Terrorism (ICT) and a specialist on radical Islamist and
jihadist movements, told JNS on Tuesday, 'Turkey is a base for the
Muslim Brotherhood. There are networks there that help Hamas with
funding, support, religious rulings, and logistics. Turkey has become a
reception point for Brotherhood members.'
Barak confirmed that 'a Hamas headquarters still exists there—in
Istanbul and Ankara—and it is integrated into educational institutions,
including universities.'
He cited the example of Professor Sami Al-Arian, a Palestinian
Islamic Jihad financier in the 1990s who was deported from the United
States and now operates from a university-affiliated think tank in
Ankara. 'There he hosts Hamas figures,' Barak said. 'Al-Arian maintains
ties with Hamas, runs webinars with them on Zoom, and manages
Brotherhood-Hamas links, including in India.'
Barak emphasized: 'All of these Muslim Brotherhood assets in Turkey assist Hamas—whether through dawa [Islamic outreach], financing, or religious rulings.'
He added that Turkey has become 'a reception point for Muslim Brotherhood figures from Libya, Iraq and Yemen.'"
Hamas, the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, has been
designated as a terrorist organization by, among many others, the United
States, Australia, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada, Japan and
the European Union.
On October 7, 2023, Israel was invaded by Hamas terrorists. They attacked civilian communities and murdered 1,200 civilians and foreign nationals, wounding thousands more. Among other atrocities, they baked a baby alive in an oven; cut off a woman's breast while raping her, then "played with it"; kidnapped 241 Israelis and foreign nationals, whom they also tortured, raped and starved – and murdered many of them.
Dr. Tal Becker, former advisor to Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in January 2024, reported to the International Court of Justice, which was accusing Israel of genocide:
"The civilian suffering in this war, like in all wars, is
tragic... The Applicant [South Africa] has regrettably put before the
Court a profoundly distorted factual and legal picture....
"[I]f there have been acts that may be characterized as genocidal, then they have been perpetrated against Israel....
"[I]f there is a humanitarian threat to the Palestinian civilians of
Gaza - it stems primarily from the fact that they have lived under the
control of a genocidal terrorist organization that has total disregard
for their life and well-being. That organization, Hamas, and its
sponsors, seek to deny Israel, Palestinians, and Arab States across the
region, the ability to advance a common future of peace, co-existence,
security, and prosperity. Israel is in a war of defense against Hamas -
not against the Palestinian people - to ensure that they do not
succeed."
This invasion of Israel, roughly the size of New Jersey (22 million
sq. km.), was launched by approximately 3,000 terrorists, accompanied by
an estimated 2,200 rockets
launched at Israeli villages, towns and cities. Around 215,000 Israeli
civilians were evacuated from their homes, becoming internally displaced
persons.
Legal scholar Avraham Russell Shalev, who specializes in international public law, argued in a 2025 article that what Hamas did on October 7 was genocide:
"[The] article analyses the October 7th 2023 Hamas attack
on Israel through the lens of the Genocide Convention, arguing that
these actions constitute genocide under international law. Drawing on
international case law, the analysis demonstrates how Hamas' actions
meet both the physical element and specific intent requirements for
genocide, evidenced by its ideology, systematic policies and leadership
statements. The article also examines how reverse accusations of
genocide against Israel have functioned as a rhetorical shield to
deflect recognition of Hamas' own genocidal actions."
Hamas opposes any negotiations with Israel or Jews. The 1988 Hamas Covenant
aims to obliterate Israel and Jews worldwide and replace Israel with an
Islamic theocratic state. Hamas aims at jihadist-martyrdom against not
only Israel but also all Jews (Article 7). The Hamas covenant spells out
Hamas's genocidal intentions. Article 2 states:
"The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of
Moslem Brotherhood in Palestine. Moslem Brotherhood Movement is a
universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement in
modern times. It is characterised by its deep understanding, accurate
comprehension and its complete embrace of all Islamic concepts of all
aspects of life, culture, creed, politics, economics, education,
society, justice and judgement, the spreading of Islam, education, art,
information, science of the occult and conversion to Islam."
Hamas states that it is against any peace process:
"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except
through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are
all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The Palestinian people know
better than to consent to having their future, rights and fate toyed
with." (Article 13).
Article 8 spells out "The Slogan of the Islamic Resistance Movement,"
which has inspired countless jihadist martyrs worldwide, goes:
"Allah is its target, the Prophet is its model, the Koran
its constitution: Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is
the loftiest of its wishes."
Hamas is committed to an eternal jihad against the Jews, until the
victory of Allah is implemented. According to Hamas, Muslims are obligated
to fight and kill the Jews wherever they find them. This global,
genocidal call is justified by a hadith (saying attributed to Muhammad)
that concludes Article 7:
"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems
fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones
and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla [lit.:
slave of Allah,], there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." (related
by al-Bukhari and Moslem)."
According to Georgetown University Professor Bruce Hoffman:
"The most relevant of the document's 36 articles can be summarized as falling within four main themes:
1. The complete destruction of Israel as an essential condition for the
liberation of Palestine and the establishment of a theocratic state
based on Islamic law (Sharia),
2. The need for both unrestrained and unceasing holy war (jihad) to attain the above objective,
3. The deliberate disdain for, and dismissal of, any negotiated
resolution or political settlement of Jewish and Muslim claims to the
Holy Land, and
4. The reinforcement of historical anti-Semitic tropes and calumnies married to sinister conspiracy theories."
Hoffman adds:
"Accordingly, what happened in Israel [on October 7,
2023] is completely in keeping with Hamas's explicit aims and stated
objectives. It was, in fact, the inchoate realization of Hamas's true
ambitions."
Erdogan, however, said in a speech in Istanbul in 2024:
"No one can make us qualify Hamas as a terrorist
organization... Turkey is a country that speaks openly with Hamas
leaders and firmly backs them."
Erdogan's dream, apparently, has long been to recreate the Ottoman Empire,
covering all of the Middle East, North Africa, Central Europe and the
Balkans, presumably with himself as sultan. Seemingly to that end, he
has repeatedly spoken about the need to reconquer Jerusalem:
"We will not allow sacred Jerusalem to be defiled by
unworthy hands.... As Muslims, we will not take a single step back from
our rights in East Jerusalem. Our struggle to make Jerusalem a city of
peace, security, and safety continues.... We remain focused on our
goals. We plan every move like a master chess player. No provocation
will prevent us from achieving our objectives. Türkiye's foreign policy
prioritizes peace, but this does not mean we will remain silent in the
face of injustice."
Injustice to Erdogan is evidently Israel in charge of Jerusalem.
Turkey, under Erdogan, has become a main supporter of other Islamic terror groups as well, including Hezbollah, al-Qaeda-affiliated Hay'at Tahrir al Sham forces in Syria and the Islamic State (ISIS).
It would not be surprising if Turkey wished for nothing more -- apart
from F-35 fighter jets -- than to help bring "peace" to Gaza. As soon
as Trump leaves office, Erdogan would be exquisitely situated to target
Israel in a pincer operation: from Syria in the east -- helped by
Erdogan's protégé, Ahmed al-Sharaa -- and from Gaza in the West.
Erdogan's regime is not a rational force that aims to contain Hamas
or turn the terror group into a moderate or non-violent entity.
Erdogan's regime openly supports the ideology and actions of Hamas.
Hence, the presence of Turkish forces in Gaza means that Hamas' presence
in Gaza will remain and Hamas terrorists will continue to target
Israel, murder both Israelis and Gazans, and continue to empower
international jihadist movements.
Anyone investing in the rebuilding of Gaza, in which a role is played
by Turkey, Qatar, Pakistan, the Palestinian Authority, Bangladesh or
the UN (which just allocated a budget of $100 million
for targeting Israel) -- in short, a bouquet of countries that have
long wished for Israel's demise -- should probably expect their bid for a
"Gazan Riviera" eventually to have a disappointing return on
investment.
It will be easy for these longtime adversaries of Israel to join the
Abraham Accords and enjoy the benefits as long as they can – just as it
was to sign the Oslo Accords – then, at the earliest opportunity, tear
them up, especially after being so deliciously positioned to attack
Israel when Trump is no longer in office.
No wonder Erdogan and the others must be licking their chops at the prospect of bringing "peace" to the Gazan chicken coop.
Uzay Bulut, a Turkish journalist, is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.
The mainstream media has largely refused to acknowledge that, as reported in a recent study by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, 60% of the "journalists" killed during the fighting in Gaza were Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad operatives or affiliates.
"The evidence confirms that
NGOs in Gaza do not operate independently or neutrally," NGO Monitor
found. "Rather, they are embedded in an institutionalized framework of
coercion, intimidation, and surveillance that serves Hamas' terror
objectives.... NGOs – both local and international, including ones
operating under the auspices of UN projects – are not permitted to
provide services or operate projects in Gaza without Hamas' approval."
On an everyday basis, NGOs need permission from Hamas to do their work in Gaza.
Hamas also inserted "guarantors" – local Gazans approved by
Hamas, or themselves Hamas members or affiliates – into high positions
in the respective NGOs to serve as points of contact between Hamas and
the NGOs. Hamas required its "guarantors" to be placed at the highest
administrative levels of the NGO, such as director, deputy director, or
board chair.
The Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), for instance, an Oslo-based
NGO operating in Gaza, among other places, chose to simply ignore
concerns from a Gazan that his floor was collapsing because of a terror
tunnel being built underneath.
The mainstream media has largely refused to acknowledge that, as
reported in a recent study by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism
Information Center, 60% of the "journalists" killed during the fighting
in Gaza were Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad operatives or
affiliates.
Humanitarian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working
in the Gaza Strip have been thoroughly infiltrated by Hamas, according
to a new report. Pictured: Ambulances donated by Rahma Worldwide on
August 7, 2024 in Khan Yunis (southern Gaza). A recently revealed Hamas
document from 2022 reported that Rahma Worldwide's Gazan director "is
now affiliated with the Hamas movement." (Photo by Bashar Taleb/AFP via
Getty Images)
Humanitarian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working in the
Gaza Strip have been thoroughly infiltrated by Hamas, according to a new
report by NGO Monitor: Puppet Regime: Hamas' Coercive Grip on Aid and NGO Operations in Gaza.
The report is based on Arabic-language documents, retrieved by Israel's
military, spanning the years 2018-2022, from Hamas's Gaza Interior
Security Mechanism (ISM), a unit within the Hamas Ministry of Interior
and National Security.
"The evidence confirms that NGOs in Gaza do not operate independently or neutrally," NGO Monitor found.
"Rather, they are embedded in an institutionalized framework of
coercion, intimidation, and surveillance that serves Hamas' terror
objectives."
On an everyday basis, NGOs need permission from Hamas to do their work in Gaza.
"All NGOs operating in Gaza are required to adhere to
strict Hamas security protocols, which include regular engagement with
the terror group's Ministry of Interior and National Security... and
other ministries relevant for specific projects... NGOs – both local and
international, including ones operating under the auspices of UN
projects – are not permitted to provide services or operate projects in
Gaza without Hamas' approval... NGOs are compelled to comply, ensuring
that their activities do not contradict Hamas' authority and narrative
or obstruct its military agenda."
Hamas also inserted "guarantors"
– local Gazans approved by Hamas, or themselves Hamas members or
affiliates – into high positions in the respective NGOs to serve as
points of contact between Hamas and the NGOs. Hamas required its
"guarantors" to be placed at the highest administrative levels of the
NGO, such as director, deputy director, or board chair.
This led to ethically questionable dispositions on the part of these NGOs: The Norwegian Refugee Council
(NRC), for instance, an Oslo-based NGO operating in Gaza, among other
places, chose to simply ignore concerns from a Gazan that his floor was
collapsing because of a terror tunnel being built underneath. According
to the NGO Monitor report:
"As part of an NRC program, funded by the UK and EU, to
provide cash assistance to families selected by Hamas-controlled
Ministry of Social Development, an NRC delegation, including the Gaza
head and five other employees, visited a beneficiary's apartment. The
resident was chosen... 'since he is elderly, weak sighted and his
partner has a broken pelvis,' and the 'poor shape of his apartment's
floor and one of the walls was about to collapse.'
"During the visit, the beneficiary asked whether 'the reason that the
floor collapsed was that there was a tunnel' beneath his home.
According to the NRC senior official, 'neither the foreign delegation
nor the association's employees asked whether there was a tunnel under
the civilian's... apartment which caused the floor to collapse, rather
it was the apartment's owner who asked the researchers... nevertheless
the researchers did not reply to him'".
The NRC had a Gazan administrative director, according
to NGO Monitor, who "supports the Hamas movement but is not affiliated
with the movement," and "He is employed by the government of Gaza and
has the rank of Naqib (Hamas rank for captain)..."
At least some of these NGOs are funded by US taxpayers: One of NRC's top donors,
donating 17.2% of the Norwegian outfit's total income in 2024, was the
USAID Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance, formerly the U.S. government's
lead agency supposedly for coordinating and delivering international
disaster aid, and thankfully since dismantled by the Trump
administration.
This cozy relationship between Hamas and the NGOs is compounded by what the author and journalist Matti Friedman has previously described
as another highly problematic cozy relationship between the media and
the NGOs – a relationship that means NGOs are never supposed to be
exposed to media scrutiny:
"In my time in the press corps, I learned that our
relationship with these groups [NGOs, activists and international
organizations, ed] was not journalistic. My colleagues and I did
not... seek to analyze or criticize them... these were not targets but
sources and friends—fellow members, in a sense, of an informal alliance.
This alliance consists of activists and international staffers from the
UN and the NGOs; the Western diplomatic corps... and foreign
reporters."
According to Friedman, in 2014, the Associated Press, in fact, went so far as to ban interviews with NGO Monitor:
"The bureau's [Associated Press] explicit orders to
reporters were to never quote the group [NGO Monitor] or its director...
Gerald Steinberg. In my time as an AP writer moving through the local
conflict, with its myriad lunatics, bigots, and killers, the only person
I ever saw subjected to an interview ban was this professor."
Friedman registered that the media themselves were intimidated by Hamas into reporting only what the terror organization wanted:
"During the 2008-2009 Gaza fighting I personally erased a
key detail—that Hamas fighters were dressed as civilians and being
counted as civilians in the death toll—because of a threat to our
reporter in Gaza. "
Similarly, the mainstream media has largely refused to acknowledge that, as reported
in a recent study by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism
Information Center, 60% of the "journalists" killed during the fighting
in Gaza were Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad operatives or
affiliates.
In September, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) coordinated an international campaign
allegedly involving 150 media outlets to "condemn the crimes against
Palestinian reporters perpetrated with impunity by the Israeli army".
The organization claimed:
"According to RSF data, more than 210 journalists have
been killed by the Israeli army in the Gaza Strip in nearly 23 months of
Israeli military operations in the Palestinian territory. At least 56
of them were intentionally targeted by the Israeli army or killed while
doing their job."
According
to the Meir Amit Center, out of 266 people identified as journalists or
media workers killed in Gaza between October 7, 2023 and November 30,
2025, at least 157 were either members of or affiliated with terrorist
groups, primarily Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
Regardless, the Association of Foreign Press Correspondents in the
United States (AFPC-USA), at its gala in Washington, DC last month,
posthumously honored 10 reporters employed by Qatar's state-owned Al
Jazeera who had been exposed
as terrorists, among them a Hamas sniper, the head of a Hamas unit
responsible for rocket attacks against Israel, and a member of Hamas
elite Nukhba forces.
Fox News chief foreign correspondent Trey Yingst eulogized the terrorists at the gala:
"These fearless and tenacious Palestinian journalists in
Gaza who don't have the luxury to leave when reporting becomes too
dangerous. May we not forget their sacrifice and contributions to our
industry."
Perhaps the most accurate description of Operation Absolute Resolve came from Beijing, with the term "hegemonic act". True, the US acted as a hegemon, that is to say, a power capable of enforcing its laws against foes.
No legal system could
anticipate all imaginable cases of an illegal action. That can be done
only if and when an act contravenes a clearly defined law that also
envisages a clearly defined punishment. Neither of those caveats applies
to the foggy notion of national sovereignty, let alone to the foggier
concept of international law.
Leaving aside virtue-signalers and blame-America cabals attacking
the US, the truth is that international law is as exposed as the Wizard
of Oz was at the end of Dorothy's journey.
Perhaps the most accurate description of Operation Absolute
Resolve came from Beijing, with the term "hegemonic act". True, the US
acted as a hegemon, that is to say, a power capable of enforcing its
laws against foes.
The late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called Maduro "my bus
driver". Maduro drove the Venezuelan bus into a ravine and made himself
easily kidnappable. Venezuela doesn't cry for him.
The late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called Nicolás
Maduro "my bus driver". Maduro drove the Venezuelan bus into a ravine
and made himself easily kidnappable. Venezuela doesn't cry for him.
Pictured: Maduro delivers a speech during a military ceremony on
November 25, 2025, in Caracas, Venezuela. (Photo by Jesus Vargas/Getty
Images)
"Illegal" was the word most used by governments and commentators
across the globe to describe the abduction of Venezuelan President
Nicolás Maduro Moros on January 3 by US Army Delta Force soldiers.
There is, however, no consensus. Some, including many leftist
politicians in Europe, call it "an act of piracy". Others label it as
"hostage taking". The term "kidnapping" has also been used.
That politico-juristic cacophony puts the term "illegal" into a
bracket denoting doubt. An act is described as illegal when it
contravenes a law or set of clearly spelled-out laws recognized by a
collectivity.
In this case, the collectivity is supposed to consist of the 193
member states of the United Nations that include both Venezuela and the
US. Those who argue that the US operation was illegal refer to the
principle of "national sovereignty" that is supposed to be the
cornerstone of international law.
The trouble is that the same international law does not offer a clear
definition either of the nation or of the term sovereignty. The Uruguay
Accords define a nation as a country with demarcated borders and under
the control of a distinct authority. Such an entity enjoys sovereignty
within its borders and according to its own laws.
With the creation of the United Nations, abiding by the UN Charter
and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights were added as conditions
for recognizing the concept of national sovereignty.
Produced by nations that had won the Second World War, the UN Charter
focused on setting rules, albeit vague ones, on the use of force in the
context of an act of war against one member state against another.
Thus, any use of military force would only be legal if specifically
approved by the United Nations Security Council, as was the case in the
US intervention in the Korean Peninsula's civil war and the eviction of
Iraq from occupied Kuwait.
However, the same shambolic legal system also recognizes the right of
self-defense and even preemptive action in the face of clear and
present danger.
In recent years other considerations have been raised to justify the
use of force in the name of "the right to intervene" and the
"responsibility to protect".
Waging war with permission from the UN Security Council has been a rare exception.
All Arab-Israeli wars, four Indo-Pakistani wars, two wars between
Bolivia and Chile, the UK-Argentine war over the Falklands, the
Iran-Iraq war, and the current Cambodia-Thailand war are among many such
cases of use of force with no regard for rules set by the UN.
All five veto-holding members of the UN Security Council have ignored the rules.
The US intervened in Indochina, Grenada, and in the second Iraq war
with no UN sanction. Russia has annexed parts of Japanese, Chinese,
Georgian and Ukrainian territory with no regard for the sacrosanct
concept of "national sovereignty".
China has annexed chunks of Indian and Vietnamese territory in the
same way and continues to annex islands in the South China Sea while
dangling the Sword of Damocles over Taiwan.
France has used military force in half a dozen African countries to
install or protect client regimes while aiding secessionists in Canada
and Nigeria, with no regard for those nations' sovereignty. Britain used
military force in Malaysia and participated in the second Iraq war
along with the US.
Other UN members have also ignored the principle.
India annexed the Portuguese territory of Goa and the French enclaves
of Mahe and Chandernagor. Indonesia annexed West Irian and part of the
Timor Island. Turkey attacked and still occupies parts of Cyprus. NATO
members intervened in former Yugoslavia to change the regime in Serbia
and carve out Kosovo as an independent state.
Sometimes respect for national sovereignty bears tragic fruits.
Dutch soldiers stationed in Bosnia to protect civilians watched while
Serbian militias massacred over 8,000 Muslims a stone's throw away from
the UN base. In Rwanda, French forces reported to Paris that the Hutu
government was massacring Tutsis on an industrial scale. President
Francois Mitterrand's order was to respect Rwanda's "national
sovereignty" and do nothing.
Let us return to the issue of sovereignty in the Venezuelan case.
Isn't it fanciful to suggest that the Maduro outfit represented that
sovereignty? Maduro lost two presidential elections, one of which was
certified by Venezuela's own parliament to have been won by the
opposition, and resurfaced as a dictator.
Could that not be seen as a transfer of sovereignty from him to the
Venezuelan people, who do not seem unhappy about his demise and hope to
regain their national sovereignty?
What about the US's national sovereignty? Do vaguely international concepts supersede national laws?
Maduro and his wife were accused of drug trafficking, a federal
crime, by the US Drug Enforcement Agency in 2022. Thus, the federal
government had the duty of bringing them to justice. In theory that
could have been done by Interpol, of which Venezuela is a member. But it
is fanciful to suggest that Maduro's own police would have arrested and
extradited him under agreements signed between Washington and Caracas
in the 1960s.
There had been similar cases before Maduro's arrest, including the
arrests of Panamanian President Manuel Noriega and Honduran President
Juan Orlando Hernandez, the latter shortly after the end of his
presidential term. Thus, one could suggest that the US has exercised its
sovereign rights to enforce its laws in defense of its legitimate
interest to protect its people against harm done by drugs.
No legal system could anticipate all imaginable cases of an illegal
action. That can be done only if and when an act contravenes a clearly
defined law that also envisages a clearly defined punishment. Neither of
those caveats applies to the foggy notion of national sovereignty, let
alone to the foggier concept of international law.
Leaving aside virtue-signalers and blame-America cabals attacking the
US, the truth is that international law is as exposed as the Wizard of
Oz was at the end of Dorothy's journey.
Perhaps the most accurate description of Operation Absolute Resolve
came from Beijing, with the term "hegemonic act". True, the US acted as a
hegemon, that is to say, a power capable of enforcing its laws against
foes.
The late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called Maduro "my bus
driver". Maduro drove the Venezuelan bus into a ravine and made himself
easily kidnappable. Venezuela doesn't cry for him.
Gatestone Institute would like to thank the author for his kind
permission to reprint this article in slightly different form from Asharq Al-Awsat. He graciously serves as Chairman of Gatestone Europe.
Amir Taheri was the executive editor-in-chief of the daily Kayhan
in Iran from 1972 to 1979. He has worked at or written for innumerable
publications, published eleven books, and has been a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat since 1987.
María Corina Machado suggested transferring her Nobel Peace Prize to Trump after the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro
The organization that oversees the Nobel Peace
Prize rejected recent suggestions that Venezuelan opposition leader
María Corina Machado could give or share her award with President Donald Trump.
The
Norwegian Nobel Institute shut down the idea Friday, after Machado
suggested that she might transfer the prestigious award to Trump earlier
this week.
"Once a Nobel Prize is announced, it cannot be
revoked, shared, or transferred to others," the institute said in a
statement. "The decision is final and stands for all time."
The statement comes after Machado floated the idea during an appearance Tuesday on Fox News' "Hannity."
Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Corina Machado waves from the Grand Hotel in Oslo, Norway, early Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025.(Lise Åserud/NTB Scanpix via AP)
"Did you at any point offer to give him the Nobel Peace Prize?" Sean Hannity asked. "Did that actually happen?"
Machado responded, "Well, it hasn’t happened yet."
"I
certainly would love to be able to personally tell him that we believe —
the Venezuelan people, because this is a prize of the Venezuelan people
— certainly want to give it to him and share it with him," Machado
continued. "What he has done is historic. It’s a huge step towards a
democratic transition."
Nobel officials said the Peace Prize cannot be shared after Machado suggested honoring Trump.(REUTERS/Maxwell Briceno and Win McNamee/Getty Images)
On Jan. 3, Trump announced that the U.S. had successfully completed an operation to capture authoritarian Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who is now facing drug trafficking charges in New York.
Trump was asked during an appearance Thursday on "Hannity" whether he would accept the Nobel Prize from Machado.
"I've heard that she wants to do that," Trump responded. "That would be a great honor."
Opposition leader Maria Corina Machado gestures during an anti-government protest on Jan. 9, 2025 in Caracas, Venezuela.(Jesus Vargas/Getty Images)
Machado
secretly escaped Venezuela last month and traveled to Norway to receive
the Nobel Peace Prize, which she dedicated to Trump.
"Let me be
very clear. As soon as I learned that we had been awarded the Nobel
Peace Prize, I dedicated it to President Trump because I believed at
that point that he deserved it," Machado said on "Hannity." "And a lot
of people, most people, said it was impossible to achieve what he has
just done on Saturday, January 3rd."
Trump said he plans to meet with the Venezuelan opposition leader in Washington next week.
He has previously stated that Machado "doesn't have the support within or the respect within the country" to lead. Trump has supported acting President Delcy Rodríguez, a longtime Maduro loyalist, who previously served as vice president under Maduro.
Fox News Digital's Landon Mion contributed to this report.
Michael Sinkewicz is a writer for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to michael.sinkewicz@fox.com
Two Israeli companies, VisiRight and Amore Capital, announced plans to enter Somaliland’s market following Israel’s recent recognition of the country.
A man holding a Somaliland flag behind his back, in Hargeisa, on November 7, 2025.LUIS TATO / AFP
Recommended
Two
Israeli companies, VisiRight and Amore Capital, announced a strategic
collaboration on Sunday aimed at supporting Israeli businesses seeking
to enter the Somaliland market.
The
initiative follows Israel’s recent recognition of the self-declared
republic, a diplomatic move that has drawn international attention and
highlighted new economic opportunities in the region.
Somaliland,
situated on a key route along the Red Sea, has seen significant
development at the Berbera port, fueled by infrastructure and logistics
investments.
The country
offers potential for projects across sectors including infrastructure,
agriculture, telecommunications, and logistics, while also providing
access to the growing markets of Ethiopia and neighboring countries
through regional trade agreements.
Under
the new partnership, VisiRight and Amore Capital plan to help Israeli
companies, ranging from infrastructure and real estate firms to startups
in water management, renewable energy, and smart technologies, navigate
the Somaliland market.
Israeli FM in Somaliland: Visit follows Israel's first-in-world recognition
The
collaboration aims to facilitate connections with government agencies,
regulators, and local business partners, enabling a structured and
sustainable entry into the country.
“I hope that one day there will be peace with Iran, and that we will be able to return to establishing regional peace,” Netanyahu said.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pressed by prosecution on Case 4000. Jerusalem, January 5(photo credit: Mark Israel Salem)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
said on Sunday that he hopes Israel will one day achieve peace with
Iran, speaking during a cabinet meeting amid widespread anti-regime
protests in the Islamic Republic.
“I
hope that one day there will be peace with Iran, and that we will be
able to return to establishing regional peace,” Netanyahu said.
He also referred to an interview he gave to The Economist
over the weekend, in which he said that Israel intends to gradually
reduce the $3.8 billion it receives annually in US military aid, with
the aim of ending the assistance entirely within the next decade.
“I expect that within a decade we will reach a trillion-dollar economy,” Netanyahu
said. “The freer the economy is, and the more it is released from
bureaucratic constraints, this will make it possible to increase
investment in Israel’s defense programs by an additional approximately
NIS 350 billion within a decade. Just as I reduced dependence on
economic aid from the United States, so too I want to reduce security
assistance within a decade.”
Netanyahu said that Israel has reached a stage of “economic and security maturity” that allows it to become more self-reliant.
Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a 40 signatures debate, at the plenum
hall of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament in Jerusalem, on January 5,
2026. (credit: YONATAN SINDEL/FLASH90)
“We receive military aid on a large scale and appreciate it very much,” he said. “During my visit with President Trump,
I told him that we deeply appreciate the assistance given to us over
the years, but here too we have matured and developed enormous
capabilities.”
Netanyahu emphasizes the funding strategy is apolitical
He emphasized that the planned change in funding strategy is not political.
“That
does not mean that I am not fighting for the support and loyalty of the
American people – on the contrary,” Netanyahu said. “You would have to
be crazy not to do that.”
When
asked whether the ultimate goal is to reduce the aid to zero, he
responded: “Yes. It is a dramatic change, and it is already underway.”
That was then, this is now: Democrats' rhetoric now reverses the attitude they had under the Obama Administration, when his official policy asserted that immigration agents face “dangerous situations" that sometimes require “split-second decisions” to employ force.
After an immigration
officer shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis who federal authorities
say tried to use her car as a weapon, Democrats are saying the officer
used excessive and improper force.
This break is a 180 degree turn from the attitude they had
under the Obama Administration, when official policy asserted that
immigration agents face “dangerous situations" that sometimes require
“split-second decisions” to employ force.
That earlier policy — lauded by Democrats — even outlined
how agents were expected to react to situations where the driver of a
vehicle puts an officer’s life in danger, according to memos reviewed
by Just the News.
The officer-involved shooting on Wednesday took place
during an Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation in the city.
When officers ordered a woman — subsequently identified as Renee Good —
to exit her vehicle which was blocking the road, video footage shows
the woman briefly reversed and then accelerated, hitting one officer.
That officer fired several times into the vehicle, striking the woman.
Good later died of her injuries.
ICE sees action as "defensive shots"
New close-up footage filmed by the ICE agent
who fired the shots shows that Good appears to have pointed her car
towards the agent and accelerated, hitting him as he fired into the
vehicle. The footage was obtained and released by Alpha News, a local Minnesota outlet.
Jonathan Ross has been identified as the ICE agent who shot Good and took the video. Ross was also previously dragged
by a vehicle in an attempted arrest of an illegal immigrant last year.
After freeing himself from the vehicle and being taken to a hospital,
Ross received 33 stitches, Just the News reported.
Homeland Security Secretary Noem in a press conference
on Wednesday laid out why the administration believes the use of force
was justified. “This appears as an attempt to kill or to cause bodily
harm to agents, an act of domestic terrorism,” Noem said.
The ICE agent responded by firing "defensive shots," and “used his
training to save his own life and that of his colleagues,” she added.
But, local officials, especially Minneapolis Mayor Jacob
Frey, a Democrat, argued on Wednesday that the video evidence released
at that point clearly shows that the officer did not fire in
self-defense.
Democrats insist that it wasn't self-defense
“So, they are already trying to spin this as an action of
self-defense. Having seen the video of myself, I want to tell everybody
directly that is bullshit,” Frey said at a press conference. “This was an agent recklessly using power that resulted in somebody dying, getting killed.”
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz said that the State Bureau of Criminal Apprehension would investigate the incident in parallel
to the federal investigation. So far, federal law enforcement has
refused to cooperate with local officials in the probe of the
shooting.
Obama-era policy sympathetic to "split-second decisions" with moving vehicles
During the Obama administration, Customs and Border Patrol —
a close partner organization of ICE, also under the Homeland Security
Department umbrella — released new guidelines for agents on the use of
force. The memorandum was sympathetic to the dangers that border patrol
agents face every day and noted that sometimes the job requires quick
decisions in “rapidly evolving” situations, sometimes necessitating use
of force.
“The dangerous situations you encounter require you to make
split-second decisions in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and
rapidly evolving,” then-Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol Michael J.
Fisher wrote in the March 2014 memo. “U.S. Border Patrol agents are among the most frequently assaulted law enforcement personnel in the country.”
The memo shows
that in 2014, the chief at the time also issued a new directive on the
use of force in incidents involving the driver of a vehicle. “In
accordance with CBP’s Use of Force policy, agents shall not discharge
their firearms at a moving vehicle unless the agent has reasonable
belief, based on the totality of the circumstances that deadly force is
being used against an agent or another person present.” The memo adds
that “[Such] deadly force may include a moving vehicle aimed at agents
or others present, but would not include a moving vehicle fleeing from
agents.”
Later, under the Biden administration, the guidelines have been superseded by further instructions, the latest of which were promulgated in 2023. Homeland Security’s standards for the use of force track closely with that earlier iteration.
Justifying deadly force under Biden
“LEOs may use force only when no reasonably effective,
safe, and feasible alternative appears to exist and may use only the
level of force that is objectively reasonable in light of the facts and
circumstances confronting the LEO at the time force is applied,” the newer guidelines, issued by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, explain.
Courts determine whether an officer’s use of force was
justified according to the objective reasonableness standard in Fourth
Amendment case law and is decided on a case by case basis.
The newer memo further explains that deadly force may be
used “only when necessary, that is when the LEO has a reasonable belief
that the subject of such force poses an imminent threat of death or
serious bodily injury to the LEO or to another person.”
Former federal agents told Just the News that,
based on the video evidence, the shooting will likely be ruled a
justified use of force by investigators. “In my mind, when I saw this, I
immediately said, ‘justified shooting,’” Jonathan Gilliam, a former FBI
special agent, Navy SEAL, and federal air marshal, told Just the News on Wednesday.
Art Del Cueto, Border Security Advisor at the Federation
for American Immigration Reform and a former border patrol agent with
more than 20 years of service, agreed that the shooting would likely be
ruled as justified.
He said investigators usually look for three things when
determining whether a use of deadly force was justified: “Did [the
suspect] have the means? Did they have the intent, and did they have the
'opportunity' to put officers in harm's way?"
“I think all those three things have been met when they were attacking a federal agent,” Del Cueto told Just the News on Wednesday.
State charges against officer still possible
Del Cueto added that it is possible that local or state
authorities may bring charges against the agent, using their own
interpretation of the facts in the case. “Knowing their political
leanings, they're now going to be able to indict, they're going to be
able to say, ‘hey, there's enough evidence there to form a bigger case,’
and then you don't know how long that case is going to sit on their
desk,” Del Cueto said.
“So, in a situation like this, it could very well put this
agent in what we call the rubber gun squad, which means he'll be sitting
there waiting for local authorities to finish their case, and that
whole time he won't be out in the field. So this could be a very worn
out and long process.”
Officer's "immunity" under debate, but a judge's opinion is the one that counts
Social media is for the moment, a dust storm of thousands
of people insisting that Ross does not have immunity. An article from
self-described progressive outlet American Prospect
saying "the law clearly stipulates that federal agents do not have
universal immunity" has been widely circulated as authoritative.
"Officers are not entitled to absolute immunity as a matter
of law,” said Timothy Sini, a former federal prosecutor in New York, told CNN.
Sini added that if the federal agent is charged in the state, he can
seek to move the matter to federal court and raise immunity arguments.
The federal judge would then have to conduct a two-part
test to determine if the officer enjoys immunity for the action. The
judge first determines whether the agent was acting as part of his
official duties. Next, the judge will assess whether the action was
reasonable based on the circumstances on the ground, he told CNN.
“At every step of the way, (reasonableness is) essentially
what you’re determining,” Sini told the outlet. “And what is objectively
reasonable under the particular circumstances is evaluated from the
perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene and turns on those
facts known to the officer at the precise moment.”
