All the Way with RFK Jr. - Steve Gruber

 

by Steve Gruber

In his endorsement of President Trump, RFK answers the call to make America great again.

 

When the richest man in the world and the namesake of a man with a rich history in American politics come together, when the former is a billionaire and a former immigrant to America and the latter is the grandson of a multimillionaire, the son of a senator, and the nephew of a president, when the two are Elon Musk and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the public takes note. When a veteran and a former congresswoman, who is also no longer a Democrat, joins them, when Tulsi Gabbard joins Musk and Kennedy in endorsing President Trump, voters take note.

Because all three are independents, because they think and speak for themselves, because they are free of the Democrat Party, and because they stand with President Trump, in defense of freedom, they represent a new dawn—a new day—for members of both parties. RFK Jr.’s speech is a testament to this new beginning because in suspending his campaign and endorsing President Trump, Kennedy proves he is a man of courage. By campaigning with President Trump, Kennedy proves he is a man of principle.

On the other side stands the antidemocratic party of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.

In contrast to these two, in contrast to a hack like Harris and a lackey like Walz, stands America’s party.

In Kennedy stands a man who transcends party loyalty.

In Kennedy stands a man who refuses to be a party to the fast undoing of liberty at home and restraint abroad.

If you have not listened to or read Kennedy’s speech, please do.

The speech is a declaration of independence—a statement of purpose—regarding the need to dissolve the political bands that have connected Americans to the Democrat Party.

The speech is also a tribute to President Kennedy’s maxim that sometimes party loyalty asks too much.

By detailing the decline and fall of the Democrat Party, explaining how the party does not represent the interests of workers or work for the good of the national interest, mourning the party’s war on freedom and its insistence on waging war against Russia—by making the case against the Democrat Party, RFK Jr. makes the case for President Trump.

The speech is not spiteful in the least.

The speech is poignant and personal with regard to the Democrat Party, and profound, inspiring, and universal with regard to liberty and justice for all.

That Democrats have responded to the speech with a series of personal attacks against Kennedy, that Kennedy’s own siblings have attacked him too, that the attacks accuse Kennedy of being everything from a drug dealer to a psychotic—all this proves Kennedy’s point: that the religion of politics, which is the official religion of the Democrat Party, is a faith without mercy and a creed without virtue.

That the media has also attacked Kennedy, that CNN cut away as he indicted the media for inaccurate and irresponsible reporting—for deliberately not reporting the truth about Covid or China or Ukraine or Russia—proves Kennedy’s point about the media: that we do not have an independent and unbiased press.

In defending the First Amendment, Kennedy reveals the through line between speech and action, between words and deeds.

Kennedy shows how a party at war with the First Amendment is the enemy of putting America first. He explains how the Democrat Party’s opposition to free speech is essential to—it is the basis of—its support of perpetual war: that censorship is a prerequisite for the wars Joe Biden wants and Kamala Harris wants others to fight.

In making the case against the forever wars of Biden and Harris, Kennedy shows how the Democrat Party is the enemy of peace.

In making the case against war with Russia, in making the case with facts—with reason—instead of insults or aspersions, Kennedy shows what it means to be a statesman. He shows what it means to analyze a situation instead of inflaming it. Most importantly, he shows what it means to the people of Ukraine and Russia—what it means to see the flower of Ukraine and the youth of Russia die in the Donbas; what it means to see an entire generation die for nothing.

Never has a Democrat sounded as pro-life as RFK Jr.

Never has the Democrat Party sounded less pro-peace than it does now.

Never has Joe Biden, who likes to sound like JFK and RFK to the point of plagiarizing them, sounded more like the lesser man; a man unworthy of the White House and unfit to anoint anyone as his successor.

At the same time, never has a speaker sounded more like a Democrat in the tradition of President Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy Sr.

In his call to get America moving again, in his call to get Americans moving so they may be active and fit, RFK Jr. leads by example.

In his endorsement of President Trump, RFK answers the call to make America great again.

In contrast, the Democrat Party calls for more of the worst: more censorship, more war, more crime, more illness, more inflation, more division.

Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Tim Walz have the audacity to believe they have the right to speak to us. And so, they condescend to us; they patronize us; they speak down to us. They would be wise to listen to us instead.

Biden, Harris and Walz would be wise to listen to what RFK Jr. has to say. But because they are too proud to stop talking and too selfish to let anyone else speak, they do not know how tiresome and absurd they sound.

We know better, not because we think we are always right but because we know some things—things like liberty and security—are constants; the two together are always just.

The two must always be one.

RFK Jr. knows this, as does President Trump.

The two, Kennedy and Trump, know we have a right to be free.

They also know we cannot be free unless we are safe.

Liberty and security, freedom and safety—the two are the lifeblood of democracy.

No wonder the two are foreign to the Democrat Party.

No wonder the two have an ally in RFK Jr. and a champion in President Trump.

***

Steve Gruber is the host of America’s Voice Live, which airs daily on Real America’s Voice TV

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2024/08/27/all-the-way-with-rfk-jr/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

IDF rescues Israeli-Bedouin hostage Qaid Farhan Alkadi from Hamas captivity in southern Gaza - Yonah Jeremy Bob

 

by Yonah Jeremy Bob

The IDF said they had already gathered some intelligence from Alkadi, both in the field and at Soroka Medical Center.

 

Rescued hostage Qaid Farhan Alkadi arrives via IDF helicopter to Soroka Medical center.

(photo credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)

The IDF and the Shin Bet on Tuesday early afternoon rescued Israeli-Bedouin hostage Qaid Farhan Alkadi, who was held by Hamas since October 7 from Mivtachim in the South, from a tunnel in Rafah.

🚁WATCH the first moments of rescued hostage Qaid Farhan Alkadi back on Israeli soil on his way to reunite with his family after 326 days in Hamas captivity. pic.twitter.com/XH0F6Qb8SV

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) August 27, 2024

The circumstances of his rescue are complex and remain open to interpretation.

The hostage’s name is Qaid Farhan Alkadi, age 52, from Rahat, father of 11 children.  

The IDF has updated that it was searching for hostages in the area for a significant period of time.

Further, the IDF has confirmed that when it broke through parts of the tunnel complex into the tunnel room where Alkadi was being kept, which has been reported as being 20 meters deep, he was not being guarded at that moment.

There are different interpretations about whether Alkadi might have been able to escape on his own, given that he was not being guarded, or whether he could not have broken out of the room where he was being held without the IDF finding him.

Rescued hostage Qaid Farhan Alkadi reunited with his family at Soroka Medical Center after over 300 days of captivity. (credit: screenshot via X/ section 27a copyright act)

The operation was led by Division 162, Brigade 401, the Nahal Brigade. Yahalom anti-tunnel special forces, along with the Shayetet 13 naval commandos.

Alkadi is healthy and is undergoing further health checks at Soroka Medical Center.

The IDF said that they had already gathered some intelligence from al-Kaadi both in the field and at Soroka.

IDF Chief Spokesman Daniel Hagari refused to share any details about the battle to free the hostage and how many Hamas forces it confronted, potentially suggesting that there are additional goals which may be achieved on an ongoing basis later Tuesday.

Questioned about whether Alkadi partially succeeded in escaping on his own, though with later aid by the IDF, Hagari did not deny the possibility, but did not confirm it and warned about informational security.

It is the fourth successful operation to rescue live Israeli hostages from Hamas, though there have been several successful operations finding and returning dozens of bodies of hostages killed by Hamas.

He is the eighth live hostage rescued from Gaza, which brings the number of remaining hostages down to 108 from an original round of 250.

Alkadi is the first live hostage to be rescued from a tunnel, with all prior live hostage rescues taking place above ground.

Top brass commends the rescue

Prime Minister Benjamin Benjamin Netanyahu praised the rescue, saying,

"Welcome back home, Qaid Farhan Alkadi. I commend the IDF and the Shin Bet for yet another successful rescue operation. We are tirelessly working to bring all our captives home."

"We are doing this through two main approaches: negotiation and rescue operations. Both methods require our military presence on the ground and continuous military pressure on Hamas."

"We will continue to act this way until we bring everyone home," he concluded.

IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Herzi Halevi said, "We do everything we can to save hostages. The IDF and the Shin Bet showed courage, determination, and taking initiative in a complex operation."

Likewise, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant praised the success of the operation and said the IDF would continue with such daring operations.

The Big reveal

Transporation Minister Miri Regev also praised the rescue on x, saying, " I commend the IDF and Shin Bet for the rescue of [Qaid] farhad Alkadi. Welcome home. This is another instance justifying our correct choice to enter Rafah. We will continue to operate until we return all of our hostages."

Transportation Minister Miri Regev reveals that the rescue operation took place in Rafah despite not being cleared by the IDF censor. (credit: SCREENSHOT/X)

'We will not take lessons in humanity from the UN and will continue to fight and apply unrelenting pressure, military and political, until all of our hostages return," her post concluded.

The post was controversial and caused a stir in Israeli media, as the location of the operation was kept under wraps by IDF censor and was not cleared for publication.

The post was deleted after more than half an hour.

Yonah Jeremy Bob

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-816613

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Democrats’ Mixed Messages - Christopher Roach

 

by Christopher Roach

We should always remember for all the talk of Our Democracy™, they oppose Trump because he aims to undo this arrangement, restore accountability, and transfer power back to the American people.

 

 

Bearing my cross like the good book counsels us to do, I watched most of the Democratic National Convention last week. Reflecting the party as a whole, it was a mélange of mixed messages.

Back in 2020, the party’s leaders intervened during the primary in order to stop a Bernie Sanders’ victory. Right before Super Tuesday, they rallied around Joe Biden, the excuse being that he could win because he was a likable moderate from Pennsylvania.

Close to the working man and filled with empathy, this invented campaign persona bore little resemblance to Biden or his presidency. It was a classic “bait and switch.” Once in office, he quickly revealed that he was not really up to the task, and he turned the keys over to the highly ideological and cunning bureaucrats running the federal agencies.

He also opened up the gates of federal spending, continuing COVID stimulus payments long after they ceased to be necessary. This all contributed greatly to persistent inflation.

Are These Good Times or Bad?

One problem with the entire narrative of the DNC is that the Democrats can’t decide if we’re in trouble or if things are hunky dory. Sometimes they say the economy is great and that we are all too dumb to notice, but they also say that the middle class is being destroyed and they’re going to help people pursue the American Dream. Kamala has a list of things she is going to do on “day one” to help the middle class, but she does not have a good explanation for why they have not been done already.

Because of the inherent contradictions in their account of the recent past—particularly the meaning of Biden’s term—they have retreated into schlock. In speaker after speaker at the DNC, a gauzy sentimentalism ruled the day. Michelle Obama, Barack Obama, and Tim Walz all talked about “civility” and “joy” and “family” and “how far the country has come.” Who can argue with that?

Barack Obama said he wants to “return to an America where we work together and look out for each other,” seemingly oblivious to his role in destroying national unity by cheering on Black Lives Matter extremists beginning in 2014. Michelle Obama spoke about how “all children, all people have value. That anyone can succeed [in America] if given the opportunity.” Tim Walz added his own glittering generalities, expressing his “commitment to the common good, an understanding that we’re all in this together, and the belief that a single person can make a real difference for their neighbors.”

These sentimental remarks were sometimes interspersed with radicalism, but the radicalism was always accompanied by a big smile. Michelle Obama claimed that “no one has a monopoly on what it means to be an American,” meaning, I suppose, that whoever swims across the Rio Grande or overstays a visa can decide for himself. Tim Walz said, “I believe in the Second Amendment, but I also believe our first responsibility is to keep our kids safe.” In plain English, he is coming for the AR-15. What does the Second Amendment even mean to people like this?

The rhetoric was empty and banal all around, but I’ll concede most of the speakers delivered their remarks well, particularly the Obamas, in notable contrast to the last four garbled years under Biden and the impending rhetorical catastrophe whenever Kamala is untethered from a teleprompter.

Democrats’ Policies Contribute to Disunity and Incivility

Multiple speakers emphasized the fraying bonds of community that once buffered partisan excess. But these remarks had a deceptive quality. It is as though Democrats want to paper over the radical changes that the left has inflicted on our public morality and recast the conservative rear-guard opposition as revolutionary.

They changed laws on marriage, added unassimilable aliens from Somalia and Afghanistan to previously safe neighborhoods, conducted social engineering via school bussing, foisted soft-on-crime policies in cities, attacked our basic understanding of who is male and female, and sent a huge portion of our industrial base to China. Responding to COVID, they stopped people from going to church and school, set up snitch lines to enforce restrictions, and made people get vaccines under threat of losing their jobs and pensions while making exceptions for the Antifa and Black Lives Matter fanatics to riot for George Floyd.

Then, after a year of left-wing violence in cities like Seattle, Portland, and Minneapolis, they threw the book at grandma for peaceful civil disobedience on January 6 and followed up with a military occupation of Washington, D.C.

When Bill Clinton led his party to power as a New Democrat in 1992, substantive policy changes were at the heart of his campaign, particularly in the primary. He was no Mondale or Dukakis; rather, he was for the death penalty, critical of the welfare system, embraced free trade, and supported a strong military. Similarly, Trump loosened up his party’s orthodoxy on free trade and foreign policy and emphasized new issues like immigration. He redefined the GOP’s center and moved it closer to the country’s.

By contrast, the latest display is all about the packaging. The Democrats are selling a narrative, a story. But their policies are as radical as ever, including child sex changes, price controls, defunding the police, reparations, and open borders.

Regardless of which side you’re on, it is a fiction to pretend we’re all “basically for the same things” or “have more in common than not.” I saw a freak show in the DNC, and I do not want what these people want. But I also noticed they were clever enough to recast their freakishness and cultural radicalism as the natural evolution of mundane beliefs rooted in the American tradition.

“Let’s Be Nice” Plus “Trump is Evil Incarnate”

Alongside all these appeals to unity, community, and other nice-sounding things, there was a lot of venom for Trump and his supporters. For them, he is the apotheosis of evil: divisive, dishonest, racist, sexist, selfish, venal, a draft dodger, greedy, and all the rest.

They painted him as a would-be dictator without really reconciling this account with the mostly normal way he governed. One state senator from Michigan said he would unleash the FBI and DOJ on his political opponents—as if Barack Obama did not do exactly that against Trump. Since supporters identify so closely with Trump—similar to the way Democrats did with Obama but not with Biden—there is a risk this backfires and is felt by many as a divisive, personal attack along the lines of Hillary’s “basket of deplorables.”

Other than projecting a faux enthusiasm for the previously unremarkable Kamala Harris, it does not seem much at this convention will inspire or move those in the middle. A policy agenda was hard to divine amid the many snide remarks about Trump, and the emotional tone seems likely to alienate men and only appeal to the most committed true believers.

In other words, the speakers demonstrated little understanding of why Trump appealed to people as a disruptor of a corrupt system under which they were not rewarded.

Trump’s policies, particularly on trade and immigration, actually helped the middle class. His critics have implied that Trump is uncaring and selfish, but he is literally risking his life, his freedom, and his wealth by pursuing the presidency. This is the only reason he is now subject to multiple bogus criminal and civil proceedings, as well as a nearly successful assassination attempt.

This kind of determination and coolness under pressure naturally commands respect.

Kamala’s Performative Normalcy

Kamala matched the tone of the rest of the convention. In her delivery, she did better than I had previously seen. She appeared confident and comfortable, and her trademark vocal fry was absent. She spoke lovingly of her parents, her middle-class upbringing by a single mother after her parents’ divorce, and of her great love of America and its opportunities.

She left some things out, though. I noticed she did not mention that half of her childhood was spent in Montreal, Canada. Also, she did not once use the words “black” or “African” or “HCBU” or “Howard” to describe herself or tell her story. She painted herself as a cosmopolitan all-American girl, not as the champion of a particular American racial group. This was smart.

Moving to her career, she touted her days as a tough prosecutor, vindicating the rights of regular people and children. But she mostly failed to identify any significant accomplishments as senator or vice president. Her discussions of policy were all vague in the extreme; she would “be a president for all Americans” and “chart a new way forward.”

Her attacks on Trump were typical of other speakers and filled with falsehoods, such as, “When politicians in his own party begged him to call off the mob and send help, he did the opposite. He fanned the flames.” No, he told people not to be violent.

She tried to paint him as selfish and out for himself, which is impossible to reconcile with the great risk and personal cost the presidency and this race have cost him.

She had little intelligent to say about inflation, which is on voters’ minds. She also tried to recast herself as a patriotic protector of the border, even though it has been a sieve letting in unvetted trash from the third world for the entirety of Biden’s presidency.

She showed herself to be a complete establishment hack on the issues that matter: inflation, crime, trade, immigration, and foreign policy. She praised NATO and made it clear she wants our country to continue to be entangled with the rest of the world, a global empire masquerading as “leadership” for others in an “enduring struggle between democracy and tyranny.” For Kamala and the D.C. establishment, the Cold War never ended, Iraq and Afghanistan were success stories, and prolonging the war against Gaza and Ukraine is somehow leadership. We are never told how this benefits Americans.

I do not expect the convention changed much. It did show who the Democrats are and who Kamala wants to be. Like Biden, she will be a defender of the establishment and of business-as-usual. Her demographics will be different, but the policies will be the same. She would serve as a figurehead for the Deep State and the unelected bureaucrats who really run the country.

We should always remember for all the talk of Our Democracy™ and norms, they oppose Trump so vociferously because he aims to undo this arrangement, restore accountability, and transfer that power back to the American people.

***

Christopher Roach is an adjunct fellow of the Center for American Greatness and an attorney in private practice based in Florida. He is a double graduate of the University of Chicago and has previously been published by The Federalist, Takimag, Chronicles, the Washington Legal Foundation, the Marine Corps Gazette, and the Orlando Sentinel. The views presented are solely his own.

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2024/08/27/the-democrats-mixed-messages/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Important New Poll Reveals Most Americans Know China Is Funding the Fentanyl Murder of More than 100,000 Americans Each Year - Lawrence Kadish

 

by Lawrence Kadish

Having lost a generation, a nation, and an empire to opium introduced by Imperial Britain during the 1800s, no one knows better than the Chinese that a drug scourge can bring a country literally to its knees.

 

(Image source: iStock/Getty Images)

In a recent national poll, more than half of responding Americans believe that China is deliberately exporting fentanyl to the United States for the purpose of harming, or even destabilizing our nation.

Were that true, some might reasonably describe that strategy as an act of war.

For China, it would be historic payback time.

Having lost a generation, a nation, and an empire to opium introduced by Imperial Britain during the 1800s, no one knows better than the Chinese that a drug scourge can bring a country literally to its knees.

So, it should not surprise anyone that they have become a center of illicit fentanyl manufacturing, with drug traffickers exporting the killing chemical to the one nation China must strategically injure if they are to make good on their intent to dominate the rest of the 21^st Century: the United States. More than simply turning a blind eye to those who are creating the drugs, the U.S. House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party reported this spring that China is directly supporting the creation of fentanyl and other drugs by offering "tax rebates and other financial benefits" to those manufacturers, as long as those drugs are sold outside of China:

"According to the report, Chinese officials encourage production of precursor chemicals by giving 'monetary grants and awards to companies openly trafficking illicit fentanyl materials.'"

One does not have to be a CIA analyst to appreciate the "why" behind such an action.

The cause and effect have not been lost on the American public. That recent poll, undertaken by the nationally respected polling company McLaughlin & Associates, revealed that a stunning 52.4 percent of Americans suspect that the Chinese are exporting the deadly drug for the specific purpose of destabilizing our society. Some 19.4% disagreed and 28.3% did not have an opinion.

When asked if our diplomatic relations with China should be dependent on Beijing shutting down those fentanyl mills, 54.5 percent of those polled emphatically said yes, while 21.3% said no and 24.2% did not know one way or the other.

The national survey also revealed that more than a third of Americans know someone whose life has been harmed or taken by fentanyl. More than some dry accountant's statistic, when approximately 100 million Americans know first-hand how this drug is destroying lives, then it is time to recognize the extent of the crisis. To underscore the threat, medical authorities say 2023 saw more than 112,000 fentanyl-related deaths in our nation. They warn that it has been more pervasive than the crack and opioid epidemics of the past.

While our two major party presidential candidates currently address issues that range from inflation to the border crisis, they need to be prepared to speak to this calculated assault on our nation, our society, and our future. They need to state what direct and affirmative action they will take if assuming occupancy of the Oval Office to make it clear to China that more than tariffs, sanctions or exports, our relationship with China will be judged by how and when they shut down this flow of poison.

Ironically, this poll is being released at a time when U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan is in Beijing to try and improve the contentious relationship between our two countries.

There is no public acknowledgement that China's fentanyl assault on the United States will be on their agenda, but it needs to be. Few nations know better than China what drugs can do to a society. They still reflect on what they describe as a "century of humiliation" created by the introduction of opium into their empire.

It is clear they believe it is now America's turn.

Lawrence Kadish serves on the Board of Governors of Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20907/china-funding-fentanyl-murders

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Microphone dispute threatens September presidential debate - Terrance Kible

 

by Terrance Kible

Trump wants microphones muted during non-designated speaking times, but Harris disagrees

 

The Trump campaign is stirring up speculation that the September 10 presidential debate on ABC will not occur. Former President Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, raised concerns over a microphone rule dispute with the Harris campaign.

The Trump campaign has called for microphones to be muted except during a candidate's turn to speak, as was the rule during Trump's CNN debate with President Joe Biden, CNN reported.

Trump criticized the "biased" ABC network on Sunday, complaining on his Truth Social platform about "Trump Haters."  

"Why would I do the Debate against Kamala Harris on that network?" he asked.

Vice President Kamala Harris's campaign has requested unmuted microphones during the entire debate.

"We have told ABC and other networks seeking to host a possible October debate that we believe both candidates' mics should be live throughout the full broadcast," Brian Fallon, spokesman for the Democratic nominee, said in a statement.

"Our understanding is that Trump's handlers prefer the muted microphone because they don't think their candidate can act presidential for 90 minutes on his own," Fallon added. "We suspect Trump's team has not even told their boss about this dispute because it would be too embarrassing to admit they don't think he can handle himself against Vice President Harris without the benefit of a mute button."

Trump's campaign said it agreed to the ABC debate with Harris as the nominee with the understanding ABC would use the CNN rules from the Trump-Biden debate.

"Enough with the games. We accepted the ABC debate under the exact same terms as the CNN debate," Jason Miller, a Trump campaign senior advisor, said in a statement. "The Harris camp, after having already agreed to the CNN rules, asked for a seated debate, with notes, and opening statements. We said no changes to the agreed upon rules."

"Interesting that this is only coming up now that the Harris campaign has started their debate prep," Miller added. "Even their own campaign spokesman said the debate about debates was over. Clearly they're seeing something they don’t like."

 
Terrance Kible

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/polling/microphone-dispute-threatens-september-presidential-debate

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Survey Shows Majority of Muslim College Students Hate Jews - Daniel Greenfield

 

by Daniel Greenfield

65% of Muslim students either hate Jews or Israel.

 

[Order Daniel Greenfield’s new book, Domestic Enemies: HERE.]

Campus antisemitism is a problem, but reports focus on the experiences of Jewish students rather than the identity of the perpetrators. Media reports hesitate to name anyone. Jewish organizations zero in on campus hate groups like Students for Justice in Palestine, but that only tells us so much about why antisemitism has become so widespread at certain universities.

Brandeis University’s Center for Modern Jewish Studies recently conducted a survey asking college students about their views of Jews and Israel. And the results are revealing.

66% of students, the vast majority, did not hate Jews or Israel.

While leftist students only make up 14% of overall students (less than the 17% who identify as conservative), they made up a full 43% of students who were hostile to Israel. The remaining 46% of those hostile to the Jewish State identified as “liberal”. Those activists associated with campus encampments and other forms of harassment are a small minority of leftist extremists who have used student organizations and political complicity to wield disproportionate power.

Liberal Jews have embraced diversity as the solution to hate, but diversity causes antisemitism.

White students were surveyed as the least likely to hate Jews. Twice as many black, Hispanic and Asian students as white students ranked as “hostile to Jews”. While black students were slightly ahead in the small “extremely hostile” group, Asians were slightly more hostile to Jews than any other minority group. This may reflect academic competition between Jewish and Asian students, Chinese government support for Hamas or some Muslim students being grouped together with Asians.

Only 10% of white students were hostile to Jews, however 23% of Asian, 22% of black and 22% of Hispanic students were hostile to Jews. That meant they agreed with statements such as “Jewish people talk about the Holocaust just to further their political agenda” and “Jews should be held accountable for Israel’s actions”. 26% potentially held favorable views of Hamas.

And that brings us back to the question of which group of students hates Jews the most.

Christian students were overall the least hateful toward Jews and Israel. (4% of Christians were more antisemitic than the average but this may reflect the inclusion of some minority students or the impact of ‘Groypers’ and other social media influencers like Candace Owens.)

72% of Christian students, 65% of atheists and agnostics and 60% of ‘other religion’ students were not hostile to Jews or Israel, so that majorities of every belief system were not antisemitic.

Muslim students were the only group where the numbers were the exact opposite.

65% of Muslim students either hated Jews or Israel. Only 29% were non-hostile.

These numbers represent a complete break from those of any other group. No single group on campus, even leftists, hates Jews nearly as much as Muslims do.

Revealingly, more Muslims hate Jews than hate Israel.

36% of Muslim students, over a third, hated Jews, 29% hated Israel, and 6% hated both making it clear that this is not about politics, territory or Gaza: it’s really about Islamic antisemitism.

The wholly artificial distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism falls apart here as it has throughout the general normalization of assaults and harassment of Jews after Oct 7.

Not even a third of Muslim students were tolerant of Jews. What does this mean on campus?

While hard data on Muslim demographics at universities with the largest antisemitism problems are hard to find and even more difficult to break down, we know that Muslim student populations have increased sharply, in some cases doubling within a decade. Muslims now make up 2% of the students at the University of California, 3.7% of Yale’s undergrads, 2.4% of Princeton seniors, 2.7% of students at the University of Michigan, and 3.6% at colleges overall.

These may be relatively small percentages (and some are out of date) but they represent over 75,000 students concentrated at key campuses. A previous survey found that encampments and other pro-terrorist activity has been concentrated at elite universities. Some of those same universities draw in large number of Jewish and Muslim students. What does it mean when a disproportionately antisemitic group grows its share of the student population?

The growing Muslim student demographics lead directly to hostile campuses for Jews.

At Harvard, the number of Muslim students in the freshmen class increased from 2.6% in 2013 to 3.9% in 2021. During that same period, the number of Jewish students fell by 2%. Would the harassment of Jewish students at Harvard have played out the same way if the number of Muslim students hadn’t been rising and the number of Jewish students weren’t falling?

At Yale, the number of Muslim students doubled from 1.5% in the oughts to over 3% in the previous decade. During this same period, the Jewish student body also declined.

Muslim immigration, sharp population growth and foreign students are changing campus demographics. A decade ago, there were twice as many Jewish students as Muslim students at UCLA. The numbers are likely reversed now. And that helps explain what happened on campus.

The sustained harassment of Jewish students is not just ideological, it’s racial and religious.

Ideological leftist opposition to Israel has come together with the traditional Islamic antipathy to Jews, and the propensity toward dislike of Jews among more ‘diverse’ minority groups in an alliance of hate. Political extremism, support for terrorism and antisemitism have come together in a toxic atmosphere where Communist and Hezbollah flags fly side by side and black nationalist and third worldist academics explain why Hamas and Oct 7 are progressive.

Muslim students and Islamist organizations tie together an alliance between white leftists who want to destroy America, Europe and Israel, as well as some black, Latino and Asian students who ethnically and racially detest Jews by drawing on the destructive tendencies of both worlds.

Where white people have learned to feel guilty about hating others, minority ethnic nationalists take pride in their racism. Critical race theory, third world discourse and orientalism are just ideological permission structures for bigotry. The moral inversion of terrorism turned the Marxist and then Islamic perpetrators into victims and the victims into perpetrators who had it coming.

Islamic nationalism, hate and even genocide are portrayed as moral because they are the work of the oppressed even if the oppressed are a racist, totalitarian majority of over a billion people persecuting not only Jews and Christians, but also Buddhists, Hindus and nearly every religion.

While anti-Zionist discourse pretends that Israel was created and sustained by a few European immigrants, the majority of Israel’s population (and the vast majority of its nationalist voters who have kept Netanyahu in power) are Middle Eastern Jewish refugees fleeing Muslim oppression.

Muslim antisemitism is why Israel exists and why it’s still subjected to Islamic terrorism.

The same hate faced by Jewish students on campus led a million Jews to flee Muslim countries for Israel, America, France and other parts of the free world. That hatred is not a response to Gaza, to the Six Day War or to any events more recent than the rise of Islam.

Islamic antisemitism is at the heart of the Koran and Islamic scripture. Islam was born in part out of the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arabia. And it teaches that Jews are its primal enemies.

Muslim students are far more hostile to Jews than any other group of students because of religious prejudice. That prejudice has been around for over 1,000 years of Islamic oppression and will not disappear no matter what negotiations take place in the Middle East.

Liberal Jews have long championed diversity, but a diverse population is statistically more antisemitic. Combining diversity with a free pass for bigotry aimed at the ideologically deserving white people and Jews is turning university campuses into no-go zones for Jews.

And what’s true of campuses is also true of American cities.

The multicultural and immigration policies of liberal Jewish organizations led directly to this crisis. It’s time for them to look at the numbers and do the math before it’s too late.

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.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/survey-shows-majority-of-muslim-college-students-hate-jews/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Former Democrat Rep. Gabbard endorses Trump - Natalia Mittelstadt

 

by Natalia Mittelstadt

"We saw first term in the presidency when he not only didn't start any new wars, he took action to deescalate and wars," Tulsi Gabbard said.

 

Former Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard on Monday endorsed GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump during a National Guard conference in battleground Michigan in which she praised Trump for his foreign policy as president.

"I'm committed to doing all that I can to send President Trump back to the White House, where he once again serve us as our commander in chief," said the retired Hawaii congresswoman and former Democratic presidential candidate who served in Iraq and Kuwait. 

"I know that President Trump understands the grave responsibility that a president bears for every single one of our lives, whether you're a soldier, you're an airman, a marine sailor or a Coastie, he keeps us in his heart, in the decisions that he makes," Gabbard said. 

"We saw first term in the presidency when he not only didn't start any new wars, he took action to deescalate and wars. ... As we head towards our decision as a country in November, the same cannot be about Kamala Harris," Gabbard said about Vice President Kamala Harris, who is now the Democratic presidential nominee.

During the conference, Trump pointed out the day marked the third anniversary of 13 U.S. service members being killed in a terrorist attack at the Kabul airport during the final U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan, under the Biden administration.

"Should have taken the soldiers out last," Trump said of the chaotic withdrawal. "They took the soldiers out first ... at our expense and our reputation. We will never forget those brave soldiers who made the supreme sacrifice for our country. ... The humiliation in Afghanistan set off the collapse of American credibility and respect."

Before Gabbard's endorsement, Trump also said: "I don't think we've ever been closer to World War III that we are right now."

Natalia Mittelstadt

Source: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/tulsi-gabbard-endorses-trump-national-guard-association-conference

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Mark Zuckerberg admits Biden administration 'pressured' Facebook to censor Americans - Misty Severi

 

by Misty Severi

Zuckerberg explained that the Biden administration pressured his team for months in 2021 to censor "certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire, and expressed a lot of frustration with our team when we didn't agree."

 

Meta Platforms CEO and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg admitted on Monday that the Biden administration "repeatedly pressured" his team for months in 2021 to censor content related to COVID-19, including content from ordinary Americans.

Zuckerberg responded to questions from the House Judiciary Committee, explaining the moderation of online content on social media platforms, including addressing reports that the Biden administration tried to censor multiple social media companies.

"There's a lot of talk right now, about how the U.S. government interacts with companies like Meta, and I want to be clear about our position," Zuckerberg said in a letter to the committee. "Our platforms are for everyone -- we're about promoting speech and helping people connect in a safe and secure way." 

Zuckerberg explained that the Biden administration pressured his team for months in 2021 to censor "certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire, and expressed a lot of frustration with our team when we didn't agree." 

The CEO admitted that the company made the ultimate decision on what to remove and when, stating that he owns up to the censorship, including on matters related to the COVID-19 global health emergency and pandemic.

"I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it," Zuckerberg continued. "I also think we made some choices that, with the benefit of hindsight and new information, we wouldn't make today."

The Facebook founder also admitted that Facebook demoted the Hunter Biden laptop story, because it was warned by the FBI about a potential Russian disinformation operation regarding Burisma and the Biden family leading into the 2020 election. 

"It's been since made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we should not have demoted the story," Zuckerberg said.

Zuckerberg said he has since changed the company's policies to not immediately demote a U.S. story while waiting for fact-checkers to confirm the authenticity of the report. 

The House Judiciary committee lauded the admission in a post to X, claiming that it was a "big win for free speech." 

Misty Severi is an evening news reporter for Just the News. You can follow her on X for more coverage.

Source: https://justthenews.com/nation/free-speech/mark-zuckerberg-admits-biden-administration-pressured-facebook-censor-americans

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Cairo negotiations break down as Israel, Hamas fail to reach compromise - David Isaac

 

by David Isaac

Off-and-on negotiations have continued for months with the United States, Egypt and Qatar acting as mediators.

 

A man posts photographs of the Israelis still being held captive in the Gaza Strip by Hamas terrorists at "Hostages Square" in Tel Aviv on March 4, 2024. Photo by Miriam Alster/Flash90.

The latest round of hostage negotiations ended without results as the Israeli delegation led by Mossad chief David Barnea returned home from Cairo on Sunday.

Off-and-on negotiations have continued for months with the United States, Egypt and Qatar acting as mediators. 

Ground down militarily in 10 months of hostilities, Hamas dropped a key demand in early July that any deal contain an Israeli guarantee of a permanent ceasefire. However, it still insists that Israel withdraw its forces from two key corridors in Gaza.

Israel, for its part, demands an ongoing Israel Defense Forces presence along the Philadelphi Corridor between Israel and Egypt. Cairo, which also opposes an Israeli presence there, insists it can police the corridor, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary as Israel has uncovered tunnel after tunnel running under the border, and in at least one case, directly under an Egyptian outpost.

Israel also insists on a continued IDF presence along the Netzarim Corridor, a four-mile long, east-west road that bisects the Gaza Strip. Israel says it needs to monitor the corridor to prevent armed terrorists from returning to the north of the Strip.

Related Articles

No impact of Hezbollah attacks on ‘constructive’ ceasefire talks, White House saysAugust 26, 2024

Schools, law enforcement need to work together to protect Jewish students, Federation head says August 26, 2024

Already under multi-state probe, MSCI allegedly penalizes Israeli banks that operate in Judea, SamariaAugust 26, 2024

The IDF has built four large outposts along Netzarim to house hundreds of soldiers, demonstrating its determination to maintain a permanent presence there, Ynet reported on Monday.

Israel’s government has highlighted its efforts to free the remaining 109 hostages captured by Hamas during its Oct. 7 invasion and massacre of 1,200 people.

“This is a national mission of the highest order,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Aug. 18.

“Up until now, Hamas has been completely obstinate. It did not even send a representative to the talks in Doha. Therefore, the pressure needs to be directed at Hamas and [Hamas leader Yahya] Sinwar, not the Government of Israel,” he added.

Despite the lack of progress in the latest round, the United States responded optimistically, calling it “constructive.” U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said Washington was working “feverishly” in Cairo to reach a hostage-ceasefire deal, Reuters reported.

However, senior Hamas official Osama Hamdan told Al-Aqsa TV, a Hamas-run channel, that “the American administration has sowed false hopes by talking about the sides on the verge of an agreement, and this for election purposes.”

Mediators tried to convince the sides to agree to a four-to-seven day humanitarian ceasefire to deliver polio vaccines and other medical equipment, Qatari newspaper Al-Araby Al-Jadid reported on Sunday.

Israel’s COGAT, the Defense Ministry unit which coordinates operations in the Gaza Strip, said on Sunday that over a million polio vaccines had already been delivered to the Gaza Strip through the Kerem Shalom crossing.

Hostages’ families have pushed for a deal, saying time is running out for their loved ones.

The families and former hostages met with Netanyahu on Friday for three hours. The meeting became heated as they blamed him for failing to bring about a deal.

“They’re dying, and every day you’re killing someone else,” said one former hostage, according to a leaked recording of the meeting aired by Channel 12. 

“You are the prime minister and you are responsible for the abductees, not Hamas and not anyone. You are supposed to reach a deal that will bring all the abductees [home],” said the daughter of one hostage.

“What deal? What deal is there?” Netanyahu responded.

“There’s a deal on the table,” she insisted.

“Whoever told you that there was a deal ready and that we didn’t take it for this reason or that reason, for personal reasons, it’s just a lie,” the prime minister said.

“To overcome an ideology, you have to use a lot of force, or eliminate it,” he said of Hamas, which he noted still insists on victory by demanding Israel leave the Strip and the Philadelphi Corridor.

He called Sinwar a “crazy man.”

In Sinwar, “We actually have a psychopath,” he said.

David Isaac

Source: https://www.jns.org/cairo-negotiations-break-down-as-israel-hamas-fail-to-reach-compromise/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Israel’s strategic offensive: Seizing the moment amid Iranian retaliation threats - opinion - Ilan Pomeranc

 

by Ilan Pomeranc

With Iran and its proxies hesitating, Israel takes decisive action to weaken its foes and shift the regional balance.

 

AN EXPLOSION takes place as Israeli strikes hit southern Lebanon on Sunday. The thinking goes that Hezbollah is in no position to fight a major war with Israel, says the writer.

(photo credit: REUTERS)

In anticipation of possible retaliation by Iran for the elimination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh – and given Hezbollah’s very significant attempt at retaliation (although relatively limited in scope) for the elimination of their de facto military chief Fuad Shukr – there are analysts and commentators who for weeks have been saying that the Iranians and their allies seek to act in a way that would avoid sparking a full-scale regional war.

The thinking goes that given Israel’s degrading of Hezbollah capabilities up to this point, including now a highly effective preemptive strike on numerous Hezbollah projectile launch sites, Iran’s central and most powerful proxy is in no position to fight a major war with the Nation of Jewish.

Add to this the growing discontent amongst Lebanon’s diverse Sunni population with Hezbollah’s actions and rhetoric, and it seems that the Shi’ite terror army will continue trying to limit its confrontation with Israel to a war of attrition.

Concerning Iran, the theory goes that neither does the Islamic Republic want to start the major war of destruction against Israel now that it has been planning for decades, instead preferring to initiate it once it would have at least a minimal number of crude nuclear devices.

When it comes to Yemen’s Houthis, one of Iran’s other central proxies, they have suffered a major blow with Israel’s devastating strike on their main port of Hodeidah and its fuel depot – fuel used, among other things, for powering major weapons platforms as well as other military infrastructure. As such, they have also become more cautious in their moves against Israel – for now.

A view shows smoke on the Lebanese side of the border with Israel, as a man stands at a beach in Tyre, amid ongoing cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israeli forces, southern Lebanon August 25, 2024. (credit: REUTERS/AZIZ TAHER)

Paying close attention to recent comments from various Iranian officials also gives the impression that while Tehran may attempt to act against Israel at any moment, that attempt might be delayed even further; that, perhaps, Iran’s retaliation will wait for better operational circumstances, including a possible target of opportunity presenting itself – or for the supply and delivery of new defensive and offensive weapons platforms from Russia to Iran or from one of its other allies.

The Iranians might also want Hezbollah to further engage in a heightened exchange of fire with Israel in attempts to preoccupy the country, before attempting a retaliatory action of their own.

Taking proactive measures

IN THE meantime, and in addition to Israel’s tailored pre-emptive strike against certain Hezbollah targets on August 25, Jerusalem has taken other calculated, proactive measures against the threat of the Iranian axis vow of revenge. An unknown party executed a mysterious cyberattack crippling Iran’s banking system, and intensified Israeli airstrikes have destroyed Hezbollah and Iranian targets in Lebanon and Syria in recent weeks.

Additionally, continued and very clear warnings have been conveyed by the Europeans and Americans to Hezbollah and Iran, that Israel’s patience is limited and that it intends to respond to attempted attacks against it with massive and overwhelming force. The pre-emptive strike early Sunday morning is an iteration of that warning.

Given these developments, it is indeed logical to assume that Iran would alter its planning and strategy for a response to Haniyeh’s and Shukr’s unnatural deaths. The Iranians are also taking into account that back in April – in response to their targeting Israel directly with a huge barrage of missiles and drones – a strike attributed to Jerusalem stealthily and precisely destroyed a sensitive and central component of Iran’s air defense network near one of the country’s coveted nuclear sites.

The unpreparedness of the Iranian axis for full-scale war, its sense of bad timing for a major escalation, the blows it has already taken – and the fact that Israel is already fighting a multifront conflict, albeit at mid intensity, with all that entails domestically and internationally – are precisely why Israel must take the initiative now.

IN SUCH a strategic and geopolitical environment – when your enemy does not feel ready for war, has been degraded in morale, confidence and capabilities, and is concerned with preserving its remaining resources and capabilities to fight the war it desires at a future time of its choosing – that is exactly the time to go to war with such an enemy, who plans for and seeks your ultimate destruction. 

Be offensive now instead of defensive later, when the threat will be even greater. Following on its successful pre-emptive strikes, continue to be the bold IDF that takes the initiative, as the best defense is always a strong offense.

This is a war of survival, as it has been from the moment Hamas-ISIS butchers crossed into Israeli territory on the early morning of October 7, 2023. Israel must clear the deck as it were of the existential threats that have been forming around it – for nearly thirty years.

First and foremost is the Iranian nuclear program, which is at the center of Iran’s ambition to create a Mahdist neo-Persian empire, an ambition from which all the other major threats to Israel’s survival come forth.

Secondly is Hezbollah, the vanguard of Iran’s budding imperial forces. It is the anchor of the Iranian regime’s ring of fire around Israel, which it has built up over decades, and as such must be decimated and removed as a strategic threat.

And finally, any of Iran’s other imperial proxies who would be activated as part of its ring of fire need to be neutralized for being a direct threat to Israel.

In the immediate aftermath of the Hamas-ISIS invasion and massacre on October 7, 2023, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly said that the State of Israel was now “going to change the Middle East.” An opportunity to do so at the highest strategic level has presented itself: It needs to be seized upon.

Ilan Pomeranc is an Israeli hi-tech entrepreneur and a member of the Israel Leadership Forum. He is involved with various Israel advocacy causes including working with Christian Zionist and pro-Israel Noahide groups.

Source: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-816470

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter