Daily Shmutz | COMMENTARY / OPINION | 10/9/25

COMMENTARY / OPINION

 

Trump’s Gaza Deal: A Win for Islamic Jihad  [21:22]   Avi Abelow

Oct 9, 2025

Trump’s Gaza Deal may look like a diplomatic victory on paper for Israel with the hopeful return of all the remaining hostages, but in reality, it hands the Sunni and Shia jihadis exactly what they want – legitimacy, survival, and time. Qatar, Turkey, and Egypt agreed to sacrifice Hamas to regroup and attack Israel in the future in some other constellation.

Instead of a deal that deals a crushing blow to the Qatari-led jihad that financed the Oct. 7th massacre, it rewards it, signaling to every Islamist movement that terror and kidnapping Israelis pays.

It is about time that the Western world understands the Islamic jihad enemy we are up against and what motivates them, not their lives or their homes or cities.

With it all, this is the best agreement Netanyahu was able to achieve under the circumstances.

 

This ceasefire is proof that we need new strategies.   JOSHUA HOFFMAN

What comes next will define and redefine the Jewish People.

OCT 09, 2025  The Future of Jewish

As news broke this week of a hostages-for-ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas that could finally bring an end to two years of war, I found myself torn between relief and disappointment.

Relief, because the remaining hostages may finally return home after an unimaginable ordeal. But disappointment — deep, almost physical disappointment — because this does not feel like a victory for Israel.

It feels like the closing act of a painful stalemate, one in which Hamas emerges politically strengthened, morally unrepentant, and more validated than defeated. The hostages’ return is a blessing; the price Israel has paid for it is a warning.

In every conflict, victory must first be defined before it can be achieved.

For Israel, victory means removing Hamas as both a military and governing force from Gaza, disincentivizing Palestinians from ever again turning to Hamas or any similar jihadist movement, and returning all hostages — alive or dead — to Israeli soil. Victory means restoring deterrence, rebuilding moral clarity, and ensuring that no future enemy believes mass murder and kidnapping can ever yield political gain.

For Hamas, victory has never been about winning in the conventional sense. Its triumph lies in paralysis: a stalemate that forces Israel to negotiate under pressure, fractures Israeli society, and delegitimizes Israel on the world stage. Its battlefield is not just Gaza, but global perception. Every delay, every protest, every viral image of suffering, no matter the cause or context, serves Hamas’ purpose: to make Israel doubt itself and the world doubt Israel.

By that measure, Hamas won this battle. It caught Israel completely off guard on October 7, 2023, exposed deep flaws in our country’s intelligence and strategic assumptions, and then fought a propaganda war far more skillfully than it fought a military one.

Through Qatar’s Al Jazeera, Western influencers, antisemitic academics, useful idiots, and the algorithms of social media platforms that amplify outrage over truth, Hamas weaponized victimhood and turned every reasonable Israeli act of defense into mounting evidence of guilt. It transformed slaughter into spectacle, and tragedy into leverage. Western governments, already polarized and fragile, imported the conflict into their own streets and campuses. Antisemitism rebranded itself.

The chaos that Hamas unleashed abroad may be its most enduring achievement.

But even the mighty must sometimes fall to remember who they are. Israel is strong — militarily, technologically, economically — but even strength can harden into arrogance. Defeat, when properly understood, can be cleansing. It checks ego, dissolves illusions, and demands renewal.

For Israel, this moment demands not despair, but recalibration. The old “conceptzia” — the belief that Hamas was contained, that Qatar was a neutral mediator, that Hezbollah would remain in check, that Iran could be deterred through ambiguity — must now be abandoned. Every layer of Israeli security, diplomacy, and psychology must be rethought.

The same is true for world Jewry. Diaspora Jews must recalibrate their political loyalties, their relationship to Israel, and their sense of safety in societies that have once again revealed just how conditional their acceptance truly is.

Jewish organizations must reassess how they operate, advocate, and unify in an environment where their very identity is under siege. They must do more than react; they must reimagine. It’s time to completely rethink how we engage and educate Jews, building a generation that is not only more connected, but more literate, inspired, and empowered. Jewish life cannot be sustained by nostalgia or fear; it must be fueled by knowledge, pride, and purpose. Only a people deeply rooted in its own story can stand firm when the world tries to rewrite it.

Yet another essential recalibration lies ahead: one of sovereignty itself. Israel can no longer afford to outsource its defense, its weapons, or its wartime economy to the goodwill of others. Dependence is not partnership; it is vulnerability dressed as diplomacy. In the same way that Jews must distance themselves from political parties that use them as props and pawns, Israel must redefine its alliances.

The days of blank-check loyalty — whether to Washington, D.C. or any other capital — are over. From now on, partnerships must be transactional, pragmatic, and case by case. You want our cooperation? It will come with terms. You want our innovation, our intelligence, our deterrence? Then treat Israel as a partner, not a dependent.

When our interests align, we will move together. When they don’t, we will move alone. The Jewish state was not reborn to be anyone’s client state; it was reborn to ensure that Jewish destiny is never outsourced again.

But independence in defense must be matched by innovation in diplomacy. For decades, Israel has brought the world’s young Jews to the Jewish state through Birthright-Taglit — a program that strengthened Diaspora identity and connection to Israel. The time has come for a “Reverse Birthright,” an initiative that sends young Israelis out into the world not as tourists, but as living ambassadors. It’s difficult to hate a country, or a people, when you have a friend from there.

Israel’s greatest untapped resource is its people: multilingual, cultured, compassionate, resilient, and good-looking. Imagine tens of thousands of Israelis, post-army or university, spending six months embedded in communities across Europe, Asia, Africa, and North and South America — teaching, volunteering, building, creating friendships that humanize Israel beyond the headlines. Every Israeli who builds a bridge abroad becomes a living counter-narrative to the lies that thrive in their absence.

This is people-to-people diplomacy: organic, personal, and disarming in a way no press release or policy speech could ever be. It is time Israel understood that global legitimacy is not granted by governments; it’s earned through relationships.

Israel’s partnerships with other nations must also evolve to counter not only terrorists, but their newest strategy: the mass abduction of innocents as bargaining chips. As retired IDF lieutenant colonel Jonathan Conricus has observed, the lesson of this war is the need to apply “a set of preventive measures to make it less likely that any terror organization or rogue state will try to emulate the actions of Hamas in the future.”¹

At the core of Hamas’ power lies one unbearable fact: the hostages. The 251 Israeli and international captives it seized on October 7th became both shield and sword. They have constrained Israel’s military operations, inflamed public opinion, and divided Israelis over how far to go and when to stop. The hostages are not only a humanitarian crisis but a moral snare, proof of Hamas’ understanding that Israel’s humanity can be turned against it.

Yet this, too, can be transformed into resolve. Israel can and must make hostage-taking a losing strategy — by reshaping global norms and deterrence doctrines so that no group ever again believes kidnapping Jews will yield anything but ruin.

There is another battlefield where Hamas has scored its greatest short-term victories: the information war. In 1948, Israel fought for land. In 1967, for existence. Beginning in 2023, it fought for truth itself. Hamas mastered the art of digital distortion, turning smartphones into weapons and outrage into oxygen. It flooded social feeds with images divorced from context, exploiting empathy as a tool of manipulation. Israel must learn to fight there as decisively as it fights on the ground — by building an infrastructure of truth as sophisticated as its Iron Dome. Propaganda cannot be ignored; it must be countered with clarity, speed, and moral confidence.

And that moral confidence is key. This war, more than any before it, revealed the deep moral asymmetry between the two sides. Hamas celebrates death; Israel mourns it. Hamas hides behind civilians; Israel shields them.

Yet, in much of the global narrative, the moral equation has been inverted. Israel’s restraint is portrayed as cruelty, while Hamas’ cruelty masquerades as “resistance.” True victory for Israel will not come from global applause; it will come from holding firm to its values even when the world distorts them. The Jewish moral tradition does not depend on validation; it depends on conscience.

If October 7th shattered Israel’s illusion of safety, October 8th shattered the Diaspora’s illusion of acceptance. Jews from New York to Paris to London to Melbourne to Cape Town awoke to find that centuries-old hatreds had been waiting just beneath the surface. Universities, media outlets, and activist movements that claimed to champion justice turned a blind eye to Jewish pain. The war in Gaza revealed a deeper one within the Jewish world: a war over identity, loyalty, and unity.

That, too, must be won. The Jewish People cannot afford to mirror the divisions that their enemies exploit. Israel and the Diaspora must stand as one organism, not as estranged relatives. If Hamas’ weapon is division, then Jewish solidarity itself is the countermeasure.

Yet, even amid this dark chapter, not all was lost. The security situation along the Gaza border has fundamentally improved, and the severity of the military threat emanating from Gaza has been significantly reduced. On a regional level, Israel’s position is arguably stronger. It exposed Iran’s vulnerabilities and demonstrated the capacity to engage multiple fronts simultaneously. It reminded both enemies and allies that Israel can absorb unthinkable trauma and still fight back with discipline and precision. The illusion of coexistence with a genocidal enemy has been shattered — painfully but necessarily.

Winning the war now means redefining the nature of power. Power is not just the ability to destroy, but to rebuild, reimagine, and endure. It means creating an Israel that no longer mistakes calm for peace, or silence for safety. It means turning resilience into strategy, moral clarity into policy, and national trauma into collective purpose.

Hamas may have won the battle of October 7th, but wars are not decided by shock; they are decided by endurance. And endurance is what has always defined the Jewish story. Israel’s victory will not be measured by whatever happens next in Gaza, but by the rebirth of vision, by the recalibration of its security and soul, and by the simple fact that, yet again, the Jewish People will not vanish.

 

Charlie Kirk’s Assassination: Whodunit?   CHERIE ZASLAWSKY

OCT 09, 2025

Ever since the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963, scores of Americans have learned to mistrust “official stories” that seem designed to conceal a passel of conspirators by pointing to a single “lone wolf shooter” as the perpetrator—someone we’ve learned to consider as a “lone wolf patsy.”

That is why the internet is percolating with citizen sleuths investigating the murder of Charlie Kirk.

In the meantime, we’ll soon see if Trump’s FBI is worth its salt. The good news is they are investigating a half dozen or more people who clearly had prior knowledge of the murder based on their online chat on Discord. And I’m assuming Kash Patel will also drag in the four people from the TPUSA event that I’d want hauled in first: the two staffers inside the tent who seemed to be signaling via hand movements seconds before the shot rang out; Hunter Kozak, the young man who asked the question about transgender mass shootings just before the shot; and the man who, right after Charlie collapsed, pumped his fist high in a gesture that echoed one of the alleged Discord chat room posts: “We f—ing did it!”

THE OFFICIAL STORY

It was the kid on the roof with a rifle. Sound familiar?

Only this time it was a Mauser firing a .30-06 caliber bullet.

No sooner was it announced that the shot hailed from a Mauser firing a .30-06 caliber bullet, than Citizen Sleuths with extensive knowledge of firearms weighed in: Impossible. Wrong angle, wrong bullet, wrong location. Among the truth-seeking critics: Alex Jones of Infowars; Nate Cornacchia, retired Special Forces Green Beret; former US Marine Zeb Boylin—and scads of others who have firearm expertise.

In a nutshell: they concur that a .30-06 would have blown Kirk’s head off. Says Boylin, a Marine Scout Sniper who taught ballistics classes for five years: “The FBI’s lying. It’s quite literally not possible for the shooter to have been on the roof that they claim….”. And as Nate points out, while guys like him posting on YouTube, etc. are investigating bullet trajectories using “math and Newtonian physics,” the FBI never even locked down the crime scene—which, by the way, UVU immediately paved over.

But here’s something everyone can likely agree on:

There are astonishing parallels to the attempted assassination of Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania: a large public outdoor event; a lone shooter up on an unsecured roof; the target shot at while speaking to the crowd; major failures by an incompetent or compromised security team. It’s almost as if the real perpetrators, whoever they may be, are saying to the President: We may have missed you in Pennsylvania, but we’ve just taken out your right-hand man in Utah.

It only took the FBI 33 hours to track down Charlie Kirk’s alleged assailant, and launch the official story, with Tyler Robinson named as the patsy…I mean assassin.

THE PLOT THICKENS

It almost seems like a point of pride for the FBI and assorted Deep Staters to obfuscate mass shootings and assassinations whether they gain anything by it or not. Why, for example, did they need for Thomas Crooks to be the guilty party in Butler, PA rather than Antifa member Maxwell Yearick, whom a number of citizen sleuths have outed as the sniper—at least one of them? Is it that We the Peons never deserve the truth?

While Occam’s Razor may work as a general principle when searching for the truth, it may offer temptation to ignore complexities in cases of high-profile attempted assassinations and mass shootings in favor of simple answers that may provide a sense of closure. However, since 1963, our own government and media mouthpieces have cried “lone wolf” so many times that most of us disbelieve them now as a matter of course.

Clearly, there’s more to this story than we’ve been led to believe.

SOME REASONS TO DOUBT THE OFFICIAL STORY

· Impossibility it was a .30-06 caliber bullet as that would have blown Kirk’s head off

· The fact that the gaping wound on his neck was an exit wound

· Necessity for the shot to have come from behind Charlie and somewhat to the right to account for the exit wound on his neck

· Transgender shooting question at the time of the kill shot

· Nearby easily accessed roofs of buildings were left unsecured

· The odd behavior of his security team including making hand signals seconds prior to shot

· Brian Harpole, the security team owner, making finger movement as if triggering a device at the very moment of the shot

· Mystery Suspect doing likewise with a two-handed movement, standing to Charlie’s right

· The fact that Brian Harpole, owner of the security group, was smiling as he mimed triggering some device

· The fact that the University immediately dug up the area where Kirk was killed and paved over it

· The fact that videographer and investigative journalist Jason Goodman detected drones at high altitudes in the airspace above the crime scene, as in Butler, PA

· The fact that a Hades spy plane flew very nearby at low altitudes both before and after the shooting

POIROT INVESTIGATES BY PROXY

Clearly, there’s more to this story than we’ve been led to believe, so let’s begin by asking some questions.

Donning my Hercule Poirot chapeau, the first thing I notice is, as Poirot was wont to say, that there are too many clues. Why the Antifa/transgender inscriptions on the bullet casings? Why the question about transgender mass shootings as Kirk was shot? Is it coincidental that Tyler Robinson, the alleged killer, has a “transitioning” transgender male-to-female lover? Why the campus presence of the radical Leftwing group Armed Queers of Salt Lake City? Why the cheering of some in the audience when Charlie had fallen?

Now all of that is real and very troubling. But it’s also a narrative, and perhaps a shade too pat under the circumstances. After all, Poirot’s trademark modus operandi is to seek out facts over narrative.

So now we need to consider two main possibilities—make that three: either Tyler Robinson, acting alone out of anger at Charlie Kirk’s Christian stance against transgenderism, shot and killed him; or Robinson acted in collusion with members of the transgender community, some of whom apparently had foreknowledge of the event; or a deeper, more sinister and more elaborate conspiracy has taken place.

And let’s begin with a new premise: Let’s assume that the official story is not only incorrect, but that it is deliberately misleading. That way we can begin to look for the opposite of what we’ve been told took place.

QUERYING THE OFFICIAL STORY

Why, for example, have we been assured there was no exit wound?

Well, if there’s no exit wound then the gaping hole in Charlie’s neck had to be the entrance wound. That means the shot had to come from Charlie’s left. So we’re going to assume the shot came from the right.

Next: why the insistence that the bullet was a badass .30-06 shot by a kid on an unsecured rooftop 200 yards away, using with his grandpa’s Mauser? For the moment, let’s consider the kid and the Mauser and even the rooftop as window dressing, and zero in on the bullet and the distance involved.

We are asked to believe that the shot came from far away—some 200 yards—and from a bullet that can kill a moose, to explain the damage to Charlie’s body.

So we’re going to assume the opposite: A much smaller caliber bullet but fired at very close range. This could account for the lethality of the shot and the damage to Charlie’s body.

These assumptions open up a new possibilities that we can now explore.

THE TWO-SHOT THEORY & JASON GOODMAN’S EXPLANATION

If Kirk was shot at close range on his right side, how can we explain the unmistakable sound of the loud crack-boom from a high-powered rifle?

Enter the two-shot theory.

While many have considered the need for two shots to pull off this baffling assassination, Jason Goodman, professional videographer turned investigative journalist and digital sleuth extraordinaire, has painstakingly unearthed evidence of the kill shot coming from behind Kirk. According to this theory, which I find very plausible, someone, whether Tyler Robinson from a rooftop 200 yards away, or someone else in another location, fired the shot we all heard—but it was not the kill shot. The fatal shot was not supersonic but subsonic, possibly via a silencer, or as Goodman suggests, it was a low-muzzle velocity projectile, likely a .50 caliber PCP round shot from an air-rifle and possibly digitally synced with the supersonic rifle shot fired further away that functioned as a decoy to fit the cover story.

Diagram from Jason Goodman’s Substack

As Alex Jones, along with a number of other alternative media and citizen experts, has opined, Charlie Kirk’s murder was a professional hit. You don’t leave it up to a kid with a screwdriver trying to assemble and disassemble Grandpa’s WWI rifle to make the shot. Assuming the guilty planners were the same ones behind Butler, they likely wanted to be sure they got their target this time. And what better way than with a skilled sniper taking a relatively close-range shot.

Through his meticulous research forensically examining the digital evidence, Goodman believes he has traced the bullet itself through several frames of video, moving in a line from behind Charlie toward the right side of the back of his head. In fact, the technology exists to link shots from two different guns to fire at the same time through a synchronous firing system that includes a transmitter/receiver to communicate with the other firearm(s).

CONSPIRACY CENTRAL

But let’s take a look at a few other popular theories bouncing around the internet:

· An exploding lavalier mic inside Charlie’s shirt killed him, not a bullet

· It was a palm pistol shot by Brian Harpole due to the “trigger-finger” movement of his right hand at the moment the shot rings out

· Charlie’s team made suspicious gestures just prior to the shot implicating them in the plot

· A man wearing black and holding a large camera-gun behind Charlie shoots him and then takes a few steps backwards before turning around and heading out toward the parking lot

While I credit Jason Goodman’s theory as the most compelling I’ve seen, considering these theories, the one I find most plausible is the last, as the location makes perfect sense and camera guns exist, though I don’t know if they fire with the velocity necessary to deliver the kill shot. But there are also oddities and questions regarding Charlie’s team’s actions which we’ll consider shortly.

And I want to add a suspicious occurrence to the list. Take a look at the fellow wearing a white shirt in the photo below holding what looks like a camera up to his eyes. Moments later, when the shot is heard, his hands are clenched together—possibly holding something—and he jerks them up and down in perfect time with the crack-boom. Not only that, but he makes the same sort of movement with two hands that Brian Harpole, on the opposite side of Charlie, makes with one hand at the same exact moment, as the shot is heard.

Mystery Suspect in white T-shirt holding something up to eyes. Brian Harpole bottom right.

Brian Harpole making triggering gesture with right hand as shot is heard.

Now I’m not saying either of these two tried to shoot Kirk—but can it be coincidental that they both seemed to mime that gunshot exactly as it occurred? Why? What were they doing? And how did they know there would be a shot or the precise moment of its arrival?

Take a look at the video below to view the hand signals and Mystery Suspect’s hands making that odd motion as the shot is heard.

You can watch this video by clicking on it, or access it on DailyMotion and expand it to full screen.

Another point of interest: TPUSA’s security head, Dan Flood, the man wearing black who appeared to give an arm signal just prior to the shot, and who is Brian Harpole’s associate in his security company Rockhouse Integrity Group—was also present, along with Harpole, at the rally in Butler, Pennsylvania where Trump narrowly escaped an assassin’s bullet. They were there to provide security for Charlie Kirk at the Trump rally.

It’s a small world.

And speaking of similarities between Butler and the Utah Valley University fatal shooting, Jason Goodman, in reviewing enlarged video of the airspace over the campus, discovered several drones above the Utah campus, as he’d found in the airspace over Butler on the day Trump was nearly assassinated.

By now one thing is clear: the similarities to Butler make this investigation a national security issue.

A CLOSER LOOK AT TPUSA SECURITY TEAM

Here’s a quote from Greg Shaffer, founder of Shaffer’s Security, which provided security for TPUSA for 7 or 8 years, till the end of 2022:

The individuals who work for that company [Integrity Security Solutions] were the ones on the stage. Dan Flood headed up security for Turning Point USA, and Brian Harpole is his best friend. Brian worked for me for seven years, and then Brian started his own company and then shorted me on the contract for Turning Point USA. That’s how they got the contract.

From Ken Silva of Headline USA: “When asked whether he had a falling out with Flood and Harpole, Shaffer said with a chuckle: ‘No, just got stabbed in the back by some friends.’”

Dan Flood, head of TPUSA security, above; Brian Harpole, owner Integrity Security Solutions, below

It’s also worthy of mention that the website for Brian’s company, Integrity Security Solutions, has been scrubbed. No more live links.

Not great optics, guys.

MESDAMES ET MESSIEURS

Here at last is my speculation, Poirot-style.

Mesdames et Messieurs: From the first I was curious about the odd hand movements of security team leader Brian Harpole facing the right side of the stage and Mystery Suspect on the left side. Both seemed to mimic the firing of a gun at the moment when the shot was heard, yet neither could have held such a weapon, and how would they know such a shot would be fired at all, let alone at that moment?

This brings us to the possibility of a low-tech version of the crime.

Shortly before Hunter Kozak, Charlie’s last questioner, came up to the podium, TPUSA security head Dan Flood texted someone on his phone. Innocent, perhaps. But suppose he texted Kozak, instructing him to speak next. It must have been prearranged for Hunter to ask a two-part question to give the shooters time to ready themselves for the shot.

Then comes the signals from Turek and Flood. Frank lifts and replaces his hat and touches his face—innocent, perhaps. But Dan Flood gives a broad arm signal exactly as Charlie speaks his last words on this earth: “Counting or not counting gang violence?” That was also the signal for Brian Harpole and Mystery Suspect to make their hand-trigger movements.

Why?

Because the sniper was on the left side behind Charlie’s tent—the far left side as you face the stage. From there, he couldn’t see Harpole to know exactly when to fire, but he could see Mystery Suspect. And Mystery Suspect could see Harpole. So the signal was sent from Flood to Harpole to Mystery Suspect to the sniper in split second timing. And the man who fired the high-powered rifle could presumably see both Flood and Mystery Suspect from his distant vantage point.

Our killer may have been holding a large camera gun and been near the back of the tent, or may have been under the breezeway further behind the tent, or may have been in the parking lot, even in the hatchback van parked near the tent as Jason Goodman speculates.

We don’t know his name, but since we find an odd overlap involving both the transgender community and TPUSA insiders, we’re likely looking at an overarching plan larger than either group, and can assume the highest level orchestrators of this open-air public assassination were not present at the Utah Valley University that day.

CLOSING THOUGHTS

The proverbial lone wolf shooter isn’t cutting it anymore. We the People need all the facts of the conspiracy surrounding Charlie Kirk’s death to be investigated and made public, and for those involved to be charged, tried and sentenced to the full extent of the law.

And that means both the “hotblooded” conspiracy that emerged from the transgender/Antifa community, and the possibility of an overarching calculated, “coldblooded” conspiracy perhaps shockingly even involving members of Charlie’s own team.

But regardless of the findings, we already know what entity was behind the hit on Charlie: the MAGA-hating, America-hating radical “Progressive” Left. And the motive? The takedown of America by the One World Government elite globalist cabal, along with their American allies—that’s you, Dems—and assorted RINOs.

And let’s not forget the Deep State.

It didn’t disappear when Trump won the election. And then there’s the phenomenon brilliant writer Joan Swirsky discusses in an article in News with Views: the metamorphosis that often occurs once seemingly honorable men get positions in D.C. The idealistic Jimmy Stewart types à la Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, swiftly morph into clones of corrupt politician Claude Rains. The Deep State powermongers find ways to blackmail, threaten or bribe them into compliance, which may be why Conservative heroes Kash Patel and Dan Bongino seem to be letting us down.

But one thing should now be clear: Deep State elements in our own government participated in, and likely orchestrated, the conspiracy to assassinate Charlie Kirk. Why else would our government be misleading us and engaging in a coverup instead of seeking the perpetrators and pursuing justice?

As Gary Bauer, president of American Values, opines, “The real threat to our Republic comes from the totalitarian Left and its Deep State allies.” Victor Davis Hanson says of Charlie Kirk’s murder, “it was a political assassination.” And as President Trump noted: “The gun may have been aimed at Charlie, but the bullet was for all of us.” What the Left and its Deep State allies have in their crosshairs are the MAGA movement, Conservative patriots, and We the People who love our country.

The enemy is within our gates.

 

HUGE DRAMA – Hamas FORCED to agree to release all hostages in the next 72 hours  [28:33]

October 8, 2025  Behold Israel with Amir Tsarfati

 

Global push to reshape agriculture, human diets so every nation’s food supply fits within ‘sustainable’ and ‘planetary boundaries’   LEO HOHMANN

Gates, Rockefeller, UN, WEF globalists want total control over world food supply and what goes on your plate, a plan that’s tightly connected to their push for digital IDs and digital ‘money.’

OCT 08, 2025

The global war on food continues to chug along under the radar of all the other problems going on in the world.

Some years ago there was a YouTuber named Christian Westbrook whose channel, The Ice Age Farmer, kept us informed on trends impacting the global food supply. Christian’s channel mysteriously disappeared in November 2022 and we don’t get nearly enough information on this important topic. He was warning back then that the globalists wanted us to eat their unhealthy, ultra-processed bioengineered food and in order to make that happen they needed to reduce our access to healthy whole foods.

Below is a video interview with Christian from five years ago that has aged extremely well.

It’s no accident that food prices keep rising at rates beyond the overall inflation rate.

Now, we have an interesting article posted October 6 at Modernity.news.

Modernity cites an article in The Lancet, titled “The EAT-Lancet Commission on Healthy, Sustainable, and Just Food Systems,” which presents what the authors call “a great food transformation.”

Modernity points out that this is part of a coordinated global program (as promoted by the United Nations, Rockefeller and Gates foundations, and World Economic Forum) to reshape agriculture, human diets, and financing so that every nation’s food supply fits within quantified “planetary boundaries.”

Modernity adds:

The food-system power grab comes as the same network of government agencies and Gates-funded projects are already re-engineering the genetic code of crops themselves, turning destructive plant viruses into self-replicating DNA platforms, illustrating how the push for “sustainability” and “climate-smart” agriculture doubles as a bid to centralize control over both the seeds in the ground and the food on our plates.

The new 80-page report links its plan to the debunked “climate change”-aligned Paris Agreement, UN Sustainable Development Goals, and the Convention on Biological Diversity.

It proposes:

• Worldwide limits on red-meat consumption (U.S. cattle herds are at historic lows, so they’ve made much progress in this area).
• A yearly reallocation of $200–$500 billion in farm subsidies.
• Continuous monitoring of national food systems under “science-based targets with monitoring and accountability mechanisms.”

Once we get biometric digital IDs tied to our bank accounts with digital programmable “money,” the globalist power-elites at the Gates and Rockefeller foundations will be able to enforce their rules on what we buy and what we consume, eliminating most of our choices. It will all be wrapped into your social credit score, which will determine your privileges in the new digital economy. I’ve been saying for five years that when the digital reset is fully implemented, our rights will be replaced with privileges. We will become digitized automatons.

The Lancet paper’s declared funders include the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, Wellcome Trust, IKEA Foundation, and Children’s Investment Fund Foundation, whose grants financed the work through the EAT Foundation in Oslo.

The Lancet argues that controlling food systems is the key to controlling every major sector, linking nutrition, climate, economics, and governance under one unified global framework.

Former British PM Tony Blair and Oracle founder Larry Ellison were talking about just such a system at the World Governments Summit earlier this year, where they call for a centralized data system run by AI for all nations.

The Lancet paper reads:

“Food systems sit at the nexus of health, environment, climate, and justice. A food systems transformation is fundamental for solving crises related to the climate, biodiversity, health, and justice. The central position of food systems emphasises the interdependent nature of these crises, rather than each crisis separately, which highlights the need to position food systems change as a global integrator across economic, governance, and policy domains.”

Governments are urged to “address inequities in the distribution of benefits and burdens of current food systems.”

Modernity notes that the Commission explicitly calls for “cross-sectoral coalitions” to implement its totalitarian framework worldwide.

The authors claim that “unprecedented levels of action are required to shift diets.”

The implication is clear: By redefining food as the central lever for solving global crises, the Commission positions international authorities and private foundations to influence or direct national policies far beyond agriculture itself.

In practical terms, this dystopian vision turns food policy into a mechanism for global management—where unelected institutions, under the banner of sustainability, unilaterally dictate how nations farm, trade, and eat.

In short, this report is a roadmap for tyranny.

It’s the same people who are pushing for the enslavement of humanity through tag-and-trace mechanisms like biometric digital IDs and digital programmable payment systems that are for a reshaping of the global food system.

You will own nothing, you will eat the bugs, you will take the vaccines, you will be happy. Just shut up and do as you’re told.

That’s the mentality of the globalists.

Oh, and by the way, they’re also the same folks who seem excited about the prospect of World War III with Russia/China.

Evil never rests.

 

From Pogrom to Propaganda: Hamas’s Legacy and the Flotilla Fraud    by Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury
October 8, 2025

• The only just response to such barbarism [Hamas’s October 7, 2023 invasion of Israel] must be unflinching: to rescue the hostages, hold the perpetrators and their sponsors to account, and refuse to normalize propaganda that celebrates murder and rape.
• Through its Al-Jazeera television empire, Qatar has promoted violent jihadist activity for Hamas and other Muslim Brotherhood-inspired terrorist groups. In addition, during the 2011 “Arab Spring,” it virtually single-handedly whipped up unlimited jihadist propaganda to oust the Egyptian government.
• Continuing its terrorist financing, Qatar seems to be in the process of orchestrating yet another “Arab Spring”, this time to oust the current government of Egypt.
• Qatar has already spent “nearly $100 billion” just in the US to gain influence there, according to MSNBC.
• For any future in a Gaza that actually hopes for real peace, it is crucial that Qatar be totally out of the picture.
• This combination — of staged humanitarian pretenses fronting for violent networks — is the new hybrid threat of our age.
• The Global Sumud Flotilla incident also highlights a deeper problem: selective outrage in which states and NGOs deploy the language of human rights in an unequal way.
• Democracies and civil-society actors should strip terrorists from their enablers, sanctuaries and financiers. Humanitarian language should not be weaponized to hide terrorism.
• For the hostage families still waiting, for the communities still grieving, and for the future of a rules-based international order, the only acceptable response to the October 7 atrocity is the application of justice, the dismantling of the terrorist networks that made it possible, and the refusal to tolerate any narrative that excuses or sanitizes savage, unprovoked cruelty.

On October 7, 2023, an orgy of slaughter and sexual violence was unleashed on Israeli civilians. It was a measured, premeditated pogrom, broadcast with grotesque pride. The world watched as terrorists streamed their atrocities across social media, turning murder and rape into a live propaganda show.

That day was not merely another episode in the long, tragic history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It was an operational and moral rupture, a mass atrocity whose reverberations continue to shatter families. The event also exposes an international discourse in which moral clarity too often gives way to equivocation.

Two years later, the consequences persist. 1,200 Israelis were murdered in the Hamas invasion. Forty-eight Israeli hostages — of whom only 20 are thought to be alive — are still being in captivity by Hamas. The beachfront Gaza Strip, which was transformed into a terror command-and-control hub, and a dispute has been distorted by selective outrage and cynical politicians.

The only just response to such barbarism must be unflinching: to rescue the hostages, hold the perpetrators and their sponsors to account, and refuse to normalize propaganda that celebrates murder and rape.

The massacre and its human toll

October 7 was not a spontaneous eruption of violence. It was the product of planning, intelligence and ruthless intent. It was an incursion coordinated with Iran. The Palestinian jihadists from Gaza invaded Israel, attacked civilian communities, tortured and murdered residents, beheaded adults and children alike, burned families alive, and used unimaginable, sadistic sexual violence as a weapon.

The scale of the atrocity — the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust — reaffirmed that modern terrorism is not constrained by any code of conduct. While exact casualty totals vary by source, the enduring human facts are clear: 1,200 murdered, many more thousands wounded, families shattered, and 251 people kidnapped and taken hostage — now either dead, still held in captivity for a prolonged, brutal imprisonment, or released earlier. Forty-eight remain, of whom only 20 are believed still to be alive. The victims have been starved (here and here) and forced to dig their own graves.

Every day that these hostages remain in Hamas’s hands is a moral stain on the international community that professes to protect the innocent.

Propaganda as a weapon: the social-media spectacle

Hamas turned atrocity into a spectacle. The terrorists livestreamed their violence. Footage of brutality was rapidly circulated and weaponized to terrorize populations and recruit sympathizers. This was not merely brutality; it was psychological warfare meant to shatter the Israeli public and force political and military concessions. The social-media broadcasts of sex crimes and sickening mutilations — and the expectation that Western platforms post this content under the claim of “context” or “news” — present a test for internet companies, Western civil liberties groups, and every democracy. Internet platform policies and human rights rhetoric have become a cover for normalizing and amplifying mass criminality.

The sponsors and facilitators: Iran, Qatar, and the regional axis

Hamas does not operate in a political vacuum. For years Iran has been one of the two principal state sponsors of Hamas, providing funding, transfers of weapons, training, and plans for the destruction not only of Israel but of the US (here and here).

American and Israeli estimates — as well as numerous open-source analyses — have documented Iran’s financial and material support to Hamas, a relationship that turns Gaza into an extension of a malign regional strategy.

Qatar is the other longtime supporter of Hamas — as well as numerous other Islamic terrorist organizations (such as here and here).

Known as “the arsonist and the firefighter,” Qatar, while offering diplomatic channels, and hosting negotiators, has demonstrated tolerance for and acquiescence to Hamas political and media networks, and provided Hamas as well as countless other terror groups with financing, diplomatic cover and logistical lifelines.

Through its Al-Jazeera television empire, Qatar has promoted violent jihadist activity for Hamas and other Muslim Brotherhood-inspired terrorist groups. In addition, during the 2011 “Arab Spring,” it virtually single-handedly whipped up unlimited jihadist propaganda to oust the Egyptian government.

Continuing its terrorist financing, Qatar seems to be in the process of orchestrating yet another “Arab Spring”, this time to oust the current government of Egypt.

Qatar has already spent “nearly $100 billion” just the US to gain influence there, according to MSNBC.

For any future in a Gaza that actually hopes for real peace, it is crucial that Qatar be totally out of the picture.

Together, Iran’s hard-power sponsorship and Qatar’s enabling funding and propaganda and diplomatic posture have helped sustain Palestinian terrorist organizations that continue to threaten civilians.

Flotillas, fraud and the exposure of foreign backing

The recent Global Sumud Flotilla — claimed by its backers to dramatize the humanitarian crisis in Gaza — has exposed a different truth: terrorist-linked networks are active within this ostensibly humanitarian campaign.

Israeli authorities report that documents recovered in Gaza demonstrate direct Hamas involvement in organizing and financing elements of this flotilla effort — a finding that demonstrates how terror groups exploit humanitarian cover for political and operational ends. The flotilla produced an international outcry and drew sympathetic headlines, while behind the cameras, a web of coordination, money flows, and strategic messaging advanced Hamas’s objectives. This combination — of staged humanitarian pretenses fronting for violent networks — is the new hybrid threat of our age.

Global hypocrisy: human rights actors, selective outrage and moral inversion

The Global Sumud Flotilla incident also highlights a deeper problem: selective outrage in which states and NGOs deploy the language of human rights in an unequal way. Prominent human rights organizations and many Western politicians have publicly condemned Israel’s interception of flotilla vessels. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Article 19 and others decried the boarding as illegal or “disproportionate.” Yet the same organizations have often been muted, equivocal or even apologetic about the reality of Hamas’s mass atrocities, hostage-taking, and use of civilians as human shields. This moral inversion — condemning the interdiction of propaganda activist ships that have confirmed links to a terrorist organization, while underplaying or “relativizing” the premeditated mass-murder of civilians and ongoing hostage abuse — erodes credibility and enables a dangerous narrative that tries to confuse the public about who is the perpetrator and who is the victim — inversions that, unfortunately, sometimes succeed.

Human rights advocacy might at least try to be applied equally: condemn both alleged human rights abuses by state actors and the deliberate targeting of civilians by non-state terror groups.

Pakistan’s recent posture and a troubling record

Pakistan’s recent statements, condemning Israel for intercepting the Global Sumud Flotilla, add another uncomfortable layer. Islamabad’s strong denunciation of Israel’s actions — and the laughable characterization of detained activists as “innocent” humanitarian workers –emerges against a long, well-documented history in which Pakistani institutions and networks have facilitated Islamist terrorism across South Asia and beyond.

From training and logistics to ideological propagation, elements within Pakistan have supported groups that share tactics and goals with Hamas and other jihadist actors. This history should immediately make Islamabad’s moralizing ring hollow and invite scrutiny. When a state that, in many documented instances, has been a source of support for terrorist organizations, starts emitting moral condemnations of counterterror operations, the international community might press for credible evidence to see if its positions are principled rather than transactional and hypocritical.

What justice requires: accountability

The October 7 attackers and their chain of command need to be exposed, prosecuted and isolated. The states and institutions that have been providing funding, safe haven or diplomatic cover to terror groups need to be sanctioned and brought to account. Platforms that allow the distribution of atrocity footage without context need to be held to upgraded standards. International law and human rights norms demand an honest, equal application: condemn hostage-taking and sexual violence, investigate and prosecute war crimes, and refuse to let political patronage create impunity.

Crucially, the world must prioritize the immediate safe return of the remaining hostages. Nothing else should outrank this moral imperative.

Two years after October 7, the international conversation has been poisoned by a fatal mixture of cynicism, selective outrage and geopolitical calculation. Some governments and institutions, particularly in the West — such as France, Britain, Canada, Australia, Norway, Portugal, Ireland and Spain — prefer moral acrobatics. These countries issue statements that comfort domestic electoral constituencies while failing to defend universal human values. There can be no neutrality in the face of mass murder, hostage-taking and rape. To equivocate is to enable. Democracies and civil-society actors should strip terrorists from their enablers, sanctuaries and financiers. Humanitarian language should not be weaponized to hide terrorism. Above all, every possible diplomatic, legal and operational effort must be marshaled to free the hostages from captivity in Gaza and prevent another attack like that of October 7.

For the hostage families still waiting, for the communities still grieving, and for the future of a rules-based international order, the only acceptable response to the October 7 atrocity is the application of justice, the dismantling of the terrorist networks that made it possible, and the refusal to tolerate any narrative that excuses or sanitizes savage, unprovoked cruelty.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury is an award-winning journalist, writer, and editor of the newspaper Blitz. He specializes in counterterrorism and regional geopolitics. Follow him on X: @Salah_Shoaib

 

We are all October 8th Jews now.   JOSHUA HOFFMAN

October 8, 2023 was when the world changed for Jews, and when Jews began to change for the world.

OCT 08, 2025  The Future of Jewish

If October 7th was the day that broke the Jewish world, October 8th was the day that remade us.

The images emanating from southern Israel on October 7, 2023 — the burned bodies, the stolen children, the laughter of murderers — tore open something ancient and fragile in the Jewish soul.

On October 8th, when the carnage was still fresh, we began to see with devastating clarity what we had long tried not to see: that the safety, belonging, and sympathy we once believed we had earned in the modern world were illusions. The spell was broken. October 8th was when the world changed for Jews, and when Jews began to change for the world.

For decades, many of us Jews believed that the Holocaust had finally secured us a place among the civilized. That the memory of six million would inoculate humanity against ever again tolerating open Jew-hatred. That our grandparents’ ashes had purchased, at last, a moral guarantee.

But the guarantee has expired. The Holocaust no longer buys sympathy. In universities and newsrooms, it has been relativized, dismissed, or perversely inverted — used as a cudgel against the very people it was meant to protect. “You should know better,” they tell Jews, as if suffering grants us not empathy but guilt. As if the descendants of the gassed are now responsible for the crimes of the world. The world has moved on. But we have not, because history has never stopped happening to us.

For our grandparents, Jewish identity was shaped by the Holocaust, by the world’s silence as Jews were industrially slaughtered. For us, it is shaped by the same silence returning. They built their Jewishness out of the ruins of Auschwitz. We are building ours out of the ashes of disbelief — disbelief that after “never again,” the world could look at Jewish blood and still ask, “But what did Israel do?” In a cruel twist of time, the grandchildren of the survivors have become witnesses again. Not to memory, but to repetition.

In the days after October 7th, the mask slipped everywhere. The activists who once claimed to stand for human rights couldn’t bring themselves to condemn Hamas, one of the world’s worst abusers of said rights. The same journalists who demanded we “believe women” suddenly didn’t believe Israeli women. And the same institutions that could issue 120-page statements about microaggressions couldn’t manage one honest sentence about Jewish dead. It was then that Jews realized something shattering: We are politically homeless.

The Left, which once promised solidarity, turned its back — or worse, its slogans — against us. The Right, which offers sympathy, often wraps it in conspiracies or conditional loyalty. The center, exhausted by outrage, simply tells us to “move on.” We now occupy a no-man’s land between worlds that either hate us or misunderstand us.

But perhaps that’s where we’ve always lived: on the narrow ridge between exile and home, between acceptance and isolation, between the dream of belonging and the reality of being alone.

And yet, out of that loneliness, something new — or maybe something eternal — has awakened. October 8th Jews are those who, in the vacuum of political shelter, have rediscovered something deeper than politics: peoplehood.

We have stopped waiting for the world’s approval to define our worth. We have remembered that our survival never depended on the kindness of kings, popes, or pundits; it depended on our own unbreakable covenant. We are the Jews who now know that safety does not come from slogans, but from solidarity. That the only protection stronger than an army is identity. That the only sympathy we can truly rely on is our own.

October 8th Jews live in an age of moral inversion, where those who murder Jews are called “resistance fighters,” and Jews who defend themselves are called “colonizers.” Where the language of oppression has become a theater of cruelty.

We once thought progressivism meant progress; now we see it can just as easily mean propaganda. We have watched words — liberation, decolonization, genocide — emptied of their meaning and filled with poison. It is a strange thing to live long enough to see universal values turned against the very people who helped articulate them.

The betrayal cuts deeper because Jews were among the founders of those modern moral movements. We practically invented civil rights, lent ourselves to the fights of the less fortunate, built the frameworks of liberal democracy — and now, those same movements have banished us from their ranks. It is not only a political betrayal but a spiritual one. October 8th Jews carry the sting of that betrayal, but also the freedom that comes after it: the freedom of no longer pretending to belong to those who would prefer a world without us.

The hatred that resurfaced after October 7th isn’t just about Jews. It’s a symptom of a large segments of civilization forgetting what decency means. They are caught in some perverse combination of lost, confused, brainwashed, incompetent, and corrupted.

When people cheer murder because the victims are Jews, something far deeper is rotting. The line between civilization and barbarism is thinner than we imagined. Jews are simply the first to feel it tear. That has always been our role in history: the canary in the coal mine of moral collapse. When antisemitism returns, it is never only about us. It is the herald of a world unmoored from conscience.

For too long, many of us believed that being Jewish was optional — a cultural hobby, a sentimental nostalgia, a heritage you could store in a drawer until Passover. Then October 7th reminded us: To be a Jew is not a choice others will let you forget. And so we have chosen, at last, to remember ourselves. October 8th Jews are not quintessentially religious or secular, Right or Left, Zionist or universalist; we are simply alert. Alert to the fact that the Jewish story has taken another wild turn, and that its next chapter will not be written by those who pity us, but by those who stand up as us.

A friend in Paris stopped wearing her Star of David; a college student in New York started wearing one for the first time. A grandfather in Tel Aviv who once said “We are tired of fighting” now says “We have no choice.” That is what October 7th did: It reconnected the scattered lights of a people who suddenly realized the darkness had returned. Some hid their identity out of fear; others displayed it out of defiance. But in both, a spark was kindled: the awareness that being Jewish is once again a statement, an act of courage, an act of continuity.

We are the generation that has outlived our illusions. The illusion that assimilation could save us. The illusion that Holocaust imagery would shield us. The illusion that political parties would defend us.

Those illusions died on October 7th, and we were reborn on October 8th.

Across the world, Jews are recalibrating — some in synagogues, others in front of computer screens, others in their own rediscovered hearts. We are learning Hebrew, studying Torah, defending Israel, singing old songs, and teaching our children not to whisper when they say they’re Jewish.

October 8th Jews understand that identity without courage is fragility. We know that education and excellence and achievement, while admirable, are no substitute for pride and solidarity. We have learned that safety comes not from apology, but from clarity — clarity about who we are and why we matter.

Our grandparents rebuilt Jewish life after the Holocaust with an optimism rooted in gratitude: gratitude for survival, for refuge, for the far-too-late sympathy of nations. But our generation must rebuild it with a different kind of strength. Not gratitude, but conviction. We are not here because the world allowed us to exist; we are here because we refuse to disappear.

To be an October 8th Jew is not to live in fear, but in purpose. It is to build Jewish schools that teach courage, media that tell truth, communities that radiate belonging. It is to reclaim moral language, to restore meaning to words like justice and freedom and peace, which have been mutilated by hypocrisy. We no longer need to ask who will stand with us; we are standing for ourselves, and through that, for the free and civilized world.

Because, if the Jews can stand tall in a world that wants them small, then humanity still has hope. If the people of the covenant can survive the betrayal of their supposed allies, then moral courage still has a future. To be an October 8th Jew is to understand that Jewish survival is not just about Jews; it is about preserving the idea that good and evil are not relative, that truth exists, that human life is sacred.

The Jew of October 8th is the Jew of Sinai, of Warsaw, of Jerusalem — the same soul, awakened again. Every time history tries to erase us, we write a new chapter. And if the world no longer pities us, perhaps that is good. Pity weakens; purpose strengthens. The world’s sympathy was never our shield; our unity is.

We are all October 8th Jews now. Not by choice, but by truth. We have no political home, but we have each other. We have no guaranteed sympathy, but we have historical strength. We have no illusions left — only faith, memory, and will. And perhaps that is the beginning of real freedom. Because, when much of the world stops pretending to protect us, we stop pretending to need its permission to exist.

We remember who we are. We build what we need. And once again, as always, we keep on keeping on.

 

October 7th: A Much Bigger Story   Brigitte Gabriel

Al Qaeda, Iran, and the Global Jihad

OCT 07, 2025  ACT FOR AMERICA

Al Qaeda Behind the 10/7 Massacre!

Is America Next?

Sarah Adams, an award-winning intelligence analyst and former CIA Targeter and counterterrorism analyst, has carved a notable path in national security. Known for her work on the 2012 Benghazi attacks, Adams served as a senior advisor to the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi, offering deep insights into the security and intelligence failures surrounding the incident. Her expertise has been further documented through her co-authorship of “Benghazi: Know Thy Enemy,” a book that unravels the complex web of events and individuals involved in the attack, as well as her involvement in “The Benghazi Committee Report,” which reflects her commitment to transparency and accountability in national security.

In a recent interview, Sarah Adams provides significant insights into the clandestine cooperation between Hamas, Al Qaeda, and Iran, particularly in relation to the October 7 attack by Hamas on Israel. *Covered at the one-hour mark.

The training for the Hamas attack reportedly took place in Afghanistan, where Al Qaeda has been running camps where approximately 1,400 terrorists were trained for the attack, which included fighters from various groups, indicating cooperation beyond just Hamas.

Al Qaeda and HAMAS are the Muslim Brotherhood, currently operating across the United States through undicted co-conspirator affiliated organizations like CAIR. Stop the Stealth Jihad-ACT NOW!

There was a series of meetings in Kandahar and Kabul where the attack was planned. These meetings involved not only Al Qaeda but also members from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Taliban, showcasing a multi-faceted collaboration.

The date for the attack, October 7, was chosen with historical significance linked to the start of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, further illustrating the deep strategic thinking involving multiple parties.

Iran played a pivotal role by facilitating the operations through its Quds Force, with notable figures like Qasem Soleimani before his death and his successor, Mohammed Kazemi, who was tasked with protecting key figures from Al Qaeda, including Hamza bin Laden, whom the US government still refuses to declare publicly is alive.

Adams and her team uncovered evidence that significant financial support came from Iran, with specific mention of a budget involving millions directed towards these operations.

Al Qaeda, under Hamza bin Laden’s leadership, has been pushing for an “Islamic Army” where different terrorist groups operate under one umbrella for strategic attacks. This includes Hamas, Hezbollah, and even ISIS, focusing on shared goals like attacking Israel and the U.S.

Both Al Qaeda and Iran aim to maintain a level of secrecy about their involvement in such attacks. Al Qaeda, in particular, does not claim responsibility for attacks to protect its safe havens in Afghanistan and to avoid direct retaliation.

Much of the planning was conducted over Telegram, highlighting how modern communication tools are being utilized to coordinate attacks across different organizations.

The 10/7 Sabbath Massacre attack was executed with Hamas as the front, but with the backing and strategic input from Al Qaeda and Iran, demonstrating a successful case of coordinated terrorism.

The cooperation between Hamas, Al Qaeda, and Iran in the October 7 attack underscores a sophisticated level of strategic planning, operational support, and ideological alignment among these groups. This collaboration not only facilitated one of the deadliest attacks in recent history but also signals a potential increase in coordinated threats against Western interests. The involvement of high-level operatives from Iran, combined with Al Qaeda’s training infrastructure and strategic oversight, paints a picture of a formidable alliance capable of executing complex terrorist operations.

Adams explicitly warns that this attack is part of a broader wave of planned attacks, including those aimed at U.S. embassies and potentially the U.S. homeland, orchestrated by this coalition.

The recent New Year’s terror attacks in New Orleans, with evident ties to ISIS, and the explosion of a Tesla Cyber Truck outside a Trump Hotel in Nevada, are likely interconnected, and we anticipate numerous revelations in the coming days and weeks. Sarah Adams, alongside other experts, is vigorously attempting to alert both authorities and the public, urging us to heed these warnings.

I assure you, we are listening.

 

Paid to deceive   Peggy Tierney

OCT 07, 2025   TIERNEY’S REAL NEWS

Anna Paulina Luna, a Republican Congresswoman from Florida, has basically confirmed that Kash’s FBI is investigating the Dark Web extremist group “Armed Queers” of Salt Lake City in connection with the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Its founder is an Iranian and funded by Neville Singham and the Chinese Communist Party.

Anna basically said that the Dark Web militant group called Armed Queers of Utah is being investigated by Kash’s FBI for facilitating Charlie’s murder (likely using Tyler as a patsy) and Charlie’s assassination was likely funded by foreign actors like the Chinese Communist Party, Iran (Hamas) and Qatar (the Muslim Brotherhood) and tied to the UN – who hates Israel.

Anna says all this will come out at trial. The trial will be a state trial – not Federal – which means cameras will be allowed in court and the public can watch.

I reported several weeks ago that the Armed Queers of Utah were the number one suspects behind Charlie’s murder and were funded by our Islamo-Communist enemies and likely controlled by rogue plants in the US intelligence and law enforcement community. Some of you were offended that I brought them up because you don’t like to believe there are evil groups in America like this who are used as mercenaries and are brainwashing your children. Well, yes there are.

If you haven’t read my series on Charlie’s assassination, you can do so here:

Continue reading

 

Is There Any Hope for South Africa?   by Nils A. Haug
October 7, 2025   Gatestone Institute

• South Africa has regressed into an ideologically-driven socialist-communist abyss of poverty, crime, corruption and systemic dysfunction at all levels: local, state and national – all in 30 years since the end of Apartheid.
• Once the leading economic power in all of Africa, South Africa is now regarded as the most corrupt country on the continent. It resembles a typical “banana republic” in some ways — little different from other failed or collapsing states in the region, particularly its northern neighbour of Zimbabwe — a Marxist dictatorial hellhole.
• The result of draconian labour laws is that the official unemployment rate exceeds 33% (more than 8 million potential workers), while the rate for unemployed younger workers exceeds 60%. These figures consistently rate among the world’s highest and confirm for millions that they have little or no future prospects in their country of birth.
• As the deindustrialisation of Africa’s most industrialised country accelerates, the unemployment rate will increase accordingly and even more people, to survive, will become reliant on government grants. The centralized ANC state then has citizens exactly where they want them – under their control and dependent upon the government for daily living. In this way future votes are secured, leading to the perpetuation of the ANC — a typical seditious device to remain in power indefinitely, like other nations in Africa.
• Even the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), a radical far-leftist political party – that of “Kill the farmer, kill the Boer” fame – lament this economic catastrophe: “What we are witnessing is the destruction of the little industry South Africa has left, a collapse that will hollow out communities and deepen mass unemployment… The government cannot continue to wash its hands while South Africa’s industrial backbone is dismantled.”
• The irony of their complaint is seemingly lost on the EFF: it was their policies that significantly contributed to the economic demise and deindustrialisation of the country. The party’s leader, Julius Malema, calls for supporters to “cut the throat of whiteness” and “shoot the Boer,” while advocating land-grabs without compensation, particularly of white-owned farmland.
• The ANC’s statement of intent sadly reveals that they will not waver from their ideological stance despite threat of sanctions and punitive US trade tariffs. The spokesman for the Institute of Race Relations, John Endres, commented about the ANC: “The party misses no opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to the National Democratic Revolution, a programme designed to turn South Africa first into a socialist and then into a communist state.”
• “Instead of renewal, [the ANC] has chosen entrenchment. Instead of pragmatism, dogma. Instead of growth, redistribution without production. Instead of survival, an overdose of toxic ideology.” – Hermann Pretorius, political commentator, September 7, 2025.
• The ANC is reportedly trying to forge a “deal” with Trump, to enlist deeper US involvement in South Africa. Its future should be of serious concern to its citizens and the West.

Once the leading economic power in all of Africa, South Africa is now regarded as the most corrupt country on the continent. It resembles a typical “banana republic” in some ways — little different from other failed or collapsing states in the region, particularly its northern neighbour of Zimbabwe — a Marxist dictatorial hellhole. Pictured: US President Donald Trump meets with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa in the White House in Washington, DC, on May 21, 2025. (Photo by Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)

Located at the tip of southern Africa and at a strategic junction of trade routes, South Africa has regressed into an ideologically-driven socialist-communist abyss of poverty, crime, corruption and systemic dysfunction at all levels: local, state and national – all in 30 years since the end of Apartheid.

Once the leading economic power in all of Africa, South Africa is now regarded as the most corrupt country on the continent. It resembles a typical “banana republic” in some ways — little different from other failed or collapsing states in the region, particularly its northern neighbour of Zimbabwe — a Marxist dictatorial hellhole.

An independent body, the South African Institution of Civil Engineering, “ten years ago rated South Africa’s infrastructure as C, and now it has deteriorated to a D rating. On its current path, the country is heading towards an E, meaning unfit for purpose.”

As reporter Shaun Jacobs notes, “South Africa’s infrastructure is collapsing in front of everyone’s eyes.” The basis of any economy is infrastructure. It is what allows trade and workers to travel. With “unfit” infrastructure: roads, ports, airports, and bridges and so on, the economy will eventually fail.

Even so, powered by its Marxist-themed National Democratic Revolution (NDR) charter, the leading political party, the African National Congress (ANC), has been accelerating its collectivist program to control all aspects of the economy, whether public or private. While the private sector still has some freedoms, these rights diminish by the day.

History indicates that the inevitable consequence of radical socialist-communist policies is economic collapse and social discord. This outcome should not be surprising when it is realized the ANC’s strategy is fully within the Marxist playbook: res delenda est – everything must be destroyed, refabricated, and brought to fulfilment into a communist state, a new order for the nation.

The demise of major private sector companies, most with a long history there, appears to be a direct result of nationalistic government policies coupled to aggressive and ideologically-driven trade unions who, presumably, would rather see companies closed down than accept a lesser wage for their allegedly “oppressed” workers.

Unionized South African workers are among the best paid in Africa, due to unions contending for above-inflation wage growth, ostensibly to narrow the long-term large inequality gap. At the same time, the ANC government has enacted detrimental labour laws that make it hard for companies to hire and fire. This has a dampening effect on hiring in the private sector and thus escalates unemployment.

The result of draconian labour laws is that the official unemployment rate exceeds 33% (more than 8 million potential workers), while the rate for unemployed younger workers exceeds 60%. These figures consistently rate among the world’s highest and confirm for millions that they have little or no future prospects in their country of birth.

In the past 25 years, more than 70,000 important companies entered liquidation with more than 2.8 million jobs lost directly due to adverse government policies. According to Haroon Bhorat, director of the Development Policy Research Unit at the University of Cape Town, these figures are an “underlying indicator of de-industrialization.”

As the deindustrialisation of Africa’s most industrialised country accelerates, the unemployment rate will increase accordingly and even more people, to survive, will become reliant on government grants. The centralized ANC state then has citizens exactly where they want them – under their control and dependent upon the government for daily living. In this way future votes are secured, leading to the perpetuation of the ANC — a typical seditious device to remain in power indefinitely, like other nations in Africa.

Even the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), a radical far-leftist political party – that of “Kill the farmer, kill the Boer” fame – lament this economic catastrophe:

“What we are witnessing is the destruction of the little industry South Africa has left, a collapse that will hollow out communities and deepen mass unemployment… The government cannot continue to wash its hands while South Africa’s industrial backbone is dismantled.”

The irony of their complaint is seemingly lost on the EFF: it was their policies that significantly contributed to the economic demise and deindustrialisation of the country. The party’s leader, Julius Malema, calls for supporters to “cut the throat of whiteness” and “shoot the Boer,” while advocating land-grabs without compensation, particularly of white-owned farmland.

In 2022 Malema’s revolutionary slogans, such as “Kill the Farmer” were ruled by the Equality Court not as hate speech, but simply an exercise in freedom of speech. However, in August this year a High Court did find Malema guilty of hate speech.

This issue was raised by US President Donald Trump at the White House meeting in May 2025 when South African President Cyril Ramaphosa dismissed allegations of hate speech directed at whites.

In addition to the closing or restructuring of corporate stalwarts such as Goodyear, Dunlop Tyres, Glencore, Mango Airlines, supermarket chain Pick n Pay, Group Five Construction, MultiChoice media, the South African Broadcasting Corporation, Cell C, the South African Post Office, Stefanutti Stocks construction, the analytic and data group Nielsen, other notable entities in financial distress include:

Murray & Roberts, a construction giant with an international footprint and an icon in South Africa for over 120 years, went into receivership this year, laying-off some 1,400 workers. As there are very few, if any, openings for these workers elsewhere, and given that one worker supports at least four others, more than 5,000 people will go hungry.

ArcelorMittal, a major steel company – the largest and oldest (since 1928) in the nation – is in the process of closing various plants. As CEO Kobus Verster explained:

“Around 3,500 jobs would be lost directly, while studies estimate that as many as 80,000 people could be affected indirectly as downstream businesses, mines, quarries, schools, and small guesthouses dependent on the industry.”

Collateral damage includes leading iron ore mines due to the fact that ArcelorMittal is their main customer.

Ford Motor Company in South Africa advises the public that it will be firing nearly 500 workers due to slowing demand. Ford is a major manufacturer of motor vehicles in the country and has had a presence there for over 100 years. A spokesman for the Solidarity trade union commented:

“When an automotive giant like Ford takes such drastic steps, it is a warning to the entire industry… We fear that further retrenchments may be inevitable if conditions do not improve quickly.”

The sad upshot is that the economy is “imploding, with key industries falling one by one like a set of dominoes, after 15 years of mismanagement and poor government policy,” notes journalist Shaun Jacobs.

Concerningly, there are no internal indications whatsoever that the socialist-driven centralized economy will improve “quickly” or at all. In fact, it will probably continue to deteriorate — unless Trump intervenes. If there is to be hope for South Africa, and the ANC is to relinquish power or remedy their destructive policies, this hope lies largely with the current US administration.

To bring about fundamental change in South Africa, there has to be a change from its alliance with totalitarian regimes to one closer to those nations reflecting Western interests and the liberal democratic tradition. The country is too important to the West for it to remain aligned with anti-Western powers of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, and for these despotic nations to take advantage of America’s absence of influence in southern Africa.

The West has long been sympathetic to South Africa — arguably, at times, too sympathetic — and has mainly treated it gently despite its recent alignment with BRICS, a group of 11 emerging economies — Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Indonesia — that bonded together on economic and geopolitical issues presumably as a counterbalance to the West, and purportedly to increase development.

Despite much international criticism, Ramaphosa declared in February that, “We are not daunted. We will not be deterred. We will speak in defense of our national interests.” Despite being the US’s largest trade partner in Africa, he was clearly verbalizing the ANC’s defiant attitude towards the West.

South Africa has also cosied up to totalitarian nations. South Africa’s anti-Western stance, however, was made clear at the United Nations when supporting resolutions contrary to Western interests. Trump noticed this contrary stance and decided to take action.

On May 21, 2025, when Ramaphosa met Trump at the White House, the US deemed it a suitable occasion to confront him with South Africa’s radical policies, including the 140 racist employment and business restrictions on white males.

Other issues raised in Washington included hate speech against minorities, which has resulted in a mass exodus of the white educated class. Assaults on white farmers have also forced many farmers to take advantage of America’s refugee program to relocate in the US. A further contentious issue was the ANC decision to expropriate private property without compensation – a disastrous policy that crippled neighbouring Zimbabwe — creating much uncertainty, and likely resulting in a dearth of foreign investment.

Also of concern was South Africa’s military co-operation with ideological “soulmates” such as Iran, Russia, and Communist China — with which the ANC has “one of the strongest party-to-party relationships in Africa.” It is a policy that has surely led to the country being further ostracised by western investors.

The televised meeting at the White House was a calamity for South Africa. Ramaphosa was unable to explain to a global audience why such racist policies are not only permitted, but enacted into law. After all, the West supported the liberation struggle against Apartheid policies — to end racial discrimination in the country against blacks — and enabled the ANC to take power. A situation of reverse-Apartheid, of apparent revenge, against whites seems to have emerged in its place.

Upon Ramaphosa’s return home — despite being criticised in front of a wide audience, and at risk of the ANC and its leaders being sanctioned by the US — an ANC spokesperson doubled-down on their radical agenda:

“We hear there is a good lobby around sanctions, but throughout our struggle we know that leaders and members of the liberation movement had to sacrifice. Even in this particular period, we will continue to pay the price of standing for justice, humanity, equality and respect for the rule of law.”

These are commendable words but misleading. The ANC’s contraventions of human rights and their blatant racism against minorities contradict their fine words.

The ANC’s statement of intent sadly reveals that they will not waver from their ideological stance despite threat of sanctions and punitive US trade tariffs. The spokesman for the Institute of Race Relations, John Endres, commented about the ANC:

“The party misses no opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to the National Democratic Revolution, a programme designed to turn South Africa first into a socialist and then into a communist state.”

Facing US sanctions, the ANC is fast losing political support both domestically. Political commentator Hermann Pretorius predicts that, due to its contrarian ideological stance, the ANC is on a “death spiral”. Its share of votes is estimated to have fallen from some 70% in 2004, to 40% in 2024, and in 2025 is estimated to be around 30%. Pretorius says of the ANC:

“Instead of renewal, it has chosen entrenchment. Instead of pragmatism, dogma. Instead of growth, redistribution without production. Instead of survival, an overdose of toxic ideology.”

Determining what the next dominant political party will be is fraught with complexities. The main contenders are the Democratic Alliance (DA), a centrist party supported by 22% of the electorate but limited appeal to a black majority; the far-left and vehemently anti-White EFF that commanded only 9% at the 2024 national election, and the MK Party, a Zulu ethnic-focused group polling at 15%, based mainly in one state. The outcome will probably be a coalition of convenience, not of ideology, and thus subject to early fracture.

The weakening of the ANC’s authority might lead to other challenges. Endres predicts:

“The party would resort to ever more extreme versions of the NDR – more state intervention, more regulation, more race-based laws, more threats to property rights – in an effort to reassert its power. It would be more tempted to get into bed with the EFF and MK to shore up its support.”

In this scenario, extreme leftist parties would dominate politics and the centrist DA would be left in the backwaters of irrelevance.

A possible alternative to the current constitutional structure is the implementation of a federalised system with independence of the nine states, much like the US. But this too is unlikely as voters might prefer to splinter according to tribal or ethnic affiliation.

With the looming demise of ANC dominance, a power vacuum might also result, and the chances of social conflict accelerate. With the nation’s enormously high unemployment rate and endemic poverty, it might only take a spark to set mass social discord alight.

In such an event, the ANC’s close relationship with the military might see a development whereby the latter is asked to take control, or simply takes over, in order to reinstate ANC dominance by force – a typical communist ploy has been used in Zimbabwe and other countries.

As it is, the military has recently engaged in activities outside the scope of its neutral position and accountability to the executive. A few weeks ago, General Rudzani Maphwanya, chief of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF), apparently took it upon himself to pay an official visit to Iran. Respected political commentator William Saunderson-Meyer commented:

“In Tehran, Maphwanya blatantly entered the civilian arena of governance to punt military and diplomatic cooperation. Emphasising that his trip was ‘not only a military one’ but had been ‘carried out at the best possible time’ to convey ‘a political message’, Maphwanya delivered personal greetings from Ramaphosa and Motshekga to the ‘peace-loving nation of Iran’ with which, he said, South Africa shares ‘common goals.'”

Ramaphosa should have been outraged at this usurpation of the executive’s role and fired Maphwanya. In an ominous development for South Africa’s democracy and separation of powers, Ramaphosa instead called a meeting of no consequence with the Maphwanya, not even a “slap on the wrist.” Along the same lines, Rear Admiral Prince Tshabalala, the SANDF’s director of Defence Corporate Communication, “made it clear that the SANDF sees a political role for itself.”

Saunderson-Meyer therefore believes “the ANC might not be able to prevent the military from acting as it sees fit.”

The ANC is reportedly trying to forge a “deal” with Trump, to enlist deeper US involvement in South Africa. Its future should be of serious concern to its citizens and the West.

Nils A. Haug is an author and columnist. A Lawyer by profession, he is member of the International Bar Association, the National Association of Scholars, the Academy of Philosophy and Letters. Dr. Haug holds a Ph.D. in Apologetical Theology and is author of ‘Politics, Law, and Disorder in the Garden of Eden – the Quest for Identity’; and ‘Enemies of the Innocent – Life, Truth, and Meaning in a Dark Age.’ His work has been published by First Things Journal, The American Mind, Quadrant, Minding the Campus, Gatestone Institute, National Association of Scholars, Jewish Journal, James Wilson Institute (Anchoring Truths), Jewish News Syndicate, Tribune Juive, Document Danmark, Zwiedzaj Polske, Schlaglicht Israel, and many others.

 

Trump just took another big step toward World War III with Russia   LEO HOHMANN

After first denying Ukraine’s request for long-range Tomahawk missiles, President Trump now concedes he has ‘sort of’ changed his mind, with only a few details on targets left to be worked out.

OCT 06, 2025

President Trump said Monday he has “sort of made a decision” on sending long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine for use against Russia.

Tomahawks can strike targets deep inside Russia, including Moscow. As you can see from the above graphic, the Tomahawk missile has a range more than five times that of the previously most lethal U.S. weapon sent to Ukraine, the ATACMS. Going from ATACMS to Tomahawks is no small step in the escalation of this war.

Trump was asked about it by a reporter Monday and you can watch his response here. He said:

“Yeah, I’ve sort of made a decision, pretty much. I think I’d want to find out what they’re doing with them, where are they sending them? I guess, I’d have to ask that question.”

What Trump seems to be saying here is that he’s approved the transfer of Tomahawks to Ukraine, but he’s just working out the details about targets the Ukrainians will be allowed to hit with these low-flying cruise missiles.

It’s absolutely chilling that a president can so casually and nonchalantly announce such a major step toward war with a rival nuclear-armed superpower like Russia and nobody in Congress or the media even questions him about the potential ramifications of such a decision.

Trump is likely to allow the Zelensky regime in Kiev, which is losing the war badly, to use the US-made cruise missiles to be fired at Russian energy infrastructure and against its military-industrial factories, but not against the Kremlin or other government sites frequented by Russia’s top leaders.

So we have another major escalation. Another new weapon system will be delivered to Ukraine. Because what Zelensky wants, Zelensky gets. That’s the pattern. And each new weapons transfer is more lethal and powerful than the previous.

Russian President Putin said just last week he did not think President Trump would approve of Zelensky’s request for Tomahawk missiles for use against his country. Putin indicated that if Trump were to grant the request, it would be the final nail in the coffin of U.S.-Russian relations. Those relations would be “destroyed,” he was quoted as saying by Reuters on October 5.

Now we find out today that the decision has already been made. The neocons win again. There are simply too many of these neocon warmongers around the President and they have his ear. This is why I’ve been predicting for a while now that America will get drawn further and further into this war, one small step at a time, and at some point it will no longer be possible to continue this game of trying to deny that we are, in fact, at war with Russia.

Every time we think maybe President Trump will pull us back from the edge of World War III, he makes another decision to draw us closer, continuing Biden’s policy of arming Russia’s enemy, right on Russia’s border, an enemy that was created by America for this specific purpose, to confront Russia as a proxy for NATO. When Ukraine can no longer fulfill its role of military tormenter to Russia because it has used up all its military-aged men, then NATO will send its troops in to fill the void.

Let’s put the shoe on the other foot for a moment. What if Mexico were converted into a client state of Russia, accepting Russian long-range missiles on its soil, for the sole purpose of firing them into the heartland of America? And what if the Russians sent over their top technicians to help fire those missiles deep inside U.S. territory, hitting military targets and energy infrastructure from Texas to Colorado and beyond? What would our response be to such a provocation? I think you know the answer.

Trump has said he is disappointed with Putin for not making peace and has at least twice in recent days described Russia as a “paper tiger” for failing to defeat Ukraine in “less than a week.” Putin last week flipped the script, questioning if NATO was not the “paper tiger” for failing to stop Russia’s advance.

Economist and trends analyst Martin Armstrong writes, citing a Wall Street Journal report, that President Trump signed off on providing U.S. intelligence agencies to supply targeting data to Ukraine for strikes on Russian energy infrastructure (oil refineries, pipelines, power plants) with Tomahawk missiles.

Armstrong explains that this suggests Washington will select the targets for Ukraine to attack. He chides the US administration for denying that we are in a war with Russia, writing:

“That is waging DIRECT WAR against Russia. They certainly can provide missiles to Venezuela and provide them targets for Washington, D.C., and put one right up Trump’s ass. I guess that would not be declaring war either.”

Sounds like two school yard bullies are about to square off. Neither one is ready to back down. Each has weapons capable of wiping out billions of people and burying the world in nuclear dust. Almost no Americans and no Russians want to go to war with each other, at least not anyone with their sanity intact. But, apparently, we have leaders that do want it. At least they are willing to risk it. And for what? Is Ukraine worth risking our own national existence, to the extent that we would cross a redline set by Putin and allow some of our most deadly long-range missiles to be fired into his country? Putin has access to even deadlier missiles, by the way, ones that travel at hypersonic speeds, as opposed to the subsonic Tomahawks.

This won’t end well, folks.

Pray for peace. Prepare for war. It’s coming to our shores. I don’t know when. But it’s coming.

 

The latest Gaza flotilla: What you may have missed   by MOSHE PHILLIPS

Anti-Zionist radicals on the boats don’t seem to care about the residents of the Strip any more than Hamas terrorists do.

(Oct. 6, 2025  JNS

A close look at the boats used by anti-Israel extremists aboard the so-called “Gaza Flotilla,” which attempted to evade Israeli navy vessels and land in the Gaza Strip on Yom Kippur, reveals much about their true motivation—something that both journalists and Israel’s supporters have missed, though should not have.

You might have expected that the banners on the ships would feature messages like “Stop the Blockade,” “Feed Gaza” or even “Stop the Genocide,” but the boats I saw in the photos had no such messages at all. That’s because the anti-Zionist radicals on the boats don’t really care about the residents of Gaza any more than Hamas terrorists do, and they know that in reality, there’s no genocide or starvation.

The signs on the boats that I saw read:

“Free Gaza”
In response, it must be noted that before Oct. 7, 2023, no Israeli soldiers were in the Gaza Strip when Hamas launched its terrorist invasion. The disengagement of Israeli civilians and the withdrawal of Israeli soldiers were completed by Sept. 12, 2005.

“Free Palestine”
One is left wondering what these signs mean, but the meaning should be clear: Mahmoud Abbas, now 89, has been chairman of the Palestine Authority since 2004. And to this day, the PLO, which created the P.A., still features a map of “Palestine” that leaves zero room for a State of Israel of any size—“from the river to the sea.”

“Leve Palestina”
This last message—“Leve Palestina”—may be the most telling to understand the true motives of these haters. It almost certainly refers to a 1979 song that has this hate in its very first line: “Long live Palestine and crush Zionism. Long live, long live Palestine.” The song infamously glorifies violence and terrorism, stating: “And we have thrown stones at soldiers and police; and we have fired missiles.” In an August 2024 unabashed tribute piece about the song, reported by Al Jazeera, it seems that the song “has gained new life since … Oct. 7,” and YouTube videos with it have had millions of views.

In the first line of its coverage of the flotilla on Oct. 1, The New York Times reported: “Activists on a flotilla of vessels carrying humanitarian aid,” and later, “their mission is to deliver food during the humanitarian crisis there.” It should be plain that the fanatics’ only goals were to provoke Israel and ensure that the media continued to portray Israel as the only bad actor in the current war with Hamas. The Times and others complied and never analyzed the signs the ships carried.

And news reports said the ships carried only a nominal amount of actual aid; the effort was more symbolic.

The official website for the flotilla spells it out: “Our efforts build on decades of Palestinian resistance.” Despite claims of nonviolence on the part of the Israel-bashing Sumud flotilla fanatics, “Palestinian resistance” has meant one thing since the 1964 founding of the PLO (when Gaza was occupied by Egypt and Judea and Samaria was occupied by Jordan), and that one thing is violence. Are there any leaders advocating for nonviolence among Palestinian Arabs? If so, where are they? Such figures rarely make headlines.

All of this reminds me of the quote below from a 2001 book, Eyes Upon the Land (Part 1): The Principles Underlying the Arab-Israeli Conflict, adapted by Eliyahu Touger from the Sichos in English Collection. It should have received much more attention from Israel’s supporters than it did, especially in light of the extremist flotilla news, as well as the recent decisions by far too many nations to recognize a nonexistent “State of Palestine.”

It said: “There is a fundamental argument that must be dealt with. At the bottom of all the Arab rhetoric lies one basic claim: ‘You are intruders. This is our land. We had been living here for centuries, and then you decided to take it from us.’ Once it is established that the Jews have a valid right to the Land of Israel, then the violence, hatred and disregard for life that has characterized the Arab position can be judged for what it is. Unless that right is established, the Arabs will always claim that they have a valid goal: reclaiming a land that is rightfully theirs. And once validity is granted to their goal, the debate whether all means are acceptable to attain it or not is one of philosophy.”

Israel’s supporters and advocates must do more to educate the public about the Jewish people’s authentic ownership of the land of Israel. It is absolutely crucial.

MOSHE PHILLIPS   Moshe Phillips, a veteran pro-Israel activist and author, is the national chairman of Americans For a Safe Israel (AFSI). A former board member of the American Zionist Movement, he previously served as national director of the U.S. division of Herut and worked with CAMERA in Philadelphia. He was also a delegate to the 2020 World Zionist Congress and served as editor of The Challenger, the publication of the Tagar Zionist Youth Movement. His op-eds and letters have been widely published in the United States and Israel.

[Ed.: Greta ten years ago holding her breath for global warming:

 

Trump Plays The Card on Hamas! A Dramatic Shift Is Unfolding in Gaza…  [54:23]   Alex Traiman and Josh Hasten

October 6, 2025  JNS TV

 

Hamas Thought They Knew EVERYTHING About Israel – They Were Dead Wrong (w/Caroline Glick)   [7:43]

Oct 5, 2025  JNS TV | Straight Up with Danny Seaman

Is Israel on the brink of victory in Gaza and is Trump’s peace plan the key? Former senior Israeli official Danny Seaman sits down with acclaimed journalist and Prime Minister Netanyahu’s advisor Caroline Glick for a conversation about the latest developments in the war with Hamas, the proposed Trump-backed Gaza deal and the future of Israeli security.

Caroline Glick, drawing on her decades of experience and close ties to both Netanyahu and Trump, argues that Israel has already achieved most of its strategic war objectives. Hamas, she says, is no longer a viable regime or military force, and the current deal on the table offers Israel everything it set out to achieve while denying Hamas any of its goals. She details how the war has reshaped Israel’s military posture and redefined the role of leadership in this critical moment.

The conversation explores the terms of the peace proposal and the practical, no-nonsense approach of leaders like Netanyahu and Trump. Glick also addresses the emotional toll of war and the resilience of Israeli society. She explains why this is a fight for survival and why the strength Israel has shown in the past two years has fundamentally changed how its enemies perceive it.

CHAPTERS

00:00 – Intro & Audience Requests for Caroline Glick

01:13 – Caroline Glick Joins the Studio

02:00 – Netanyahu, Trump, and Optimism in Israel

03:24 – The Gaza Deal: Israel’s War Goals Within Reach

05:15 – What the Deal Means for Hamas

06:37 – Why This Moment is Different for Netanyahu

08:10 – Faith in the IDF and the People of Israel

09:42 – Security Control Over Gaza: What’s Changing?

11:05 – Trump, the Nobel Prize, and Real Motives for Peace

12:17 – Biblical Strength & the Path to Real Peace

13:55 – The World Misunderstood Israel’s Endurance

15:24 – Heavy Costs—but National Resolve Remains Strong

17:00 – Closing: “We’re Stronger Now Than Before Oct 7”

 

The Historical Secrets for Israeli-Palestinian Peace   DANIEL CLARKE-SERRET

“Eternal peace” requires a paradigm shift, not a press conference.

OCT 06, 2025  The Future of Jewish

U.S President Donald Trump’s 21-point plan for ending the war in Gaza has been hailed by the man himself as the dawn of “eternal peace.”

It’s fair to say that the president isn’t a student of history, otherwise he wouldn’t have dared fallen into such a hubristic trap.

The historical precedents for “eternal peace” haven’t been all that promising. (That’s a British understatement.) A treaty with precisely that appellation was signed in 1686 between Poland and Russia. Its clauses included the ceding of Kiev to Russia and, as all irony-allergic readers are aware, the status of that city has never been in doubt again.

In reality, Russia and Poland have been in constant conflict ever since, to the point where Poland completely ceased to exist for a short time. She has been occupied by Russia in the context of both the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, and to this day Poland feels it necessary to be a member of an American-led defence alliance to ward of the possibility of the bear’s attack.

Meanwhile, Ukraine, of Kiev fame, is currently engaged in an existential war with her ever-aggressive neighbour lurking menacingly on her territory. So much for eternal peace.

Lest we think this phenomenon is limited to Europe, we would do well to remind ourselves of the events of the Early Middle Ages. There, in the heart of the Northern Middle East, the Eastern Roman Byzantines and the Persian Sassanians finally came to terms.

In a famed treaty of 532 CE, known alternatively as the “Perpetual Peace” or “The Treaty of Eternal Peace,” Byzantine Emperor Justinian I and the Sassanid King Khosrow I agreed to a permanent cessation of hostilities between the two warring empires. It was meant to endure indefinitely, but needless to say it broke down in short order. A mere eight years later, the Persians breached their treaty obligations by resuming their hostilities against the Byzantine Empire. It is in this light that Trump is perhaps unwise to toast his diplomacy with a poisoned chalice.

Yet none of this is to say that his peace efforts are unappreciated. True enough, he is motivated by the baubles of a Nobel Peace Prize, and he has an ego which challenges the Mongol Empire for size, but, nonetheless, his efforts may indeed lead to the release of all the hostages, that being the condition of just the first stage of the plan. If indeed he triumphs in this regard, we will gladly thank him for his intervention. Nonetheless, what he’s most unlikely to realise is eternal peace and just like the ominous 532 CE precedent: Hostilities are sure to return in the near future.

Is this cynicism? Shouldn’t we just give peace a chance? To be sure, the precedents in Ukraine and the Middle East are far from rosy, but isn’t it a council of doom to despair before the starting whistle has been blown?

I should state most emphatically that eternal peace between two nations is entirely possible and, as this essay goes on, we shall unveil one particularly prominent example of it. Indeed, in the Byzantine-Sassanian case, a perpetual unity of sorts did eventually come — just not in the way that either empire expected. With the arrival of Islam, both polities were utterly crushed and their territories were joined as one under the tender sword of the Umayyad Empire. This case study shows us that peace is possible, but it takes an unprecedented paradigm shift — in this case, the crushing defeat of both powers by a third party.

But is there another way? Can perpetual peace come to pass without the mutual destruction of the two warring parties? In a famous essay of the same name, Immanuel Kant discusses this very issue. The German philosopher conceived of a world without boundaries or frontiers, a cosmopolitan “soulless despotism” where states became a thing of the imagined past.

In his own prose, he dismissed the idea of a world government, but the consequence of his position makes it a logical necessity. Kant famously believed in the concept of moral universalism, that we owe duties to all human individuals equally as human individuals and that it was wrong-headed to impute specific duties towards family, friends, community, and state as other philosophies have traditionally done. We see the fruits of this thinking today in the “Woke” movement and in talks of open borders.

It would be improper to dismiss Kant’s essay out of hand, but as a recipe for perpetual peace, it is naively wanting, even undesirable.

So, what options are left for eternal peace?

Is it a pure utopian dream only imaginable in the biblical book of Isaiah? Is it a fantasy only capable of realization through crushing military defeat — thereby bringing additional problems in its wake?

I say, again, that eternal peace, at least between some nations, is entirely possible and the historical record confirms as much. Nonetheless, as stated previously, there needs to be a thus far unconceived paradigm shift.

The best example of such a realignment taking place, leading to two centuries of peace, with a near certain prospect of eternal peace onwards into the future, is the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom. Although they fought a bitter Revolutionary War, followed by an encore in 1812, the two nations soon came to peaceful terms. Why?

It is easy to dismiss the special relationship on the basis that both countries are English-speaking, have a similar heritage and indeed, in the decades prior to independence, were one country. Lest we forget that the casus belli of the contest was the belief that Crown-in-Parliament was failing to respect the liberty of British subjects.

Yet, despite the close pre-war relationship between Britain and America, the eternal peace that we see to this day was never a sure thing. It was the actions of the leadership, George III, John Adams, and particularly George Washington that allowed the parties to stride towards the future in confidence and peace.

George Washington had the bearing of a general and the stature of a leader without the avaricious ambition to match. To be sure, he did not display the meekness of Moses: When the Continental Congress was in the process of selecting a Commander-in-Chief, Washington unsubtly showed up in a military uniform. He did want the job. Yet his mild presentation of candidature was married with a genuine humility.

Upon being mocked by newspaper cartoons as president, the normally self-controlled Washington flew into a rage, balling that he didn’t want the position in the first place. Furthermore, in an act entirely unprecedented and unexpected, he resigned his military commission immediately upon winning the Revolutionary War.

The latter point cannot be emphasized enough. In an oft repeated tale, Thomas Jefferson had reacted with profound shock when Alexander Hamilton pronounced that he admired Julius Caesar. It moved him so that it became his go-to dinner party anecdote. And what was the issue with Caesar for Jefferson? That he embodied the sum of all fears for a nation contemplating Republicanism.

The Founding Fathers had an abiding anxiety born of history, namely that a successful military commander, with a loyal and all-conquering army, would seize the levers of power as a tyrant. That, after all, had been the historical experience of Republican government. That, after all, had been the lesson of Caesar, the moment that he crossed the Rubricon. Would that be fate of America?

So, when George Washington resigned his position and returned to civilian life, he instantly became a hero. He had bucked the precedent of Caesar and ultimately became the power-unhungry president that the new nation so desperately needed. In a letter which changed all of history.

At last, the hour of republicanism had come — with the meekest of generals who knew when it was time to go. Everyone had expected Washington to seize power, but through his resignation, his awe-struck citizens knew what they had to do: They needed George Washington as the figurehead of the new nation. No more would the Monarch’s birthday be celebrated. Instead the meek, victorious general would take his symbolic place as a spiritual father figure. Indeed, from as early as 1778, Washington was spoken of as the father of the country.

The actions of Washington that day in stepping away from power literally changed the world. They were the paradigm shift that was needed for eternal peace, both internally within a liberty-loving America and in terms of its relationship with the former mother country.

Prior to the resignation, but hearing of its unprecedented possibility, King George III allegedly said that such an action would make Washington “the greatest man in the world.” So, when it actually happened, the King presumably thought that he was witnessing history in the making; an extraordinary act of humility that changed the perception of American Republicanism in the eyes of the British state. It laid the foundation for eternal peace, a near-utopia that was sealed in the events to come.

In 1785, when John Adams met King George III as America’s first minister to Britain, he expressed his nation’s desire for lasting friendship and mutual respect. The King, remarkably gracious in defeat, replied that though he had opposed separation, he now fully accepted American independence and wished for enduring peace based on their shared language, faith, and heritage. Their exchange marked an unprecedented moment of dignity and reconciliation between former enemies.

These two gentlemen show us the path to peace.

In life and history, conflict is inevitable. War, as a last resort, is sometimes unavoidable. But the war having being won, it is incumbent on the victor to be gracious and for the loser to accept the result. Though they may have lost the battle, the vanquished is charged with the responsibility of looking to the future, building a shared destiny of co-operation and friendship.

What was achieved by Adams and the King that day is a lesson that the Arab states in general and the Palestinians in particular have so singularly failed to learn. Instead of accepting the result of Israel’s War of Independence, which the Arabs themselves initiated, they have persistently acted with aggression and hostility towards the modern State of Israel.

No George III has risen up to say, “I was the last to consent to the Separation, but the Separation having been made and having become inevitable, I have always said, as I say now, that I would be the first to meet the friendship of Israel as an independent Power.”

In short, there has been no paradigm shift. Instead we have seen history on rinse and repeat. So, while the United States and Britain are family happily united, the Jews and the Arab world are family unhappily estranged.

When Donald Trump speaks of eternal peace, it is, of course, possible, but it would require the Palestinians to take upon the lessons just articulated: Acceptance, forgiveness, leadership and a complete paradigm shift. Perhaps too much for the President to stake his reputation upon? Very probably.

Yet, there is at least one opportunity that should be seized forthwith: Trump would do well to read his history books and finally follow the example of Washington: a man of modesty, humility, and a refusal to grasp for power. These are the actions that can change the world and finally, possibly, lead to eternal peace.

 

Shocking Truth About the Antichrist Revealed…   [45:56]

October 2, 2026   Destiny Image

Billy Crone reveals the truth about King Charles and other major end-time players…

 

Israel was sold victory, and got surrender.    YONATAN DAON-STERN

U.S. President Donald Trump, with the help of Hamas’ backers, is turning the Jewish state’s surrender into his “Peace Prize.”

OCT 05, 2025

Last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stood at the White House, next to U.S. President Donald Trump, and declared:

“I support your plan to end the war in Gaza, which achieves our war aims. It will bring back to Israel all our hostages, dismantle Hamas’s military capabilities, end its political rule, and ensure that Gaza never again poses a threat to Israel.”

He told us this plan would “achieve all our war objectives without any further bloodshed.”

This was supposed to be the turning point. The victory speech. Netanyahu told us this was the path to victory. Trump crowned it Netanyahu’s “crowning achievement.”

And then came the switch.

Trump didn’t present this plan as cautious diplomacy. He dressed it up as if it were biblical prophecy fulfilled. His own words:

“This is a big, big day, a beautiful day, potentially one of the great days ever in civilization… after 2,000, 3,000 years, whatever it is.”
This isn’t leadership; it’s narcissistic lunacy. To call a temporary ceasefire and hostage deal “the greatest day in thousands of years” is insane. It shows this was never about Israel’s victory; it was about Trump’s own myth-making.

And the myth-making isn’t for free. Trump wants the Nobel Peace Prize. That is what this is all about: personal glory. He is prepared to sacrifice Israel itself for his prize, his “eternal peace,” and his legacy.

By the way, this is the same “Peace Prize” that was once seriously proposed for Hitler himself and has already been awarded to a rogues’ gallery of dishonourable men, including Yasser Arafat, for the Oslo Accords that began the very chain of appeasement and illusion that led us straight to October 7th.

Perhaps this dishonourable prize is indeed fitting for such a dishonourable man.

At the United Nations just days earlier, Netanyahu had promised to “finish the job.” He told the world Hamas would be destroyed. The Israel Defense Forces even broadcast his speech into Gaza by loudspeaker, telling the people they had a last chance to rid themselves of Hamas.

But standing in Washington, he gave it all away. He endorsed a plan cooked not just in the White House, but in Doha, Ankara, Islamabad, and Cairo. Trump bragged about it: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia, Egypt, every one of them backing the plan.

Why would these states, which cheer on Palestinian terror and many of which actively support it, suddenly support a “peace plan” that dismantles Hamas? This is not because it dismantles Hamas, but rather because it dismantles Israel, freezes its momentum, and places Israel’s fate in the Arabs’ hands.

Within days, Trump declared the oxymoron of our time: “Hamas is ready for peace.” He demanded that Israel stop bombing. What Netanyahu sold as victory turned into restraint, delay, and international supervision.

This reminds me of the earlier Trump demand during the Israel-Iran truce: He explicitly told Israel, “do not drop those bombs,” after Iran had already launched missiles that struck Be’er Sheva and killed Israeli civilians. Jets were turned back. As retaliation planes soared, Trump forced Israel’s hand, making us stand down. It is baffling that Netanyahu did not see that coming.

This isn’t victory. This is being played. This is being set up.

And Hamas? They accepted what suited them. They promised hostages “according to the exchange formula … with the necessary field conditions.” They praised Trump’s leadership. They smiled at Qatar and Turkey. Hamas spokesman Musa Abu Marzouk said openly on Al Jazeera: “We will hand over the weapons to the Palestinian state, whoever rules Gaza will hold the weapons.” In other words: Gaza will not be disarmed. Hamas’ guns remain in Gaza until a Palestinian state exists, which means never on Israel’s terms.

Osama Hamdan spelt it out further: “Attempts to remove Hamas from the political scene will not succeed.” “We will not accept foreign forces in Gaza.” “When a Palestinian state is established, the weapons will be at its disposal.”

He even invoked the hostages as leverage, saying corpses are buried in areas where Israeli forces are present, implying that Israeli withdrawals are required just so Hamas can access the bodies. This is not demilitarisation. This is not disarmament. This is a declaration that Hamas remains in power, with weapons intact, until Israel itself is destroyed.

And somehow, we accepted this. Netanyahu told us Hamas would be disarmed under this plan, when Hamas itself told the world it would not. In other words, they will not give up their guns. Not to Trump, not to Netanyahu, not even to Tony Blair. They will only give up their weapons when Israel itself is destroyed and replaced by “Palestine.” And somehow, we accepted this. Netanyahu told us Hamas would be disarmed under this plan, when Hamas itself told the world it would not.

What, then, has been achieved? Not the war aims Netanyahu promised. Not the destruction of Hamas. Not the disarmament of Gaza. What has been achieved is the victory of the hostage movement. This is what the world is celebrating: that the hostages will be freed. And let me say clearly, no war in history has ever been won because hostages were freed. Not one.

We had the hostages on October 6th. Victory is not bringing them back. Victory is making sure the ideology that kidnaps Jews goes extinct. Victory is destroying the idea that kidnapping pays.

But what have we done instead? We have rewarded it. We have proven that kidnapping Israelis works: It brings ceasefires and prestige, and it even brings them back their murderers. We have taken the deepest humiliation of October 7th and enshrined it as the definition of “peace.”

This is the result of Israel making the return of the hostages the most important issue. This is not a victory. It is defeat, surrender, sacrifice.

Where is the justice for all those who died needlessly on October 7th? What about the soldiers who gave their lives and who have spent almost two years now fighting? What about the Israelis who put their lives, their bodies, their livelihoods, and their economic futures at risk to defend their homeland?

Think of every parent who buried a child after October 7th. Think of the soldiers who marched into tunnels, the ones who never came home, the ones who came home mangled and broken. Are their deaths being paid for with the cheap currency of a photo op, a “hostage deal,” and the promise of someone else’s peace prize? This isn’t just impractical. It is profoundly immoral. It is a betrayal of every life spent defending this country.

We have been down this rabbit hole before, the Oslo Accords and the illusions of “recognition” used as moral cover, the appeasement dressed as diplomacy. Each step emboldened the enemy; each concession normalised the abnormal. Each time we surrendered moral clarity for the promise of normalisation, the price rose. We rewarded terror with legitimacy, and now the process that began decades ago has delivered us to this carnage.

The only way out is to stop the loop of suicide. We must stop rewarding the kidnapping of our children. We must stop pretending that normalisation with regimes that bankroll or excuse terror is a fair trade for our survival. We must stop sacrificing our boys so that others can write themselves into history books and collect prizes. Our first allegiance must be to our people, our dead, our soldiers, our children. We must stand for justice first, not spectacles. We must demand accountability for every life lost, not deals that let the perpetrators go home with their guns and their prestige.

This is one of the most important reasons Israel was founded: to be a refuge, to defend a people who could not otherwise survive. We seem to have forgotten that. We are paying the price now, in blood and dignity. If we do not reclaim justice as our policy, there will be nothing left of Zionism but a museum exhibit and a burnt blue and white flag.

This is the result of all these delegations to Qatar and all the “mediations” that have kept our enemies in business. This is the result of all those “Surrender Now” protests every week, the emotional spectacles, and the vice-signalling. This is the result of surrendering the moral high ground to emotionalists who’d rather spill out their feelings on camera than use their brains. This is the result of this nation’s emotional state. We end up sacrificing tomorrow for the present; we choose optics over outcomes.

Wars are not won with exchange deals. They are won with the enemy’s unconditional surrender. Don’t forget it. If they are setting the terms and conditions, we are not the winners. Anyone who tries to sell this as a victory is a liar.

We must challenge this with all our power. We must talk to ministers, to Knesset members, to anyone who will listen. We must go on the streets if we must. We must use the internet, write, call, and organise. Show your voice. If we do not act now, maybe we will never be able to in the future. Fight with words, with votes, with presence, with everything legally possible.

This is relevant for the entire world. The response from the Muslim Brotherhood makes the global consequence explicit. They celebrate this as a model and a school for future action. In their message, translated below, they say:

“Hamas has mastered the art of military combat and the art of international political combat. … This is a qualitative leap for Hamas and a new school of struggle that will be studied by future generations. We are with the resistance. … They were right when they fired the first shot.”

This is not a fringe reaction. This is instruction and propaganda. It shows that our enemies see this not as a setback but as a template: combine terror, kidnappings, and relentless lobbying until the world rewrites the rules for you. They will teach this to recruits, to movements, to confused allies and to a sympathetic media.

If our deal becomes their curriculum, then the consequences are horrific and immediate: more attacks, more kidnappings, and more global celebration of our humiliation. This is not an unintended side effect; it is the foreseeable reaction of a movement that reads victory differently than we do. They do not see the return of hostages as a cost; they see it as proof that the method works.

This deal effectively sanctions the kidnapping of every Jew all over the world!

Tragically, Israel is a nation on the brink of suicide.

It has become a nation that begs its enemies for surrender — a nation that, by definition, cannot win. It is a nation whose leaders broadcast targets in advance and tell its enemies where to go to avoid being hurt. It is a nation that cannot even name its own enemy. It is a nation that confuses defeat with victory, self-sacrifice with morality. It is a nation so morally inverted that it feeds its own enemy while starving its own people of the justice they deserve; it calls itself “the most moral army in the world,” the “virtue” of sacrificing its heroic soldiers for the appeasement of the BBC.
It is a nation whose leader surrenders its independence to the whims of foreign powers.

And worst of all, it is a nation whose people cheer as this happens, mistaking submission for salvation. This is not merely a mistake. This is a path to suicide. And the time bomb, from the moment this deal is inked, will begin ticking until the next October 7th. I don’t know how many will die, whether I will survive this, whether you will survive this, or how many people will be taken hostage.

This is fundamentally the responsibility of our prime minister, whose leadership has failed to prevent this from happening. Look at what is going on around the world: the massacre at a synagogue in Manchester just a few days ago and the celebratory protests that followed in England. Jews everywhere are in greater danger than at any time since World War II. This is not an accident. This global rot is connected to the erosion of our moral clarity.

The Palestinians got a state. They got international recognition. All over the world, people support them and cheer for them. And we, we sign our own death warrant. That is what is happening now, not just in Gaza but globally.

This is where we have come; this is how far we have fallen.

They get their murderers back from our prisons. They keep their weapons. They keep their ideology. As Abu Marzouk said plainly: “Whoever rules Gaza will hold the weapons.”

And what do we get? We get back our own people, half alive, severely traumatised, while they get everything. We gain nothing. We reward terror. We prove to the world that October 7th works.

It is truly beyond belief. And yet here we are.

We are being set up. We are baited by promises and myth-making. We are accepting a framework that turns justice into theatre and hands the initiative to the very people who attacked us. This is not a mistake. It is a choice, a choice made by leadership that values optics and prizes over the survival of our people.

If you want to change this, do not walk away. Do not whisper in the comments and go home. Do something. Talk to your friends, your family, and the Knesset members. Take to the street, write, broadcast, and organise. If not now, when? If not us, who?

Before it’s too late (it’s not), fight. Fight for whatever is left of Zionism. Fight for victory defined on our terms, not on the altar of someone else’s prize.

If you will it, it is no dream.

 

Who is financing the destabilization of America?   DR. PETER AND GINGER BREGGIN

This is “start a war” money. It’s “launch a revolution” money!

OCT 05, 2025

Billionaire Deep State supporters eager to force the United States into a one-world government pour millions into nonprofits which promise wonders and deliver misery—from main street riots to the epidemic of abortions to pressuring for “climate change prevention” to organizations promoting transsexual education in grade schools and more.

If a nonprofit’s activities will further destabilize traditional America, the Deep State is all for it and is eager to fund it. Dr. Peter Breggin and Ginger Breggin interviewed Scott Walter, the president of Capital Research Center, an organization dedicated to investigating and exposing abuses among some foundations, charities, and other nonprofits that are spending money in unauthorized manners, promoting damaging actions in the US and around the world.

And it’s not just a little money. This is “start a war” money. It’s “launch a revolution” money! Ultimately, it is “suppress freedom and constitutional liberties” money. As the publisher description of the book declared on the Amazon page, “The money is staggering. In the 2018 election cycle, Arabella’s nonprofits took in $1.2 billion, more than double the fundraising of the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee combined. In the 2020 election cycle, Arabella’s fundraising spiked to $2.4 billion.”

Following the assassination of Charlie Kirk, hateful comments about Kirk’s death and threats against other conservative figures have proliferated on the internet through social media outlets, and these are being investigated for criminal violations.

Our guest helps to map out the incredible reach and influence of the Deep State billionaires who donate to the umbrella group—Arabella—filtering funds down to nonprofits that share their values and promote their anti-American views.

Scott Walter’s book, Arabella: The dark money network of leftist billionaires secretly transforming America. Arabella is the guidebook that helps us grasp where all the taxpayer fortunes went after they were allocated by USAID and other government entities. This book will assist citizens, investigators, and journalists alike in untangling the nest of ill-willed organizations working on dismantling the United States and the Constitution.

Arabella: The Dark Money Network of Leftist Billionaires Secretly Transforming America

Exposes Arabella Advisors as a major “dark money” operation that channels billions into progressive causes through opaque networks and deceptive grassroots groups, revealing its significant influence on U.S. politics and…   Read more →

The Breggin Hour can be heard on Saturday and Sunday at 4 pm ET live on AmericaOutLoud.news. For podcast episodes listen on iHeart Radio, our world-class media player, or our free apps on Apple, Android, or Alexa. All episodes of The Breggin Hour are available on podcast networks worldwide every Monday.

Red-Green Axis   Peggy Tierney

OCT 05, 2025  TIERNEY’S REAL NEWS

If you haven’t figured it out yet – Communist China & Iran-Qatar (backed by the NWO and the UN) want Islamo-Communism to rule America and for our country to be divided, sick and weak. Their foot soldiers are the enemy within.

The alliance between atheist Communism and political Islam is called the RED-GREEN AXIS and sadly many Americans are clueless about this. The RED-GREEN AXIS is our real enemy here on earth.

Our enemies in the RED-GREEN axis are buying our farmland & our Hollywood movie studios, disrupting our energy and communication systems, manipulating our weather systems, controlling our news networks and social media, stealing our military technology, poisoning our children and our atmosphere and spying on, blackmailing and bribing our politicians, judges and juries.

Islamo-Communist billionaires in America, Europe, Communist China, Qatar and around the world fund left-wing NGOs (non-profits) – like those run by Koch, Soros and Clinton. The NGOs then organize & radicalize the “purple haired” Antifa and “masked Jihadi” foot soldiers on college campuses and in our streets.

These NGOs also fund the mass migration of people from Islamo-Communist countries who hate us – under the guise of helping. Some of

those “migrants” turn into domestic pirates and steal our resources and terrorists who commit political violence.

Around the world, these terrorist foot soldiers and mercenaries are called Antifa, Hamas, Hezbollah, MS-13, Tren de Aragua and more…they used to be called Brownshirts, the Gestapo, the Red Guard…they just changed their names!

Continue reading

 

‘The Blasphemy Business’: The Persecution of Christians, August 2025    by Raymond Ibrahim
October 5, 2025 at 5:30 am

• “What we see in Africa today is a kind of silent genocide or silent, brutal, savage war that is occurring in the shadows and all too often ignored by the international community… [J]ihadist groups are in a position to take over not one, not two, but several countries in Africa…. It’s very dangerous for the national security of the United States…. Christians are going to be targeted and destroyed.” — Alberto Miguel Fernandez, geopolitical analyst and former U.S. diplomat, Fox News, August 7, 2025, Mozambique.
• The Islamic State (ISIS) released a newsletter praising its “mujahideen” [jihadists] for targeting and slaughtering the Christians of Democratic Republic of the Congo and Mozambique mentioned above, and urging followers to replicate these attacks in Europe…. It praises the massacres and beheadings of Christians inside churches, and attacks on Christian communities, all of which left “pools of blood.” It calls on its followers to offer Christians three choices: “If they refuse Islam and the jizyah tax, the third option is murder.” — MEMRI, August 8, 2025, Democratic Republic of Congo.
• “Our conquering ancestors ruled with swords, advancing legions and leading the way, until they terrorized the nations of their time, who came to them willingly or unwillingly, surrendering and submissive. This is the truth, and anything beyond it is false.” — ISIS newsletter, reported by MEMRI, August 8, 2025, Democratic Republic of Congo.
• The “hearts still ache for revenge against the Christians of Europe. The call is still open to the heroes of Islam to attack them again and invade them in their own backyards and implement the divine rulings against them as their brothers did in Africa, and Allah will surely support those who support Him.” — ISIS newsletter, reported by MEMRI, August 8, 2025, Democratic Republic of Congo.
• Below are some of the more notable incidents of the ongoing genocide being carried out against Christians in Nigeria….
• “The herdsmen chased and shot at farmers as if they were animals.” — morningstarnews.org, September 1, 2025, Nigeria.
• “The culmination of the efforts to stop the [church’s] construction took place on Sunday, July 27, 2025. The construction committee was subjected to a mass lynching by government officials and residents….” — Rev. Puput Yuniatmoko, persecution.org, August 8, 2025, Indonesia.
• “While the language of the draft agreement [between Azerbaijan and Armenia] is general in nature, it mentions combating intolerance, racism, and violent extremism. Absent from the list of vices to be countered was religious persecution and ethnic cleansing — longstanding practices of the totalitarian Azerbaijan regime.” — persecution.org, August 14, 2025, Azerbaijan.
• “During detention, we were forced to drink water from Lotas [vessels typically used in toilets]. One person would open their mouth while another poured water through the same vessel.” — Zakria John, morningstarnews.org, August 20, 2025, Pakistan.
• “Nabeel Masih, a 25-year-old Christian from Lahore, died… after years of neglect, abuse, and lack of crucial medical care. At 16….Masih was accused by a man named Akhtar Ali of posting a blasphemous image on Facebook….Police had the image removed to prevent unrest, erasing the only evidence that could prove whether Masih had posted it. ” — morningstarnews.org, August 20, 2025, Pakistan.g

Continue reading

 

My Name’s Jihad; Where’s Your Closest Synagogue? | Nicholas De Santo  [4:07]   Nicholas De Santo

Oct 3, 2025

🇩🇪 🎤 See me live in Berlin, Germany: I Heard You Want Your Country Back!, 7 November 2025:

and

 

 

Leo Hohmann – Very Important to Hear. Trap is Set. War, Collapse, Digital Prison and More!  [51:15]

Oct 1, 2025

Episode 586 of the A Minute to Midnite Show. Tony K is joined by Leo Hohmann. This is one of the most important discussions, with information that everyone should hear and share! This is a big wake-up call!

[Ed.:  This vindicates me!!]

 

Dystopian Britain policing how many sodas you are allowed to drink now  PETER IMANUELSEN

Free refills of certain sodas are now banned.   

OCT 04, 2025

When you think that clown world couldn’t get more absurd, it suddenly does.

You see, the British government is now controlling what food you are allowed.

They have BANNED supermarkets and stores in England from offering buy one get one free promotions on certain food items such as snacks and candy, cakes, ice cream and pizza. Food that they deem to be unhealthy.

And they have also banned restaurants and cafes in England from offering refills of Coca Cola and other sodas containing sugar.

Of course, they say that this is being done to reduce obesity rates in the country.

Sure, drinking soda with sugar and eating lots of snacks and candy is an excellent way to gain lots of weight, something that we all know is not healthy.

But the fact that the government is now coming in and controlling what people can and cannot eat is dystopian. They literally banned free refills at restaurants. This is ridiculous.

This ban comes into effect shortly after the government announced a MANDATORY digital ID. Yes, people will be BANNED from working if they don’t have a digital ID.

A petition calling on the government to scrap the digital ID plans got almost 3 million signatures. Yet they responded by completely ignoring the concerns of the public.

Sounds almost like people won’t be able to earn a living if they don’t get a mark…

What’s next? Will they add a social credit score that tracks how many Coca Cola’s you have bought during the month, and if you exceed your allowed limit, your digital ID turns red and suddenly you are banned from flying?

The way things are going, the foundations for an authoritarian control system is rapidly being built.

Already, over 12.000 people are arrested every year in Britain for things they posted on social media. Preachers have been arrested on the street for the crime of reading from the Bible.

You really wouldn’t think something like this could happen in a Western country in 2025.

But now it’s happening and the mainstream media is not only ignoring it, but they seem to like this agenda.

But I’m here to expose it and bring you all the latest news to navigate this strange new world we are living in.

Make sure to stay subscribed – OR upgrade to a paid subscription to help me reach even more people with the REAL NEWS that is being censored by the media.

Thank you!

 

Read previous articles