Displaying posts published in

February 2025

Time to Bring Down the Curtain on Iran’s Terror Axis by Robert Williams

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21434/iran-terror-axis

In the US, in the past — many people may have forgotten — Iran was found guilty of supporting the 9/11 attacks…. Recently, Iranian state agents have been trying to murder senior US officials who served in the Trump administration, various dissidents, and Donald Trump himself.

Iran has an interest in having Democrats re-elected as soon as possible. Even while Iran fired on US forces in the region more than 160 times just since October 7, 2023, the Biden administration never stopped being inordinately generous to Iran and compliant with its nuclear weapons program.

Iran has also been busy setting up a drone factory in Venezuela, as well as expanding its presence in Cuba.

The mullahs might well hope simply to wait until President Trump’s term is over to break out their nuclear weapons and resume “exporting the Revolution.”

While the US might be reluctant to seek regime change in Iran, if the Trump administration allows the mullahs to stay in power, there will be no peace for the foreseeable future in the US, Europe or the Middle East. In addition, almost 90 million Iranians will continue to have to suffer unimaginable abuses and human rights violations that the mullahs daily impose on them.

Ending Iran’s regime would finally put a stop to its becoming a nuclear power and its incessant attacks on US assets in the Middle East, and finally could bring peace to the region. That prospect appears worth serious consideration by the Trump administration.

Iran’s terror axis, thanks to Israel’s military operations, is finally beginning to collapse. Iranian terrorist proxies have been seeming to disintegrate across the region.

In Gaza, Israel has degraded Iran’s Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) terrorist infrastructure. In Lebanon, Israel has severely decimated Hezbollah’s capabilities and killed its leaders and commanders. In Syria, Hezbollah, along with Iranian forces, have been shown the door. Even though roughly 2,000 Hamas and 7,000 PIJ terrorists are still operating in Syria, while Iran retains proxies in Iraq and the Houthis in Yemen, the Shia terrorist “octopus,” overall, has had several of its tentacles detached. Now, what about the rest of the octopus?

Dr Denis MacEoin’s letter to the Edinburgh University Students’ Association This letter was sent to the Edinburgh University Student Association in April following their vote to boycott Israel because of its ‘apartheid’

https://www.thejc.com/news/dr-denis-maceoins-letter-to-the-edinburgh-university-students-association-pf63hsy2

This letter was written in 2011 by the late Professor Denis MavEoin of blessed memory in 2011. It was reprinted in the Jewish Chronicle on February 25, 2025. It is both apposite and relevant today, rsk

“May I be permitted to say a few words to members of the EUSA? I am an Edinburgh graduate (MA 1975) who studied Persian, Arabic and Islamic History in Buccleuch Place under William Montgomery Watt and Laurence Elwell Sutton, two of Britain’s great Middle East experts in their day. I later went on to do a PhD at Cambridge and to teach Arabic and Islamic Studies at Newcastle University. Naturally, I am the author of several books and hundreds of articles in this field.

I say all that to show that I am well informed in Middle Eastern affairs and that, for that reason, I am shocked and disheartened by the EUSA motion and vote. I am shocked for a simple reason: there is not and has never been a system of apartheid in Israel. That is not my opinion, that is fact that can be tested against reality by any Edinburgh student, should he or she choose to visit Israel to see for themselves.

Let me spell this out, since I have the impression that those members of EUSA who voted for this motion are absolutely clueless in matters concerning Israel, and that they are, in all likelihood, the victims of extremely biased propaganda coming from the anti-Israel lobby.

Being anti-Israel is not in itself objectionable. But I’m not talking about ordinary criticism of Israel. I’m speaking of a hatred that permits itself no boundaries in the lies and myths it pours out. Thus, Israel is repeatedly referred to as a ‘Nazi’ state.

In what sense is this true, even as a metaphor? Where are the Israeli concentration camps? The einzatsgruppen? The SS? The Nüremberg Laws? The Final Solution? None of these things nor anything remotely resembling them exists in Israel, precisely because the Jews, more than anyone on earth, understand what Nazism stood for. It is claimed that there has been an Israeli Holocaust in Gaza (or elsewhere). Where? When?

I’m speaking of a hatred that permits itself no boundaries in the lies and myths it pours out

No honest historian would treat that claim with anything but the contempt it deserves. But calling Jews Nazis and saying they have committed a Holocaust is as basic a way to subvert historical fact as anything I can think of.

The Trump Revolution in the Middle East Has Just Begun by Guy Millière

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21425/trump-middle-east-revolution

Most Democrats in the US seem to have forgotten the absolute horror of the attack of October 7, 2023. They seem not to understand why most Israelis think that there is no way to coexist with a Gaza Strip in the hands of terrorists thirsty for Jewish blood. These Democrats appear not to see that relocating Gaza Arabs elsewhere has nothing to do with “ethnic cleansing.” Trump did not propose to eliminate the Arabs, but to relocate them to safer places. These Democrats also appear to ignore that ethnic cleansing is precisely what is at the heart of the intentions of the members of Hamas, an organization with explicitly genocidal goals.

The leaders of the main European countries talk about the “two-state solution” while knowing perfectly well that the only outcome Hamas wants is a one-state solution: the destruction of Israel, not a state alongside Israel… Europe’s leaders ignore countless polls showing that the residents of the Gaza Strip, as well as those, in the territories mismanaged by the Palestinian Authority, celebrate the October 7 massacre and want above all else Israel’s destruction. That, in fact, seems to be the actual goal of everyone who disagrees with Trump.

A Palestinian state would indeed be — as the Palestinians have openly stated — a launching pad from which to keep trying to destroy Israel.

[I]n reality, Arab leaders do not like the Palestinians any more than the Israelis do, but it is considered impolite to say so. The positions of at least several leaders of the Arab world might become flexible.

Trump, however, possibly in a hurry to solve the Iran-Hamas-Israel War, should not under any circumstances “go wobbly”.

Qatar is reportedly trying to come up with a potentially duplicitous “peace plan” to allow its treasured client and Muslim Brotherhood associate, Hamas, to remain in power in Gaza so it can attack Israel again.

No one bothers to explain how the Gazans can continue to live in an area studded with unexploded ordnance, where 70% of the buildings are destroyed, and which Trump has rightly defined as a “demolition site,” while leaving nearly two million people to reside there and hundreds of armed terrorists in tunnels.

No one admits that massive population displacements have successfully taken place in the past. Millions of Germans were moved from territories conquered by Germany after 1945, with no protests voiced…. Jews who lived in the Gaza Strip were expelled in 2005 by decision of the Israeli government to give the Palestinians there a chance to create a peaceful “Singapore on the Mediterranean.”

What American Democrats and European leaders should be committed to is preventing Hamas, a terrorist organization, from remaining in power. Netanyahu explains: “[Y]ou can’t talk about peace, neither with Hamas or in the Middle East, if this, you know, toxic murderous organization is left standing, any more that you could make peace in Europe after World War II, if the Nazi regime was left standing and the Nazi army was left standing.”

American Democrats and European leaders still grant legitimacy to the Palestinian Authority (PA) and say that they would like to entrust it with the management of Gaza after the war. They apparently do not want to see that the PA is a corrupt entity that rewards terrorism and supports the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas. They appear to want Gaza to remain a terrorist entity able to attack Israel again and again. Interesting.

“The non-terrorists in Gaza move to a place where they can live in peace and dignity. The US and others then rebuild Gaza and recover their costs through the commercialization of 25 miles of what will become pristine beachfront, now open to the world… [P]eace prevails with no American boots on the ground nor expense to the American taxpayer. Hard to quarrel with this if you believe in peace, prosperity and human dignity.” — David M. Friedman, former US Ambassador to Israel, X, February 6, 2025.

Trump appears determined to profoundly change the Middle East. It is to be hoped at that he will not allow himself to be discouraged, misled or have his impressive visions diminished.

If Trump successfully manages to overcome the pressures and obstacles placed in front of him, what he is setting in motion today can magnificently transform the Middle East.

February 4, 2025, the White House, Washington, DC. President Donald J. Trump is at a press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump says that Hamas must be eliminated, and that “the US will take over the Gaza Strip”, dismantle “all of the dangerous unexploded bombs”, “get rid of the destroyed buildings” and “create an economic development”. He adds that Gaza’s Arabs should go to other countries and “be able to live in comfort and peace”.

The Moral Case for Mass Relocation What does history show us about President Trump’s proposal to permanently move the population of Gaza? Brian Horowitz

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/moral-case-mass-relocation-joseph-schechtman

“Population transfer is a grave surgical operation, justifiable, not for cosmetic reasons, but only where the sole alternative would be chaos and destruction.” —Joseph Schechtman, 1953.

President Donald Trump’s proposal to permanently relocate the entire population of Gaza to neighboring countries has caused a storm of condemnation. Foreign leaders, U.N. officials and experts have decried the plan as ethnic cleansing, a violation of international law, and a war crime. But in the years before and after World War II, the imperial powers, the fledgling international bodies, and global leaders alike, operating within the post-Versailles order founded on the breakup of large multiethnic empires, saw population transfer, both voluntary and compulsory, as a humanitarian tool to avoid future wars. In fact, they considered it not only necessary and legal, but also morally justified and advantageous. For British Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon, who negotiated the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, population transfer would achieve the “removal of old and deep-rooted causes of quarrel”—an act that reflected the very basis for the existence of nation-states, which gave a political voice to individual peoples.

A pressing problem for the post-Versailles order occurred when part of the people of one nation-state found itself trapped by map-makers and the realities of defensible geography into living in someone else’s national home. The problem was especially acute when these ethnic minorities became embroiled in war between the nation-state of their ethnicity and their country of birth. To avoid both national disenfranchisement, and to limit future wars, the answer to such problems, whenever practical, was population transfer. The first internationally sanctioned example of “unmixing populations” after the Great War was the voluntary exchange of respective ethnic minorities between Bulgaria and Greece. The Treaty of Lausanne then sanctioned the compulsory exchange of Greeks in Turkey and Turks in Greece. While 1.6 million people endured all kinds of suffering in the process, in the end the misery was widely judged to be worth the price as the transfer created a new reality in which ethnic, religious, and culturally monolithic populations were formed, putting an end to violence and conflict.

Understanding the complexities of migration, refugees, and population transfer desperately requires a capable historian. Fortunately we have one in Joseph Schechtman, a Russian Jew who authored seminal books such as European Population Transfers, 1939-1945 (1946); Population Transfers in Asia (1949); The Arab Refugee Problem (1952); and The Refugees in the World: Displacement and Dislocation (1964). Schechtman was a believer in the utility of mass population transfer, which he saw as a useful solution to thorny and bloody nationality disputes and presented a difficult subject in political terms that leaders, politicians, and ordinary people could understand.

Schechtman saw the postwar population transfers as beneficial to peace in the continent. ‘To have saddled the Polish state with millions of ardently nationalistic Germans,’ he wrote, ‘would have threatened not only the existence of Poland but the peace of Europe.’

DOGE Is Constitutional. What It’s Exposing Is Unconstitutional. Seton Motley

https://townhall.com/columnists/setonmotley/2025/02/25/doge-is-constitutional-what-its-exposing-is-unconstitutional-n2652721

The Deep State Swamp and its denizens and creatures are up in arms about what President Donald Trump and Elon Musk are doing with their Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).  

What these tens of millions of career thieves really are?  Is embarrassed – and very, very worried.  DC has been the biggest and longest-running con in world history.  These stewards of the scam have spent these many decades pocketing trillions of our dollars.  While pretending to be looking out for US.

Then Trump and Musk parachute in with their DOGE.  FINALLY someone is examining what DC has for decades been doing to US.  And the usual suspects – who should be convicts – are screeching.

My favorite of their defenses of the indefensible?  “DOGE is unconstitutional!!!”  Even a former Ronald Reagan Administration associate White House counsel – Alan Charles Raul – makes the assertion:

“What is not debatable, however, is that Congress has not authorized this radical overhaul, and the protocols of the Constitution do not permit statutorily mandated agencies and programs to be transformed — or reorganized out of existence — without congressional authorization.

“The Constitution is well known to interpose meaningful checks and balances and a separation of powers among the responsibilities of the executive, legislative and judicial branches. It is also well understood that the respective branch’s powers and duties will intersect and overlap.  Fundamentally, however, all legislative power belongs to Congress, and executive power to the president.”   

And right there – where we emboldened – Raul proves himself wrong and Trump-Musk-DOGE right.  Trump is the chief executive of the Executive Branch.  He can run his branch of the government however he wishes.  

No, Trump’s Tariffs Will Not Cause Inflation Tariffs won’t break the bank—history shows prices stay steady, and buying American is always an option. The media’s panic over Trump’s tariffs is just another round of misplaced hysteria. By Spencer P. Morrison

https://amgreatness.com/2025/02/25/no-trumps-tariffs-will-not-cause-inflation/

President Trump has imposed 10 percent tariffs on imports from China. Predictably, the media’s chicken littles shrieked that the sky was falling. Tariffs will raise prices! Not only that but the poor will be hardest hit! Just think of the children!

These arguments are easily dismissed as appeals to emotion—they are rhetorical flourishes, devoid of truth and meaning. In reality, both history and logic prove that tariffs will not increase prices in the long run. Rest easy: the sky remains high above your head.

The Time Traveler

Every time President Trump threatens to raise tariffs, the media clucks that American consumers will pay the price. This did not happen last time, and it is unlikely to happen now. Consider the great washing machine debacle of 2018.

In January of 2018, President Trump announced that he would impose a 40 percent tariff on imported washing machines. On top of this, he also imposed additional duties on imported steel and aluminum—lightning occasionally strikes twice.

At the time, liberals lost their collective minds. They lamented that low-income Americans would not be able to afford washing machines. They pontificated that we would be living in a nation of grungy, soiled masses—living caricatures of Pig-Pen from the Peanut’s gang.

Of course, that never happened.

The price of washing machines did not change appreciably over the next few years. This is obvious when looking at the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”). The CPI tracks the prices of over 80,000 consumer goods and services in cities across America. They do this every month. How? They contact stores and obtain actual sale prices.

What did the CPI have to say about the price of washing machines in the aftermath of President Trump’s insidious wave of tariffs? Not much.

Obama Judge Hands Trump a Victory But mysteries remain from the case of Democrats’ IT man Imran Awan. by Lloyd Billingsley

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm-plus/obama-judge-hands-trump-a-victory/

Fourteen states, all led by Democrats, sought to stop Elon Musk’s DOGE from accessing data systems at seven federal agencies. On Tuesday, a federal judge found that the Democrats had not carried their burden “and therefore plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED.”

The federal judge was Tanya Chutkan, a donor to Obama’s presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012, and appointed by the composite character president in 2014. Assigned to the cases of January 6, 2021, Chutkan handed out prison sentences even longer than the government requested. Before that, Chutkan handled a case with significance for national security that after seven years remains unresolved.

Of all the IT people in all the IT firms in all the world, House Democrats thought Imran Awan was best man for the job. Sometimes working from his native Pakistan, Awan and his family team accessed the computers of some 40 Democrats on the intelligence and foreign affairs committees. Without their consent, Awan and his team stashed the Democrats’ data on a server controlled by Xavier Becerra, then chair of the House Democratic Caucus.

Capitol Police wanted a copy of the server but the one Awan produced turned out a fake. In February, 2017, Awan got booted off the House computer network but Becerra had already fled to California where Gov. Jerry Brown made him attorney general. Becerra had nothing to say about Awan’s IT intrigue, and Chutkan provided additional protection. The Obama judge repeatedly delayed Awan’s trial on bank-fraud charges, and the case did not become a factor in the 2018 election that kept Becerra in the AG slot.

In August of 2018, Chutkan sentenced Awan to time served, his single day in detention and 11 months of GPS monitoring and three months’ supervision. “There have been numerous allegations lobbed at him from the highest branches of the government,” the judge said, “all of which have been proved to be without foundation by the FBI and the Department of Justice.” In reality, Awan had never been formally charged with unauthorized possession of government material or anything of the sort. Judge Chutkan, a vocal opponent of President Trump’s travel ban, conveniently left out the context and background.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz charged that Awan was “put under scrutiny because of his religious faith and that “the right-wing media circus fringe” was jumping to conclusions. Awan’s attorney Chris Gowen, a former aide to Bill and Hillary Clinton, said Awan’s arrest for bank fraud was “clearly a right-wing media-driven prosecution by a United States Attorney’s Office that wants to prosecute people for working while Muslim.”

Germany can’t ignore migration any longer The AfD’s voters are not going anywhere, even if their party is locked out of government. Paul Lever

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/02/25/germany-cant-ignore-migration-any-longer/

Sunday’s federal elections in Germany produced a clear-cut result. The two right-wing parties came first and second. The Christian Democratic Union (CDU) picked up 28.5 per cent of the vote, while the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party won 20.8 per cent. Together, they will have 360 out of 630 seats in the Bundestag, enough to form a stable coalition that would reflect Germany’s political mood.

But it seems that won’t happen. The CDU, in common with all the other parties, has said that it will not co-operate with AfD. It will now open talks with the Social Democrats (SPD), which was the big loser of the election, falling from 25.7 per cent of the vote in 2021 to just 16 per cent this time round – its worst election result in over 100 years. The CDU and SPD together will have 328 seats, even with a combined vote share of only 45 per cent.

The reasons the other parties give for refusing to work at all with the AfD are partly its policies – the AfD is opposed to the provision of aid to Ukraine, sceptical about membership of NATO and against any sanctions on Russia (ironically all positions now espoused by the president of the United States). More importantly, it’s because Germany’s established political parties question whether the AfD can be trusted to uphold democracy. They also accuse some of its leading members of having Nazi sympathies.

The AfD actually started life as a party that opposed the euro in 2013, and was led by some mild-mannered economics professors. But it quickly shifted its focus on to immigration. It argues for a near total clampdown on arrivals and the large-scale deportation of illegal immigrants. In this, the party is in tune with the mood of the German electorate as a whole. All the polls before the election suggested that voters saw immigration as a major issue of concern. The fact that in the weeks before the election there were several fatal attacks mainly carried out by asylum seekers on members of the public served only to heighten this concern.

Neetu Arnold How Left-Wing Activism Corrupted America’s Schools Trump was right to slash education contracts. He should keep going.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/trump-department-of-education-contracts-left-activism

On February 10, the Trump administration slashed almost $900 million in U.S. Department of Education research contracts, in an effort to reduce “waste, fraud and abuse.” Education activists attacked the move, claiming that it would stifle important research.

Quality education research certainly matters. But the Institute of Education Sciences, which administers the contracts, has abandoned this mission. The IES has abused what should be a nonpartisan mandate and pushed progressive political agendas through research and training programs.

Consider the IES’s Regional Education Laboratory program. Created by the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, RELs were charged with studying effective educational practices and disseminating the latest scientific knowledge to local school authorities. Despite this noble-sounding goal, critics have complained that the RELs promote fads, waste resources, and are prone to politicization.

The Department of Education allocates nearly $60 million to run 10 RELs across the country. Each lab oversees a set of states. Within its designated region, each REL works with local schools and state education leaders.

RELs have pushed progressive identity policies in schools. REL Mid-Atlantic collaborated with the New Jersey Department of Education to promote racial preferences in teacher hiring. This laboratory developed six training sessions on “culturally responsive hiring practices” for state leaders to “build an educator workforce that more closely reflects the ethno-racial diversity of the state’s student population.” Another part of the project featured REL staff working with ten local school districts to increase the “hiring of teachers of color.”

Leor Sapir The Corruption of The New England Journal of Medicine A leading medical journal has capitulated to transgender activists.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/new-england-journal-of-medicine-transgender-activists

The New England Journal of Medicine is the world’s most prestigious medical journal. It publishes only 5 percent of the original research submissions that it receives. Physician Marty Makary, President Trump’s nominee to head the Food and Drug Administration, has written that publishing a study in the journal “is rocket fuel for your academic career.”

But like so many other institutions, NEJM has allowed a dubious commitment to “social justice” to overtake its pursuit of excellence in medical science—particularly when it comes to youth gender medicine. NEJM’s coverage of this controversial field has abandoned even the pretense of objectivity, declining to hold researchers to scientific standards or air alternative views that would advance scientific knowledge.

“Gender-affirming care” for youth involves the use of puberty-blocking drugs, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries to treat children who experience distress associated with their sex. Once embraced by many Western countries, this protocol has faced criticism in recent years for lacking credible evidence of its safety and benefits, for its potential harms, and for imposing life-altering treatments on children unable to give informed consent. In the U.S., though, medical associations have bucked the growing international consensus, maintaining their commitment to what they regard as a nonnegotiable human right.

In his first days in office, President Trump signed executive orders designed to starve the pediatric gender industry of federal funding. Transgender advocacy groups and several Democratic attorneys general filed lawsuits to block the administration from achieving its goal.

Commentators on all sides lament that this issue has become so politicized. But the politicization is the result of scientific and medical institutions failing to impose high standards and to facilitate open debate.

NEJM’s conduct is a good illustration of that failure. Its refusal to hold the research it publishes to high scientific standards and its documented track record of suppressing debate on these novel, invasive, and risky procedures has directly contributed to the politicized environment we see today.