Displaying posts published in

October 2025

The Gazan Suicide Bomber Who Attacked Israeli Hospital That Saved Her Life Catherine Salgado

https://pjmedia.com/catherinesalgado/2025/10/01/the-gazan-suicide-bomber-who-attacked-israeli-hospital-that-saved-her-life-n4944341

Here’s a story every American should hear — the Gaza woman who twice received extensive life-saving care from Israel, obtained her education through Israel, and then returned to blow up the hospital that saved her life. And she told an American journalist that she would attempt another terrorist attack in a heartbeat if she could.

Westerners tend to be cultural imperialists, which means that they make the false assumption that the overwhelming majority of human beings have basically the same goals and standards and want the same outcomes. The number of egregiously stupid mistakes that American politicians, for instance, have made because they refuse to acknowledge that Communist and Islamic regimes don’t value the lives or prosperity of their people is appalling. 

Even the new America-brokered deal pressed on Israel that would require the release of hundreds of Gaza jihadists — Oct. 7 mastermind Yahya Sinwar was previously released through just such a deal — does not seem to acknowledge that the overwhelming majority of the so-called Palestinians fanatically and fundamentally believe they must wipe Israel off the map for Allah. They are taught that from school, the media, and mosques from the youngest ages. As long as Gaza exists as a Muslim-run territory, Israel will be fighting off terror attacks.

But Sinwar was only one of about a thousand Gazans traded back in a deal for a single Israeli hostage, just as the brand new deal would release around 2,000 Gazans in exchange for the nearly 50 Israeli hostages. Among the other Gazans in the Sinwar deal was Wafa, an attempted suicide bomber who targeted the very Israeli hospital that had saved her life. 

Back in 2012, Leland Vittert told The Free Press’s Bari Weiss that he was a foreign correspondent for Fox News. He described how normal it was as a Middle Eastern correspondent to have to cover suicide bombings against Israel and riots in the “West Bank,” which is the Palestinian propaganda term for the Israeli land the Bible calls Judea and Samaria. But the Obama-backed “Arab Spring” that gave birth to so many Islamic terrorist movements had been occupying his time. 

Hamas says, ‘Yes, but’…and the world looks away By Warren H. Cohn

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/10/hamas_says_yes_but_and_the_world_looks_away.html

There’s finally a deal on the table.  Eight Muslim nations signed on.  The Palestinian Authority signed on.  The world is ready to stop the bloodshed.  And yet — predictably, infuriatingly — Hamas shrugs and says, “Yes, but…”

Every time there’s a glimmer of peace, Hamas moves the goalposts.  Another round of haggling.  Another round of delay.  Another chance to keep the chaos going — because chaos is the only currency Hamas knows how to spend.

And here’s the question no one seems to ask: Where are the protesters now?

For months, we’ve seen mobs in the streets screaming, “Ceasefire now!”  They chained themselves to bridges.  They stormed college campuses.  They shouted down Jewish students and politicians.  But now — when there’s actually a ceasefire deal that Israel and the Arab world have signed off on — the silence is deafening.

Why aren’t the protesters outside Hamas’s offices, demanding they accept the deal?  Why aren’t they rallying against the terrorist group that’s blocking peace?  Because it was never really about peace.  It was about blaming Israel.

Hamas survives by saying, “Yes, but.”  It always has.  It feeds on delay, on endless negotiation, on bloodshed dragged out just long enough to buy itself another news cycle.  Meanwhile, innocent families — Israeli and Palestinian alike — suffer while the “resistance” leaders hide in tunnels and play politics with people’s lives.

Bibi Tells the Truth (Again) Israel’s battle against terror isn’t limited to the region. by Cal Thomas

https://www.frontpagemag.com/bibi-tells-the-truth-again/

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to the UN General Assembly was partly performance, but mostly profound.

The performance part included a QR code on his lapel which delegates were invited to zoom in with their camera phones and see atrocities committed by Hamas that are too gruesome for TV networks to show. He also arranged for his statement that Israel has not forgotten the hostages to be blasted over loudspeakers set up in Gaza for that purpose.

The profound part included repetition of what he has said before with some twists. Netanyahu reminded the delegates that Israel’s battle against terrorism is not limited to the region, but that the terrorists want to return the entire world to the “Dark Ages.”

A few excerpts from his speech:

“Iran’s aggression, if not checked, will endanger every single country in the Middle East, and many, many countries in the rest of the world, because Iran seeks to impose its radicalism well beyond the Middle East.”

“Hamas steals the (humanitarian aid) and then they hike the prices … and that’s how they stay in power.”

“Israel must also defeat Hezbollah in Lebanon. … It has tentacles that span all continents. It has murdered more Americans and more Frenchmen than any group since Bin Laden. It’s murdered the citizens of many countries represented in this room. And it has attacked Israel viciously over the last 20 years.”

“For 18 years, Hezbollah brazenly refused to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which requires it to move its forces away from our borders. Instead, Hezbollah moved right up to our border. They secretly dug terror tunnels to infiltrate our communities and indiscriminately fired thousands of rockets into our towns and villages.”

“In this battle between good and evil, there must be no equivocation. When you stand with Israel, you stand for your own values and your own interests.”

“We see this moral confusion (about which side is good and which side is evil) when Israel is falsely accused of genocide when we defend ourselves against enemies who try to commit genocide against us. We see this too when Israel is absurdly accused by the ICC Prosecutor of deliberately starving Palestinians in Gaza.”

President Trump Gives the Globalists Another Lesson – But More Are Needed The bad ideas that spawned the UN are deeply entrenched in the West. by Bruce Thornton

https://www.frontpagemag.com/president-trump-gives-the-globalists-another-lesson-but-more-are-needed/

Donald Trump’s address to the UN once again has challenged the failing bloated institution, especially when its damage to our country and its Constitutional order by allowing globalist elites to chip away at our sovereignty in order to serve the “international community” of the “new world order” globalist elites. Much of our foreign policy errors and crises spring from the near century of the UN’s bad ideas and feckless idealism.

Wielding his signature straight talk, Trump delivered a much-needed home truth: “What is the purpose of the United Nations?” he asked, and quickly answered, “For the most part, at least for now, all they seem to do is write a really strongly worded letter and then never follow that letter up. It’s empty words, and empty words don’t solve wars.”

In other words, a typical hypertrophied bureaucracy riddled with professional deformation––the chronic abuse that served the institution and its treasonous clerks rather than the alleged purpose for which it was created and financed–– mostly by U.S. taxpayers.

Greed and ambition we’ll have with us always, but the bad ideas that spawned the UN are deeply entrenched in the West. The seed idealistic globalism began with Immanuel Kant’s “Perpetual Peace” in 1795. In it, Kant imagined innovations like a “federation of free states” that could form a “pacific alliance” that would “forever terminate all wars.” Kant understood that the world of his times was not yet ready for such a dream, but he believed that “the uniformity of the progress of the human mind” would reach such a goal.

During the following century the growth of new technologies and global trade seemingly promised a global “harmony of interests,” yet also more lethal and destructive wars too devastating and costly for business, giving impetus to Kant’s ambitious vision. By the outbreak of World War I, numerous downpayments on Kant’s dream had produced multilateral agreements, conventions, and treaties aimed at “establishing and securing international peace by placing it upon a foundation of international understanding, international appreciation, and international cooperation,” as Nicholas Murray Butler said in 1932.

Before then, agreements like the three Geneva Conventions (1864, 1906, 1929) had established collective laws for the humane treatment of the sick and wounded in battle, and later for prisoners. The Hague Conventions had similar ambitions. The first (1899) called for an international Court of Arbitration, and restrictions on aerial bombardment and the use of poison gas. The second (1907) convention expanded restrictions to naval warfare practice and armaments, as well as other changes to slowing down what host Tsar Nicholas II called the “accelerating arms race” that was “transforming armed peace into crushing burdens that weighs on all nations and, if prolonged, will lead to the very cataclysm it seeks to avert.”

“Diplomacy. or Telling it Like it is?” Sydney Williams

“Diplomacy and virtue do not make easy companions.”  Iain Pears (1955-)

                                                                                                            

“Your countries are going to hell,” said President Donald Trump to the UN on September 23. “…you want to be politically correct and you are destroying your heritage.” While he was speaking to the General Assembly, his words were aimed at long-time allies in Western Europe. Post-war Presidents have prided themselves on their diplomacy. Even President Reagan, while demanding that Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev “tear down this wall,” did so without a hint of acrimony in his voice. While I suspect Mr. Trump has never read H.L. Mencken’s Prejudices: First Series, he, nevertheless, followed his admonition: “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

Diplomacy is the art of having people understand and accept your position. In the halls of government power, words are usually best understood when backed by strength. President Theodore Roosvelt advised American Presidents to “…speak softly and carry a big stick.” Will Rogers, American humorist and social commentator, put it differently: “Diplomacy is the art of saying ‘nice doggie’ until you can find a rock.” The American journalist and author Isaac Goldberg wrote in 1927 that diplomacy is the art “to do and say the nastiest things in the nicest way.” At times it is more diplomatic to leave certain things unsaid. Nixon’s Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once said: diplomacy, “is the art of restraining power.” In the end it is the ability to get people to see and do things your way. 

Donald Trump, for all his qualities, is not a diplomat.[1] To his accolades that makes him a hero. On the other hand his bluntness and coarseness can be off-putting. He went beyond just Europe when he asked what the more delicate would have hesitated to ask: “What is the purpose of the United Nations?” According to its Mission Statement, its core mission is to “Maintain Peace and Security – to prevent and remove threats to peace and to suppress acts of aggression through peaceful and just means.” Forty years ago Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Reagan’s Ambassador to the UN, condemned the UN for the “bizarre reversal” of its founding intent to resolve conflicts. Has there been an improvement in the last four decades? In March 2014, Russia annexed Crimea, In February 2022, Putin’s armies invaded Ukraine. On October 7, 2023, Hamas militants slew 1,200 Israelis. Sudan’s civil war (April 2023-present) has killed 150,000 and displaced an estimated 14 million, in a country of under 50 million. Today, what in different circumstances would seem black humor, the military junta that governs Sudan is a member of the UN’s Human Rights Council. Amazing! Why are critics of Israel, including the UN, silent on Sudan?

In his attack on Western governments, President Trump, in his immutable way, focused on what he called a double-tailed monster: “Immigration and the high cost of so-called green energy is destroying a large part of the free world and a large part of our planet. Countries that cherish freedom are fading fast because of their policies on these two subjects. Both immigration and their suicidal energy ideas will be the death of Western Europe.”

Should Comey Be Convicted? by Alan M. Dershowitz

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21947/should-comey-be-convicted

Lawfare and selective prosecution are fundamentally wrong. It would be best if neither side misused the legal system to “get” their enemies. The Trump administration obviously believes that asking nicely is not likely to work, and that those who distort the legal system by turning it into “lawfare” must be held to account in order to stop it.

The ink was not even dry on the US Department of Justice’s hastily drafted two-count indictment of former FBI Director James Comey when partisans chose sides.

Most on the “left” insisted that this was a revenge lawfare indictment with no basis in law or fact. Many on the “right” saw nothing amiss, arguing that the defendant did in fact lie to Congress.

The nonpartisan reality is that it is too early to make a full assessment of the merits or demerits of the case. The other reality is that the indictment raises several distinct if overlapping issues.

First and foremost is whether it properly alleges crimes. Put another way, if there is evidence to establish the allegations, would that evidence be sufficient for a conviction? In order to convict, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intentionally and under oath lied or deceived legislators about a material fact. So if a jury were to conclude that Comey knew that he had authorized an FBI assistant to leak material, his negative answer to a material question from Senator Ted Cruz might well be found to be a crime. Complicating matters, the assistant apparently referenced now denies that Comey was aware of the leak. Perhaps someone else was involved, such as a law professor through whom Comey allegedly laundered leaks. In any event, factual issues are for juries to resolve.

Second, Comey’s lawyers are sure to argue that even if Comey did cross the line into criminality, he would not have been indicted if he had not alienated President Donald J. Trump.