This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Under the Joe Biden-Kamala Harris agenda of promoting the far-left ideology of transgenderism, schools have forced girls to allow boys to be on their athletic teams, in motel rooms with them on trips and in their showers.
It's happened at multiple levels from grade school to university, where national governing bodies have submitted to the falsehood that males can become females. In fact, under the science, being male or female is embedded in the body down to the DNA level and does not change.
Too, there already have been injuries to females on such teams because of the greater muscle mass and athletic performance of males.
Of course multiple lawsuits have been begun, and the Supreme Court has yet to issue a determining rule.
But that ultimately may be unnecessary, as those involved already have started delivering their judgment. In fact, multiple teams now have refused to play a "women's" volleyball team from San Jose State because it includes a male who says he is female.
The presence of the man calling himself Blaire Fleming on that team means that his teammates will not be able to enjoy the competition for which they have trained. And the women on the other teams also will be deprived of the competition for which they have trained.
A report at ZeroHedge explains two of the most recent announcements came from Boise State and the University of Wyoming.
Those teams are "forfeiting" their games rather than play San Jose State, which recently advanced its record to 9-0 for the season after being given the "victory" in games that were not played.
The Wyoming team said, "After a lengthy discussion, the University of Wyoming will not play its scheduled conference match against San José State University in the UniWyo Sports Complex on Saturday, Oct. 5. Per Mountain West Conference policy, the Conference will record the match as a forfeit and a loss for Wyoming."
The report noted Wyoming first had said the game would be played, "but reversed that decision after state legislators began organizing a letter to the university's president and athletic director."
Former Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines, who was among the first to launch a revolt against males on women's sports teams, applauded the latest developments in the social and moral contest over adopting the ideology that men can simply call themselves women, and be on women's teams.
Some of the legal actions already in play charge the NCAA with violating Title IX by allowing men on women's teams.
"The suit asserts that including male-to-female trans players not only disadvantages women but also presents a safety hazard…as highlighted in this video shared by Republican Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn:"
Earlier Southern Utah forfeited a scheduled match with San Jose.
A report at Not the Bee said the fourth school to protest the male player was Utah State.
The report said, "Honestly, these girls just don't want to get hurt by Spartans redshirt junior Blaire Fleming. They know if they play against a biological male their chances of injury skyrocket due to the sheer power behind those spikes."
San Jose, in a statement, claimed officials were "disappointed" that athletes "are being denied opportunities to compete."
But now a governor has joined the conversation:
The Cowboy State Daily reported, "U.S. Rep. Harriet Hageman, a Republican and Wyoming's only delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives, voiced support for UW's ultimate decision in a Tuesday statement."
"I am proud of UW volleyball standing up to this nonsense," wrote Hageman. "We must do what it takes to protect our girls! I hope everyone will go support the team this season."
Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon also voiced support of the decision, saying, "It is important we stand for integrity and fairness in female athletics."
Lawmakers in that state warned their school: "The Legislature has been very clear that the University of Wyoming, being a publicly funded land grant institution, should not participate in the extremist agenda of Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) or propagate the lie that biological sex can be changed. We all know it cannot."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
An American writer who relocated to Germany some years ago now is facing up to three years in jail for violating that nation's censorship rules.
He posted a satirical image on social media featuring a white swastika behind a white medical mask – suggesting the links between Germany's COVID-19 policies and requirements of the government in its efforts to control the population during COVID to the government's behaviors exhibited during the Nazi regime.
It is the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression that is reporting on the case involving CJ Hopkins, an American writer who relocated to Germany in 2004.
He's was accused of disseminating propaganda after he posted two images on X featuring "an illustration of a white swastika behind a white medical mask," FIRE reported.
He was acquitted in January, but government officials there refused to accept the decision and sent him to the Berlin Appellate Court, which granted government officials' demands and reversed the lower court's ruling.
Hopkins, in an interview with FIRE, said, "It's been going on for what feels like forever. It does grind you down. I'm not going to stop fighting, but I'd be lying if I said I don't get knocked down sometimes, so this is a knockdown."
Hopkins said the appeals court reversal was expected.
"If this court had any intention of respecting the law and following the law, it would have just dismissed the prosecutor's arguments in the first place," he explained.
The case now is expected to return to the Tiergarten District Court, which originally acquitted him, for a sentence that could range up to three years behind bars.
He said ultimately he intends to take his case to the Federal Constitutional Court, which is similar to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could dismiss the case or allow it to move into another level of lengthy legal arguments.
He told FIRE, "I said from the beginning, I kind of feel like it's my responsibility. A lot of people can't afford to do this. Part of what keeps me going is, I know a lot of people out there are grateful for it."
While America's First Amendment would appear to protect personal opinions, including satire and parody, the governor in California, Gavin Newsom, recently signed into law a ban on political parody, prompting speech proponents to take him to court for the apparent constitutional violation.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Polling by the Daily Mail just hours after the vice presidential debate between GOP candidate JD Vance and Democrat Tim Walz has revealed a clear victor.
"Donald Trump's running mate J.D. Vance can leave New York as the victor after his one and only debate with vice presidential rival Tim Walz, according to DailyMail.com's exclusive snap poll," the major publication documented.
The two tangled over "abortion, immigration, gun violence and the Middle East" and "bigged up their bosses."
"But it was Vance who left the best impression with viewers, after a strong start against a nervy opponent and despite dodging a question on if Trump lost the 2020 election," the report said.
In fact, Walz refused to answer the debate's first question, whether he would support a first strike situation by Israel against Iran, after the terrorist-support regime there launched missiles at Israel earlier in the day.
Vance immediately responded that it would be up to Israel to make that decision.
The polling of 801 likely voters found 50% saying Vance won, to only 43% picking Walz.
The rest were unsure.
James Johnson, of J.L. Partners and a DailyMail.com pollster, said it's clear Vance won.
And the report cited Walz's "major blunders."
"The first was when he was tripped up by a question about his claims he was in Hong Kong teaching during the Tiananmen Square pro-democracy protests in China in 1989," the report explained. "Local media reports from the time put him in his home state of Nebraska."
Eventually he conceded that he "misspoke" in making the claim.
Then he said, later, "I've become friends with school shooters."
The report said he was unclear what he meant by that.
The Mail reporting also included that, "Democratic pundits were left scratching their heads in disbelief Tuesday night after the at time stumbling performance of Vice President Kamala Harris' running mate, MInnesota Gov. Tim Walz."
He mixed up words, "appeared anxious" and refused to answer some questions about his own misstatements.
Symone Sanders Townsend, an MSNBC host and former campaign manager for Bernie Sanders. said on social media, "My thoughts about this debate can all be summed up with: Gov. Walz is not prosecuting the case rather its a nicefest. If you agree with Vance on so much then why should we vote for you?"
And Asha Rangappa, a CNN analyst, said, of Walz. "The policy wonking is not really cutting it."
ABC's Linsey Davis, one of the biased moderators for the presidential debate a few weeks ago, said, "It kind of reminded me of the June 27th debate when Kamala Harris that night said of Joe Biden it was a 'slow start, but a 'strong finish.' And that's how it felt that Tim Walz kind of did tonight. You know, to use Tim Walz's own words, I mean, a lot about this debate tonight was weird. There were uncomfortable, cringey moments."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A legal team from the ADF is asking a federal court in California to put an immediate halt to a ban in the state on political parody.
That was imposed by Gov. Gavin Newsom just weeks ago.
"California's war against political memes is censorship, plain and simple. We shouldn't trust the government to decide what is true in our online political debates. Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed two laws punishing political speech, with one law taking effect immediately, just as the election season heated up – a time when we need more speech, not less," explained Jonathan Scruggs, a lawyer with the organization.
"That includes political parody and satire, a type of expression that has been used throughout our nation's history. While lawmakers act as if posting and sharing memes is a threat to democracy, these laws target speech California officials don't like.
"We are urging the court to immediately halt enforcement of the law in effect now and to affirm the right of The Babylon Bee and Ms. Rickert to speak freely about political matters online."
The fight is over a case brought against the state in U.S. District Court there on behalf of the Babylon Bee and others.
The dispute is over the state's demand to censor political memes and satire, a move that has been described as threatening online political speech throughout the state.
WND previously reported as the battle heated up and Newsom, who has faced mockery for his state's high taxes, extremism on social issues like abortion and transgenderism, attempts to interfere with other states and their rights, took chutzpah to a new level.
That, by the way, derives from a Hebrew word meaning "insolence," "cheek" or "audacity."
He signed a law banning parody.
The report said video creator Christopher Kohls is charging Newsom with violations of the First and 14th Amendments with Newsom's "anti-deepfake measure" that was signed into law this week.
California's governor was offended by a parody released by "Mr. Reagan" recently:
In it "Kamala Harris" confirms she is the Democrat candidate for president because Joe Biden "exposed his senility at the debate."
She confesses she is the "ultimate diversity hire," as a woman and a "person of color."
"So if you criticize anything I say you're both sexist and racist."
The mockery continues.
The video uses AI-generated audio clips, and it was shared by Elon Musk, collecting more than 100 million views.
Newsom responded:
The lawsuit in federal court in California charges that Newsom's scheme is a flagrant use of "state power to force private social media companies to censor private citizens' speech by purging election-related AI-generated content."
Musk's comment? "You're not gonna believe this, but Gavin Newsom, just announced that he signed a LAW to make parody illegal, based on this video."
He concludes California needs "new leadership."
However, taking on Newsom directly was the Babylon Bee, which prominently announced it has "'obtained this exclusive, official, 100% real Gavin Newsom election ad."
In it, "Newsom" states:
This is a message for the people of America, given in my authentically recorded non-AI voice. Thanks to my leadership over the last several years, California has become a world leader in extremist left-wing governance. My policies were so effective that almost 1 million people are now fleeing the state every year. We even ran out of U-Hauls.
During the COVID pandemic, I locked everyone in their homes and shut down businesses for months. Not the French Laundry, though. That's my favorite restaurant. Last year, I cleaned up the dangerous, messy streets of San Francisco. You know, because Chinese Communist President Xi was coming. And I really wanted to impress him. He's my boss, after all.
This year, I signed legislation that allows me to take custody of your kid if you refuse to give him artificial hormones and chop off his genitals. Because if you don't do that, you're a bigot. And bigots shouldn't be allowed to have kids. I've also led the way in green energy by banning all cars that don't run on electricity. Then I banned almost all the electricity. This is smart leadership.
On my watch, the cost of living and homelessness have skyrocketed. Schools are failing. Drug dealers and human traffickers are pouring across the border. And poop has covered the sidewalks of San Francisco. This is the positive, joyful vision we offer as Democrats.
That's why I'm enthusiastically endorsing Kamala Harris for president in 2024. She'll do to the country everything I did in California. Anyway, I'm California Governor Gavin Newsom, and I approve this 100% real message, which is a recording of my voice without the assistance of any AI whatsoever.
This isn't a deepfake. And you can rest assured that it isn't, because I just signed an unconstitutional law outlawing deepfakes. No one would dare violate it. Thank you, and science bless America.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The Democrats in America already have established themselves as the "party of violence."
They've repeatedly called GOP nominee President Donald Trump a "Hitler" and called for him to be destroyed, put in a bull's-eye, and "extinguished."
The violent rhetoric may have contributed to two recent assassination attempts against Trump, and other threats to his life.
Now that reputation as a "party of violence" is being reaffirmed, with a report that Kamala Harris' husband, Doug Emhoff, allegedly "forcefully slapped" an "ex-girlfriend for flirting with another man."
It is the Gateway Pundit that reported: "Party of Violence: Kamala Harris's Husband Doug Emhoff Accused of Assaulting His Ex-Girlfriend After a Film Festival, Leaving Her Sobbing in a Cab."
The Daily Mail detailed that "three friends" have confirmed to the publication Emhoff "assaulted his ex-girlfriend."
"The Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, 59, allegedly struck the woman in the face so hard she spun around, while waiting in a valet line late at night after a May 2012 Cannes Film Festival event in France," the report said. "One of her friends told DailyMail.com that the woman called him immediately after the incident, sobbing in her cab, and described the alleged assault."
The reports come just weeks before voters in America will decide whether to leave the White House in Kamala Harris' hands for the next four years, to continue Joe Biden's inflation, which has totaled more than 21% since he and Harris took office, the weakening of America's foreign agenda, and the all-out advocacy for transgenderism and abortion for all.
The DailyMail.com said it was not identifying the woman, "Jane," "a successful New York attorney."
The report said the three "friends" all explained that "Jane" had told them of the violence.
"The friends, who all asked not to be named for fear of retaliation by Emhoff, shared with DailyMail.com pictures of him and Jane together from 2012, and other documents and communications corroborating elements of the story."
The allegations are in shocking conflict with the image, pushed by the Harris campaign, of Emhoff as "benevolent" and "an ally to" women.
"Jane," contacted by the Daily Mail, declined comment.
The publication, however, earlier had reported "that Emhoff cheated on his first wife and mother of his two kids around 2008, allegedly impregnating his daughter's nanny who also worked as her grade school teacher."
Emhoff admitted to that situation.
The publication documented, "In a fawning interview on Sunday, MSNBC host and former Biden White House press secretary Jen Psaki told Emhoff that he 'reshaped the perception of masculinity' – despite his admitted affair with his daughter's nanny and teacher."
Jane told her friends she got tickets to the gala event in France, and took Emhoff.
A New York businessman told the publication of a call from Jane.
"It was hard to hear her because she was sobbing. She told me she was with a guy and he hit her. It was very clear what she was telling me. She said she was with a guy, her date, she was at the Cannes Film Festival, and he hit her. She was in the car with the guy at the time. I didn't know what to do, I didn't know whether to call the French police. I couldn't get a hold of her after calling back."
The incident was from 12 years ago, before Emhoff met and married Harris.
The businessman described what he was told: "It was something like 3 am. They were trying to get out of there and they both had been drinking. There was a gigantic line for taxis. [Jane] went up to one of the valet guys, offered him 100 Euros or whatever, to get to the head of the line. She told me she put her hand on his shoulder. Doug apparently thought that she was flirting, and came over and slapped her in the face."
Jane reported the incident caused a break between the duo.
A second account said Jane wanted to leave Emhoff behind at the cab stand, but he "forced himself into the car, which she did not want."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The moderators picked by CBS to run its vice presidential debate, between GOP candidate JD Vance and Democrat Tim Walz, were assessed by a multitude to have been biased toward the Democrat, just as the ABC moderators during the presidential debate a few weeks ago exhibited their bias.
And a commentator at the Daily Signal is crediting Vance with having delivered a "masterclass" to CBS in dealing with such partisanship.
Commentator Jarrett Stepman wrote, "Not only did Vance, Donald Trump's running mate, handle obviously skewed questions. He also refused to allow the moderators – a "CBS Evening News" anchor Norah O'Donnell and "Face the Nation" chief foreign affairs correspondent Margaret Brennan – to live "fact-check" him without calling them out on it."
"When Brennen tried to interject with a comment on Haitian illegal immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, before moving on to the next question, Vance stopped her. She tried to cut him off with a 'we just don't have time with all these questions to allow you to respond,' but Vance wasn't having it. 'Margaret, the rules were that you guys weren't going to fact-check, and since you are fact-checking me I think it's important to say what's actually going on,' Vance said," he reported.
"The Ohio Republican went on to explain how illegal aliens can use a government app, CPB One, to apply for legal status, which he said was a part of the Biden-Harris administration's open border policies. The moderators continued trying to stop Vance, but he kept speaking. They even cut off his microphone. But Vance didn't look reckless or like a boor. He looked like a guy who took the discussion – and the intelligence of the American people – seriously. This is how it should be done."
He said the CBS moderators were "nearly as biased as the ABC News moderators" for the September 10 presidential debate.
They "cherry-picked" questions to be of interested to leftists, and steered the discussion toward topics that help Democrats. And, for example, they entirely ignored the huge scandal in which Walz has been involved over stolen valor – his multiple lies about his military service.
Moderators, he said, "don't just ask biased questions these days; they now actively participate in the debate to help whatever Democrat is on stage."
He cited "a funny moment."
"Vance pushed Walz, Kamala Harris' running mate, on a Minnesota law that allows babies to be killed after a botched abortion. It was a law that Walz signed. But Walz didn't and seemingly couldn't answer the question. Instead, Walz just pointed to the moderators and said they 'fact-checked' it last time. He clearly wanted the 'moderators' to step in and help him. They didn't deliver the life preserver this time, but it's understandable why Walz thought they would."
A report in the Daily Mail said a multitude of pundits and commentators "were not all pleased" with the moderators' bias.
Talk show host Megyn Kelly responded to the CBS stunt: "Tried to fact check. JD put you in your place. You won't [let] him fight you and you wont let them debate."
Another on social media said, "JD Vance called out the moderators for lying to the audience, and CBS immediately muted him. Legacy media is clearly controlled by the Democrats."
The network, before the debate, had lied about what its moderators would do, promising they "would not be doing live fact-checking."
That came after ABC's one-sided performance, with Kamala Harris, against President Donald Trump.
During the exchange that the moderators provoked, Brennan suddenly shut off the microphones and boasted, "Gentlemen the audience can't hear you because your mics are cut."
Brit Hume noted, "'The moderators were obnoxious and made it feel like three-on-one on Vance, and Vance was just fine."
WND has reported the ABC stunts were so egregious that there were questions whether the network should be reportion the 90 minutes of air time as a political campaign contribution to Harris.
The network has refused to say whether that reporting will be done.
It was Beth Brelje, an award-winning investigative journalist and elections correspondent for the Federalist, who wrote the ABC debate this week was a "90-minute ambush to boost Kamala Harris."
She explained, "Working as a team, ABC hosts David Muir and Linsey Davis propped up Harris and repeatedly tried to vanquish Trump by talking over him, cutting him off, and asking bizarre questions they did not ask Harris. At one point, Davis jumped in for Harris and offered a rebuttal to one of Trump's comments on abortion, a move beyond the scope of a moderator.
"It was not a debate, but a campaign contribution. That's not a big surprise from either moderator, as Muir hosts the most Trump-negative network news evening broadcast and Davis has a long track record of promoting Democrat talking points including stolen election claims from Hillary Clinton."
She reported, "In broadcasting, where advertising is sold by the second, time really is money. A 30-second commercial in the February Super Bowl cost $7 million. CBS charged $225,000 for a half-minute ad during a 2016 debate between former President Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. CNN sold ad packages for the June 27 debate between Trump and President Joe Biden for a minimum of $1.5 million per package, which included two 30-second ads, plus a few online ads."
While ABC's charges weren't known right away, assuming a "lowball" figure of $225,000 for half a minute, the 90-minute campaign promotion "comes to a contribution to the Harris Walz campaign of at least $40.5 million."
In the CBS debate, both moderators already have expressed opposition to Trump. In the ABC event, "it was revealed moderator Davis was a sorority sister of Harris, and the ABC News chief, Dana Walden, was a "close personal friend" of Harris who introduced her to her now-husband.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
JERUSALEM – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Wednesday, "Iran made a big mistake attacking us… and they will pay for it," following Tehran's decision to fire some 180 ballistic missiles at the Jewish state Tuesday evening.
The attack marks the second time in five-and-a-half months that the Islamic Republic has attempted to directly strike at Israel. On the first occasion, U.S. President Joe Biden infamously told Israel to "take the win" after almost all of the projectiles either failed to launch or were knocked out of the sky. Second time around, there are significant differences, which enter into the equation.
In April, Biden was planning to run for re-election, and could at least pretend he was somewhat in control of his administration. Following his defenestration in favor of his Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee, and his apparent removal from any decision-making process, it's not at all clear what leverage he can bring to bear over Israel's leaders, particularly Netanyahu. Where once Biden may have been able to call on a personal relationship with Israel's longest-serving prime minister, his administration's actions – and its seemingly clear preference of acting for the benefit of Iran, at the expense of the Jewish state, is a hurdle which may prove too steep to overcome.
Furthermore, the balance of power has shifted in the region in the last two weeks or so, and it is exactly this change, particularly Israel's dismantlement of much of Hezbollah's command structure, including the elimination of its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, in an ingenious and deadly aerial bombing attack, which prompted Iran's action.
Prior to the attack, when the U.S. SIGNIT said it had picked up indications Iran was preparing to strike – which IDF spokesperson Daniel Hagari initially denied – a White House official who spoke on the condition of anonymity said there would be "severe consequences." The scale and scope of those "consequences" was not expounded upon, and predicting what it might be is somewhat opaque, considering how much succor has been lavished upon the Islamic Republic.
What are the options?
The last time Israel fended off an Iranian ballistic missile attack, it responded in a quiet, even understated way, but one which left the Iranians and even the Americans in no doubt as to what its capabilities were. The current mood in the country makes it feel like this will not be anywhere near enough if Israel were to repeat the trick.
So, how might it respond to this latest act of wanton Iranian aggression? The jewel in Iran's crown – so to speak – is its nuclear program, which Israel specifically – because of the mullahs' stated aim of "wiping it from the map" – has attempted to delay and derail for the best part of 20 years. It is nearing completion and the time for doing anything about it grows ever shorter. Could the retaliation for a ballistic missile attack from Iran be the provocation for taking out Iran's nuclear program?
Other possible targets which have been floated include potential assassinations of high-ranking Iranians, as well as the country's oil infrastructure. It is worth bearing in mind how much revenue the Islamic Republic has been able to attain from selling this commodity to Russia and China, in particular.
At around 8 p.m. local time Tuesday, millions of Israelis received a message on their cell phones warning them of extreme, imminent danger. They were directed to get to shelters as soon as possible and told to wait until the all clear was received. A few moments later, the first of several incoming rocket alert sirens blared throughout the country, as Iran unleashed its missiles.
On the eve of the vice presidential debate between Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, and Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat from Minnesota, former President Donald Trump wrote a message to his millions of supporters. Having harangued Biden and Harris, highlighting neither one of them seemed to be in charge, and accusing the vice president of being more interested in campaigning in San Francisco with showbiz friends, he turned to the issue at hand.
"When I was president," he wrote, "Iran was in total check. They were starved for cash, fully contained, and desperate to make a deal. Kamala flooded them with American cash and, ever since, they've been exporting terror all over, and unraveling the Middle East."
It is almost impossible to argue with this assessment, although no doubt Trump's many detractors will try. Since Biden ascended to the presidency, his coterie of former Obama-administration staffers – albeit minus the loathsome Ben Rhodes – have seemed to put Iranian interests above even American ones.
The Iranians have shown a clear preference for candidate Harris to become President Harris. A war in the Middle East would likely be deleterious for her chances of following Biden into the Oval Office. Many questions remain, the principal one is whether the United States will be able to rein in Israel's fury over being targeted a second time.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Israel never has taken second place to any government intelligence operation, to anyone, anywhere.
The Mossad, after all, tracked down Nazi Adolf Eichmann in Argentina, where he'd been in hiding since World War II collapsed around the Nazi movement and he fled in 1945.
He lived at ease there for years, but was caught by Israeli agents in 1960, transported to Israel, tried for his war crimes and executed.
Other operations, sometimes still unknown to the public, have been successful, too.
Just recently, Israel was able to destroy hundreds of Hezbollah terror operatives by exploding their electronic pagers. Israel had BUILT the pagers, installed explosives, and then arranged for them to be delivered to and used by Hezbollah.
Also, comments repeated recently by Iranian officials confirmed that a special squad intended by Iran to seek out and hunt down Israeli agents inside Iran was, in fact, headed by an Israeli agent inside Iran.
But it wasn't military or government intelligence that allowed Israel recently to bomb, and destroy, Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah inside a bunker 60 feet underground in Lebanon.
It was jinn.
You know, those entities more commonly called genies. As in "Aladdin," where they were endowed with "cosmic power in an itty, bitty living space," and as in "I Dream of Jeannie."
That's according to Mostafa Karami, who teaches at a Muslim seminary in Iran. He opined that the Israeli attack on Nasrallah was successful because the help from "jinn."
The report comes from Robert Spencer, the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center who as written 28 books including "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)," "The Truth About Muhammad" and "The History of Jihad."
He commented, "Karami didn't say whether or not the Israelis employed the services of Barbara Eden of 'I Dream of Jeannie' for this operation, but as Ms. Eden is now 93 years old, she is unlikely to have participated."
He noted the Israelis' "astounding" successes of late, including "the explosion of thousands of pagers that belonged to high-level Hezbollah operatives."
Then there was the elimination of terrorist Nasrallah.
"Karami also remained mum about whether or not the Israelis have a secret laboratory full of bottles, from which they summon their trained jinn whenever they need them to carry out special ops," Spencer joked, "The jinn, according to the Quran, are spirit beings that Allah created from 'smokeless fire.' They can be dangerous; the Quran says that some of them even try to turn prophets away from their mission."
Spencer continued, "The twentieth-century Islamic scholar Muhammad ibn al-Uthaymeen states a standard Muslim view when he asserts that while human beings cannot see jinn, 'undoubtedly the jinn can have a harmful effect on humans, and they could even kill them.' Hmmm. Did the jinns not only lead the Israelis to Nasrallah but do him in themselves?"
Karami stated, "Considering the Zionists' history of subjugating genies, they carry out many of their missions through this means, and demons are their secret army."
Spencer notes the beliefs that "They [the Jews] have had access to genies and cosmic science since the time of David and Solomon. Historically, they have always used genies, their documents and traditions proved that. They have used genies and demons for warfare and intelligence operations throughout history."
And he suggests that could explain Israel's "stunning against-all-odds Israeli victories in 1948, 1967, and 1973."
Further, he explained, there's no reason to believe Karami isn't serious. After all, it's "in the Quran."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Two columnists at the Daily Signal are asking why is the U.S. Naval Academy engaging in election interference by inviting a far-left speaking to an annual dinner.
And how are they getting away with it.
The questions are being raised by Hans von Spakovsky, the chief of the Election Law Reform Initiative and a senior legal fellow in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, and Cully Stimson, the deputy director of the Meese Center and manager of the National Security Law Program.
She "has already said that she plans to attack presidential candidate Donald Trump in the annual Bancroft Lecture at the U.S. Naval Academy on Oct. 10," They explained.
That would put the academy in violation of "Defense Department directives prohibiting the military from engaging in partisan political activity," they charged.
"In addition to constituting a clear violation of a long-standing, mandatory policy, families whose sons and daughters are attending this august military institution should be outraged by the academy's partisan indoctrination of future officers of the U.S. Navy," they explained.
The dinner event dates back years, and was set up to honor George Bancroft, the secretary of the Navy when James Polk was president in the 1940s.
The report explains Ben-Ghiat has claimed what motivates Trump is an "authoritarian character" and a desire to destroy democratic values," when, in fact, he's been an outright advocate for those concepts in America.
She claims, instead, that Trump is loyal to Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping.
She even hallucinates "Trump has an 'attachment to America's enemies,'" the report said.
They authors explain the ideas resident in "the mind of this so-called historian from New York University" can be debated, but the point at hand is "her venomous, partisan attack on a political candidate" at the academy, "in direct violation of Defense Department rules."
In fact, Department of Defense Directive No. 1344.10 "bans active members of the military, which includes the naval officers who are administrators and teachers at the academy, from engaging in 'partisan political activities.'"
In this case, the academy is doing exactly what it is ordered not to do by appearing "to imply official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement" of what is patently a partisan, political speech.
"Even if you agree with Ben-Ghiat's wild, unsupported claims, that isn't the point," they explain. "The point is that the Naval Academy should not be inviting, sponsoring, or in any way endorsing lecturers who are at the academy to give what is clearly a political speech, whether it's attacking or supporting Donald Trump, or attacking or supporting Kamala Harris."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
South Korea has unveiled one of the largest ballistic missiles in the world and other weapons capable of penetrating deep underground bunkers within North Korea.
During its Armed Forces Day ceremony, South Korean President Yoon Suk Teol told thousands of military troops in Seoul it would be the end of the North Korean regime if they attempted to use nuclear weapons against South Korea, according to the Independent.
"If North Korea attempts to use nuclear weapons, it will face the resolute and overwhelming response of our military and the South Korea-U.S. alliance … That day will be the end of the North Korean regime … The North Korean regime must abandon the delusion that nuclear weapons will protect them," Yoon said.
On display were approximately 340 weapons systems and military equipment, including a Hyunmoo-5 ballistic missile which carries around eight tons of a conventional warhead and is able to reach underground bunkers 100 meters deep in North Korea.
"Our government will build on the solid South Korea-U.S. alliance to further strengthen the security cooperation of South Korea, the US and Japan … The only way to secure peace is through enhancing our strength," Yoon said.
According to the Korea Herald, Yoon further stated the alliance between South Korea and the U.S. has been "upgraded" to a "nuclear-based alliance," after he and U.S. President Joe Biden signed an agreement in 2023.
During the ceremony, Yoon further noted South Korea has been on a peaceful path since the end of the Korean War in 1953, but added North Korea "insists on continuing down the path of regression."
Recently, North Korea has increased its aggressive posturing towards its neighbor to the south, launching 18 ballistic missiles simultaneously in May.
During a visit to North Korea by Russian President Vladmir Putin in June, a deal was struck between the two nations, and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was reportedly supplied with long-range nuclear missile technology in exchange for artillery.
Reuters reported North Korea had recently tested ballistic missiles capable of carrying a "super-large warhead," to improve weapons capabilities. Kim reportedly stated the tests are a necessity because of "outside threats."
This week at the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, Pyongyang's U.N. representative Kim Song told the delegation North Korea would not give up its nuclear weapons, regardless of who is in the White House.
Song accused the U.S. and its "followers" of being confrontational and oppressive towards North Korea.
"Whoever takes office in the U.S., we will only deal with the state entity called the U.S., not the mere administration … Likewise, any U.S. administration will have to face the DPRK [Democratic People's Republic of Korea], which is different from what the U.S. used to think … When it comes to national prestige, we will never bargain over it with anyone for it was gained through the bloody struggle of the entire Korean people," Song said.
According to a report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, North Korea currently has 50 stored nuclear warheads in its possession as of June 2024.
"North Korea continues to prioritize its military nuclear programme as a central element of its national security strategy. SIPRI estimates that the country has now assembled around 50 warheads and possesses enough fissile material to reach a total of up to 90 warheads, both significant increases over the estimates for January 2023," the report states.