Al-Qaida is attempting to acquire nuclear weapons – Where is the Biden administration? thumbnail

Al-Qaida is attempting to acquire nuclear weapons – Where is the Biden administration?

By Center For Security Policy

In 2001 when the United States invaded Afghanistan, Al-Qaida stood on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons. Osama Bin Laden himself had met directly with members of an Islamic organization called Ummah Tameer-e-Nau (UTN). The head of that organization was Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood the former head of the Pakistani nuclear power program. Bashir had already drawn for Osama a crude sketch of an atomic bomb and was discussing the possibility of building him one. Fortunately, for the whole world, that plot was discovered and dismantled in an operation still too sensitive to discuss in detail.

We may be standing on the verge of having Al-Qaida realize their dream and acquire nucs. Unfortunately, this time the guy in the White House shows no signs of caring or intending to act. It is key to Biden’s political strategy that we all believe the fall of Afghanistan had no negative security implications for America. Joe would rather we all slumber on in complacency until doomsday than admit the truth.

The Independent reported recently that the Taliban was attempting to acquire nuclear weapons. AND Magazine has confirmed independently that according to a former head of Afghan intelligence such efforts are underway. It would be more accurate to say, however, that Al Qaida is attempting to acquire these weapons. The individual leading the effort to acquire nuclear weapons is Hafiz Muhammed Agha Hakim. While Hafiz is the Taliban governor of Nuristan Province he is also a senior member of Al-Qaida. This is an example of the extent to which Al-Qaida and the Taliban now work together seamlessly.

Hafiz met recently with two “Arabs.” One of them was Abu Al-Marwan, whose father, according to the source, was associated with Abdulaziz Al-Masri’s cell in years past. Al-Masri was a senior Al-Qaida official who was a key part of Osama’s WMD programs. The purpose of this meeting was reportedly to explore the possibility of acquiring nuclear weapons from jihadist sympathizers within the Pakistani security forces that guard Pakistani nuclear weapons.

Pakistan has roughly 200 functioning nuclear weapons. The Pakistani Taliban has staged several attacks since the fall of Kabul on facilities known to be associated with the Pakistani nuclear weapons program. There has been concern for years about Islamists within the Pakistani nuclear security forces providing nuclear weapons to Islamic terrorist groups.

AND Magazine has also learned that recently the Pakistanis have made changes to how they recruit members of the nuclear security forces. Historically, these forces have been composed of Punjabis and have been extremely cohesive. The Pakistanis have now changed their recruiting practices – bringing in individuals from other parts of the country and thereby increasing the likelihood of infiltration.

There has also been recent reporting about the methodology being used by the Pakistanis to safeguard their nuclear weapons which suggests concern about their safekeeping is well warranted.  According to Wired and The Atlantic, the Pakistani Strategic Plans Division which guards the country’s nuclear weapons has now begun to move atomic bombs around the country in unmarked, largely unguarded vehicles. This suggests strongly that the Pakistanis have taken note of the number of attacks by the Pakistani Taliban on nuclear-related facilities and that they no longer trust that those installations are impregnable.

The nukes travel “in civilian-style vehicles without noticeable defenses, in the regular flow of traffic,” according to The Atlantic. Anybody who has spent five minutes on the ground in Pakistan and so much has taken a cab to the hotel from the airport will know what is wrong with this plan. It is also of note that the Pakistani Taliban have demonstrated repeatedly their capacity to ambush heavily armed convoys of Pakistani government vehicles.

Read more.

Originally published by AND Magazine


Sam Faddis

Senior Fellow.

RELATED ARTICLE: U.S. must do more to counter Houthi attacks on ships


🚨 BREAKING: Joe Biden raises the possibility of “American troops fighting Russian troops”…

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) December 6, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Federal Government Paid Media Outlets to Promote the Covid Vaccine thumbnail

The Federal Government Paid Media Outlets to Promote the Covid Vaccine

By Rav Arora

After releasing my three-part series earlier this year showing how multiple media outlets refused to platform dissent on the Covid vaccine, I was asked on multiple podcasts why this was the case. Ideological groupthink, fear of exacerbating institutional distrust, and financial motives were on my list of potential explanations, but I did not have concrete evidence.

As I highlighted in my first piece, the responses I got from editors claiming their publication’s “pro-vaccine” allegiance were quite jarring. More than anything else, a publication should be “pro-truth” — whether that means highlighting the astounding benefits of a therapeutic or exposing its serious side effects. The idea that a whole media corporation would take a firm stance on a novel, experimental product is antithetical to the core purpose of journalism.

As I’ve said many times before, we are a pro-vaccination newspaper, and personally I just wish everyone would get vaccinated already.

Editor response to Rav Arora’s story proposals on vaccine risks

As it turns out, mainstream media’s nearly monolithic coverage of mRNA vaccines and other Covid measures can be at least partially explained by a clear financial interest. Recently, independent journalist Breanna Morello — who left Fox News because of draconian vaccine mandates in New York City — alerted me to a FOIA request filed by the conservative media company TheBlaze, which found a number of major media outlets were paid to promote the Covid vaccine.

Such venues included the Washington PostLos Angeles Times, NBC, CNN, Fox News, and several others. TheBlaze’s report received little coverage — even in conservative media (perhaps because some of those outlets were also paid by HHS) ideologically predisposed to criticize government-fuelled narratives on the pandemic. As The Blaze reports:

Hundreds of news organizations were paid by the federal government to advertise for the vaccines as part of a “comprehensive media campaign,” according to documents TheBlaze obtained from the Department of Health and Human Services. The Biden administration purchased ads on TV, radio, in print, and on social media to build vaccine confidence, timing this effort with the increasing availability of the vaccines.

During the vaccine rollout, the Biden administration made a number of efforts to bolster vaccination rates. The US Department of Health and Human Services’ COVID-19 Public Education Campaign states they employed “both paid advertising and media interviews, presentations, radio/TV tours, and other public events to educate people about the importance of vaccination.”

The L.A Times – an outlet funded by HHS to promote Covid vaccines – runs a morally reprehensible column justifying mockery of ‘anti-vaxxer’ deaths.

The HHS website contains public access to all vaccine campaign advertisements for media outlets and beyond. One past advertisement promotes Covid vaccination in children, featuring a montage of selected medical doctors stating in unison,

We can all agree on this: you can trust the Covid vaccine for yourself, or your kids, or your grandkids….I mean it from the heart.

In another ad directed to parents, HHS’ selection of doctors state,

We want you to know, Covid vaccines are ‘safe and effective’.’ My grandkids are vaccinated…what’s not safe is getting Covid.

Is it ethical for the government to dubiously claim Covid vaccines are uniformly beneficial for kids, and contracting Covid is far less “safe” than getting your child double-vaccinated? No such randomized clinical evidence exists suggesting the benefits of the Covid vaccine outweigh the harms in young cohorts with a nearly zero risk of serious outcomes. The concentrated risk of myocarditis in boys and menstrual irregularities in girls suggest the Covid vaccine may be harmful on net. Moreover, is it ethical (for either party) for the federal government to advertise such medical misinformation on platforms allegedly committed to investigating the truth and holding the powerful accountable?

HHS advertisement on the updated Covid booster

A new government ad on the HHS website now promotes the updated Covid vaccine. It falsely claims the new booster shot prevents long Covid and hospitalization when the only available evidence from Pfizer and Moderna are rat studies and a 50-person trial (with an unexplained 2% rate of serious adverse events).

Rather than critically covering such propagandistic attempts to promote a longitudinally ineffective therapeutic with a 1 in 800 serious adverse event rate, major media outlets allowed the federal government to freely spread its misinformation on their platform. The New York Times’ reporting on vaccine-induced myocarditis, for example, downplayed the side effect at every sight and compared it to misleadingly higher rates of Covid-induced myocarditis:

For over two years, the media and government officials have been peddling dangerous misinformation — the very sin they accuse the conspiracy web of committing — about COVID-19 posing a higher risk to young people than the vaccine. Instead of examining age, gender, and health-stratified risk-benefit ratios, they elementarily look at aggregate data and cherry-pick seemingly beneficial outcomes to justify their “Everyone should get vaccinated!” campaign. A few of umpteen examples:

CNBC: “Myocarditis risk higher after Covid infection than Pfizer or Moderna vaccination, CDC finds

Reuters: “Higher risk of heart complications from COVID-19 than vaccines -study”

CNN: “Pediatric cardiologists explain myocarditis and why your teen should still get a Covid-19 vaccine

The Conversation: “Myocarditis: COVID-19 is a much bigger risk to the heart than vaccination

As an admittedly biased Zoomer, one of the most discrediting media assault campaigns grew in opposition to Joe Rogan’s claim in a June 2021 podcast that healthy 21-year-olds didn’t need the vaccine. Over two years later, Rogan’s judgment has been vindicated — as it was at the time — given the 0.003% mortality risk among 20-year-olds and unusually high rates of myocardial and menstrual-related vaccine adverse events. However, the mainstream media ecosystem conducted a fierce reputational decapitation in response to Rogan’s impermissible dissent from the CDC and Pfizer’s edicts:

The Washington PostJoe Rogan is using his wildly popular podcast to question vaccines. Experts are fighting back.

The AtlanticJoe Rogan’s Show May Be Dumb. But Is It Actually Deadly?

Today: Dr. Fauci says Joe Rogan ‘incorrect’ to tell young people not to get vaccinated

NBC: Joe Rogan’s Covid vaccine misinfo matters

The United States wasn’t alone in spending large sums of taxpayer dollars to promote its agenda. The Trudeau government invested over $600,000 in hiring social media influencers to advance federal directives, including the push for Canadians to get vaccinated and boosted.

As CTV reports, Health Canada spent the most on hiring influencers to promote government information; $130,600 was spent towards an “influencer campaign in support of the COVID-19 vaccination marketing and advertising campaign.”

None of this is to mention Pfizer’s vaccine campaigns paying celebrities to rhapsodize about marvellously ‘safe and effective’ mRNA inoculation. Travis Kelce — a professional football player watched and revered by many young American men in particular — promoted getting the updated booster shot and flu vaccine in the same visit.

The journalists I grew up admiring — such as Megyn Kelly, Glenn Greenwald, Alex Berenson (Unreported Truths), and Matt Taibbi (Racket News) — were known for challenging consensus and providing novel perspectives on complex sociopolitical topics. I relied on select journalistic outlets and individual commentators for an honest, independent evaluation of the facts.

The heavily biased coverage of race relations and criminal justice issues in 2020 following the tragic death of George Floyd was self-discrediting but hardly surprising given the dominance of identity politics in elite liberal discourse.

The deterioration of journalistic standards during the vaccine rollout beginning in 2021, however, was particularly disorienting. The Washington Post, NBC, and the New York Times should have held the Biden administration’s feet to the fire for promoting experimental vaccines in all Americans irrespective of risk and continued revelations regarding concerning side effects.

They miserably failed to do so.

The last standing bulwark against government propaganda and censorship is crumbling before our eyes, losing relevance by the month. Perhaps a solution for media institutions to earn back credibility is to critically cover federal agencies misinforming the public rather than take funds to promote their agendas.

Just a thought.


This article was published by the Brownstone Institute and is reproduced with permission.


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Israeli Forces Find Hamas Missiles Under UN Equipment thumbnail

Israeli Forces Find Hamas Missiles Under UN Equipment

By Catherine Salgado

Editors’ Note: Whether it be running cover for terrorist organizations, pushing the totalitarian “Green Agenda”, acting as a nest of spies under diplomatic immunity, or inflicting Covid lockdown on the entire world, the UN has become the epicenter for efforts of the International Left to subvert freedom and Western civilization. It used to be an idea somewhat on the fringe to “Get the US out of the UN.” This should no longer be considered a fringe idea, but rather a necessity to maintain peace and order in the world.

In the latest revelation of United Nations (UN) property being used by terrorists to conceal weapons, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced discovery of a cache of Hamas missiles under UNRWA equipment (watch here).

Hamas has stored weapons in UN schools for years—the UN even admitted that back in 2015. At a certain point, especially considering how much the UN promotes Hamas propaganda against Israel, there has to be knowledgeable culpability for the UN. The UN is so anti-Israel that the Israeli ambassador there put on a yellow star during his speech in October.

Not to mention there is evidence that UN schools are training young Palestinians to want to be jihadis. You can watch a video (one of several) of young Palestinian students at a United Nations school who can’t wait to start killing Jews. They said they are taught to hate Jews and support jihad. The point is that it’s unfortunately not surprising that Hamas was stashing missiles under UN equipment.


“[Jerusalem Post, Dec. 2] The IDF on Saturday uncovered dozens of Hamas missiles hidden underneath UNRWA equipment, it announced.

Dozens of missiles with varying capacities, as well as some 30 Grad rockets, were found and confiscated by forces from the 261st Brigade.

The IDF struck over 400 terror targets across the Gaza Strip since the resumption of the war in Gaza, following a seven-day humanitarian truce with terrorist group Hamas…The [215th Artillery] Brigade also raided a mosque used by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist group as an operational headquarters.

The terror-infested mosque was later destroyed by Israeli Air Force fighter jets.”

Thank goodness the Israelis are not letting the terrorists’ use of “civilian” buildings stop them from taking out the threat.


Catherine Salgado is an accomplished writer and investigative reporter who publishes daily at her Substack column, Pro Deo et Libertate (For God and Liberty). This superb column provides news and opinion pieces from an honest, common sense perspective in the spheres of culture, politics, liberal arts, and religion. The Prickly Pear is grateful for her permission to reproduce her public writings and recommend that our readers subscribe to Catherine’s superb Substack column. Please consider a paid subscription for full access to all of her excellent and informative writings. 

Image Credit: Shutterstock


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

‘248% Increase In Price’: Video Reveals Kevin McCallister’s Grocery Bill In Biden’s Economy thumbnail

‘248% Increase In Price’: Video Reveals Kevin McCallister’s Grocery Bill In Biden’s Economy

By Julianna Frieman

Editors’ Note: This little exercise performed by a TikTok user is illustrative of how painful inflation is, especially for the poor who don’t own assets to any extent. They get through life largely by living from paycheck to paycheck. It has been 33 years since the movie was made so if you divide the 248% inflation by 33, you get an average inflation rate of 7.5% per year. This is the hidden “tax” levied on the populace by a government and central bank that can’t control spending, and pay for their excesses by depreciating the value of money. In December of 1990, the S&P 500 was about 330 and today it is almost 4600. Gold was about $400 per ounce at the end of 1990, and today it is $2,080. Both advanced much faster than Kevin’s grocery basket. So those who can afford to buy assets and leave them alone for the long term, have done OK, but most of us can’t put the bulk of our wealth in investments. The policies of deficit spending, allegedly justified by programs to “help the poor”, turn out in fact to be policies that hurt the poor the most. We would not need to fund government through money printing if our political leaders would balance the budget and we got back to a system of stable money that held its purchasing power.

Kevin McCallister would need more than $20 to pay off his grocery bill in President Joe Biden’s economy.

TikTok user Geoffrey Lyons determined that the shopping trip in “Home Alone” would not be as affordable in 2023 as it was in the film, which was released in 1990, according to the New York Post. Many were left wondering how the math of modern inflation would impact this Christmas classic.

Kevin’s shopping list consisted of the following ten items: TV dinner, a load of Wonder Bread, frozen Mac and cheese, cling wrap, a half-gallon of milk, tide laundry detergent, toilet paper, a half-gallon of orange juice, a pack of army men and dryer sheets, according to the outlet. With a $1 off coupon for the orange juice, Kevin paid $19.83. (RELATED: Joe Pesci Reveals Worst Injury He Suffered While Filming ‘Home Alone’)

Lyons revealed the current price of each item on Kevin’s grocery bill in the United States, concluding that the child would have to fork over $63.73 before tax, the outlet reported. The total would be $68 including the coupon — a 248% increase in price from 30 years ago.

“So, I broke it down, $4.50 for the orange juice. $4.50 for the saran wrap. TV dinner: couldn’t find the same one, so we did $5 for that one because it had the food inside,” Lyons said. “$13.00 for the Tide. $3.00 for the Wonder Bread. $3.50 for the frozen mac. $4.60 for the milk. You got $8.79 for the dryer sheets. You got $8.00 for the toilet paper, and you got just $9.00 for the toy soldiers.”

The video received more than 3 million views and several comments expressing shock at the economic shift.

“A $100 bill is the new $20 bill,” one user wrote.“

I bet the cashier’s wage is still the same in 2023,” another commenter wrote.

“Self-checkout I’m still paying 19.38 today,” a third user wrote.


This article was published by The Daily Caller News Foundation and is reproduced with permission.

Image Credit: YouTube screenshot of the movie Home Alone produced by 20th Century Fox


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Israel’s Reservists and ‘The Most Just War In History’ thumbnail

Israel’s Reservists and ‘The Most Just War In History’

By Jihad Watch

The redoubtable Italian-Israeli journalist Fiamma Nierenstein has recently spent time with Israeli reservists — 300,000 were called up for the current campaign and all 300,000 showed up — who are fighting to preserve their tiny state against those who wish to annihilate it. More on her moving report can be found here:

The Determination of Israel’s Reservists

by Fiamma Nirenstein,, December 3, 2023:

Who is the Israel soldier? They can be of any age and profession. It may have been a long time since they held a weapon. Many of them are at Tze’elim, one of the IDF’s largest bases, just across the border from Gaza on yellow sand.

When I meet them, they are waiting, as the brief ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was still holding. A short time later, Hamas broke the truce, attacked Israel with rockets, and the fighting began again.

These soldiers are older and more emotional than you would imagine. Their intentions are clear: “Never Again.” The Oct. 7 massacre will never be permitted to reoccur. Israel must be freed from the nightmare of Hamas.

In Tze’elim, rows of barracks and numerous disorderly tents house thousands of soldiers of all kinds. We meet with a group of them from Brigade 252. They are soldiers from the miluim—the reserves. They have completed their three-year military service—or two years, if they are women—but they all keep their “miluim bag” under the bed. If the phone rings, as happened on Oct. 7, they rush to the front, whether they are in Tel Aviv or traveling in Japan, whether they are left-wing or right-wing, professors or taxi drivers. They tear themselves away from the operating room and the shop, the lawyer’s office and the bus they drive.

Commander A. is thin, with gray hair and a kind smile. He is religious. On the morning of Oct. 7, he was in synagogue without a telephone. Someone told him “something never seen before is happening.” A. rushed to his collection point in the south and has yet to return home.

On Oct. 7, the reserves were immediately thrown into the battle to retake the kibbutzim that had been attacked and massacred by Hamas terrorists. They hunted down the Hamas men who remained and collected the wounded and dead Israelis in the fields and on the roads. A. closes his eyes. He has seen hell.

The 252 was then sent into the Gaza town of Beit Hanoun, home to 50,000 inhabitants who serve as human shields for what is essentially a massive rocket launching pad. The reservists were trained in a mock-up of a Gaza city. They practiced how to enter, shoot, exit, climb, attack and go through tunnels full of TNT. They trained against ambushes, snipers and RPGs.

A. says that, when they went into Beit Hanoun itself, “We had to quickly learn a lesson: Beit Hanoun’s ambush is in its heart, not its outer circles. The terrorists let you enter easily. There’s a row of houses, two or three more, and that’s where Hamas is waiting for you—where you don’t expect it, in civilian structures.”

A. explains, “If we decide to destroy a structure and there are civilians inside, we warn the civilian population. … There are precise rules for evaluating whether we have to act, whether it’s essential because if we don’t act, the lives of soldiers or Israeli civilians are in danger. We try to stop Hamas’s continuous use of human shields by moving the civilians out completely.”

A. is happy to say, “Of civilians killed in Ben Hanoun, the number is zero.”…

Now that the soldiers are back at war, the humanitarian issue is certainly important to them; not because of what the Biden administration tells them, but because that is what an Israeli soldier is.

First and foremost, however, they are Jews who know exactly what was done to their people on Oct. 7 and will continue their war of justice and survival. One of them tells me, “Yes, I feel when we fight, feel it physically, that our kidnapped citizens are not far away, and I fight for them too with all my heart. This is the most just war of all time.”

These are the citizen-soldiers who, like Cincinnatus leaving his plow to fight the Etruscans, left their normal lives to fight the enemy, and once Hamas is crushed will, like Cincinnatus, return to their civilian lives as professors, bus drivers, lawyers, cooks, surgeons, and farmers. Fiamma Nierenstein offers a touching portrait of these reservists, their determination and their grit. Who would not be impressed, and moved, by men (and women) such as these?




This is an urgent call for action.

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) December 6, 2023

Our top priority is returning all the hostages home.

Watch the IDF Chief of the General Staff LTG Herzi Halevi in his statement:

— Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) December 6, 2023


The Remarkable Life and Heroic Death of Ido Rosenthal

No Truce With Terrorists

US State Department says Hamas won’t release female hostages because they will tell about jihadis’ sex crimes

Toronto: Hundreds stranded as buses fail to show for rally in support of Israel

France: Paris jihad murderer was under surveillance, but nothing was done to prevent his attack

Erdogan calls Netanyahu ‘butcher of Gaza,’ says he’ll be tried as ‘a war criminal’

Hamas-linked CAIR condemns Biden administration for giving Netanyahu ‘green light’ to resume Gaza bombing

Canada: Muslim in Calgary pleads guilty to terror charge for plotting to murder gays

Germany: Cologne gives in to Muslims, monument to the Armenian genocide is finally being removed

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Youth and Muslim Voting Blocs Show Signs of Moving Away from Biden thumbnail

Youth and Muslim Voting Blocs Show Signs of Moving Away from Biden

By Family Research Council

Heading into the 2024 election, early polling of young voters as well as public anger manifested by Muslim groups over events in the Middle East indicate that President Joe Biden may be losing ground in at least two key voting blocs that have traditionally voted strongly blue in past elections.

Last week, The New York Times reported on an unusual phenomenon currently happening among young voters in America: they do not seem to be leaning in the Democrats’ direction by the same overwhelming margins that they have in past elections. In the last two presidential elections, young voters (aged 18-29) heavily favored the Democratic candidate, with 55% going to Hillary Clinton versus 37% to Donald Trump in 2016 and over 60% going to Biden (with Trump garnering under 40%) in 2020.

But the same pattern does not appear to be materializing in 2024. “Virtually every poll shows a close race between Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump among young voters,” the NYT’s Nate Cohn observed. He went on to contend that the reason behind the turnaround is likely because young voters “are by far the likeliest to say he’s just too old to be an effective president.” In addition, “[m]any are upset about his handling of the Israel-Hamas war. And all of this is against the backdrop of Mr. Biden’s longstanding weakness among young voters, who weren’t enthusiastic about him in 2020, and Mr. Trump’s gains among nonwhite voters, who are disproportionately young.”

Meanwhile, Muslim American voters, another key Democratic demographic, also appear to be moving away from the president due to his administration’s support for Israel following the atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7 and the resulting war in Gaza. At a conference in Detroit on Saturday, Muslim leaders from eight swing states across the country, including Michigan, Minnesota, Arizona, Wisconsin, Florida, Georgia, Nevada and Pennsylvania, gathered to pledge their withdrawal of support for Biden because of his “refusal to call for a ceasefire in Gaza.”

Despite only making up about 1.1% of the U.S. population at 3.45 million, experts say that Muslim Americans can have an outsized influence on the election due to their propensity to largely vote for Democrats. As noted by Axios, Biden won Arizona by only 10,500 votes in a state with an Arab American population of about 60,000, and in Georgia, the president won by only 11,800 votes in a state with about 57,000 Arab Americans.

“Recent polling shows a tightening race in a hypothetical matchup between the 45th and 46th presidents,” Matt Carpenter, director of FRC Action, told The Washington Stand. “President Biden won voters aged 18-34 by 20 points in 2020, and recent data shows younger voters would choose Biden over Trump in a possible rematch by just four points, a remarkable switch in sentiment among this key group of voters. Given the 2020 election was ultimately decided by about 44,000 votes across three states, small movements among key demographics can produce dramatic effects in the electoral college.”

Carpenter continued, “Look also at some of the movement among Muslim Americans. While they are a very small group of voters in America, they voted overwhelmingly for Biden in 2020, giving him almost 70% of their vote. In important swing states, like Michigan, Muslim voters wield an outsized influence on the Democratic Party’s vote share every election cycle. It’s possible in a hypothetical matchup between Biden and Trump we see these key groups of voters return to their historical voting behavior, but I wouldn’t count on it.”

Carpenter went on to point to additional voting blocs that appear to be shifting away from Biden as the 2024 election approaches.

“We have also seen dramatic moves among key voting blocs since 2016, when Donald Trump won by assembling a coalition of non-college educated white voters, who voted for Obama twice, alongside the traditional GOP base,” he observed. “And we have also seen steady movement among Hispanic voters to the GOP in recent cycles, particularly in Florida and Texas. The more these key groups of voters balk at the idea of another four years of the Biden administration, the ceiling lowers a little on Biden’s reelection hopes. There is still a long way to go before election day, including a presidential primary, and anything can happen. But, it’s safe to say the Biden campaign has to be sweating their decline among these key groups of voters.”


Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2023 Family Research Council.

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Our Dysfunctional Press thumbnail

Our Dysfunctional Press

By Bruce Bialosky

There was a blatant episode recently that exemplifies how deteriorated our press has become. The immediate disclosure to the world that the Hamas propaganda machine blamed Israelis for a hospital bombing in Gaza – in reality, the hospital parking lot — and the killing of 500 people – which was actually 50. These irresponsible reports spread a blood libel that gave justification for riots throughout the world and the cancellation of meetings with President Biden. But that is just a small sample of the distortion done on a regular basis by the legacy media.

Meet the Press, one of TV’s most iconic news programs, transitioned to a new host on September 17th. That morning saw Kristen Welker anchor her first show after succeeding long-time host, Chuck Todd. It would be easy to take the position that it would be Tweedle-dee, Tweedle-dum. But in the spirit of writing this column and being part of the journalist world, I committed to giving her a shot.

She was able to book former President Donald Trump for her first show, no question a big “get.” Trump is difficult to watch as a guest because of his repetitive rhetoric and chest pounding, so watching was indeed a commitment. He was a prince compared to her. It wasn’t just that she dripped with disdain for Trump. That would be expected since she is aligned with the left-wing press. The questioning was truly atrocious and lacked any professional standards.

Let’s lay down some ground rules for a good interview. A good interviewer asks open-ended questions and then listens to the answers. If appropriate, directed questions might be asked based on the interviewee’s responses. These are called “follow-up” questions which can be extremely newsworthy if used correctly. For example, “Mr. Trump, you just stated that you believe in further building the wall on the Southern border. You only accomplished part of your stated goal in your first term. What are you going to do differently to make that happen?” Again, an open-ended question with a more defined scope.

I know you might be thinking I am out of my mind because it’s been years since you have seen much of that. Some people still manage that journalistic trait. I used to regularly watch Tucker who asked questions and then let the interviewee talk while he remained silent. Stuart Varney (Fox Business) does that most of the time. Bari Weiss does a really good interview and so does Dennis Prager on their respective platforms.

Back to Welker. She started off by asking Trump a fair question because he had used the word “retribution” regarding his legal troubles and charges against him. Then five minutes into the interview she says to Trump, “I want to hear from you, I want to hear what’s in your head, when you go to bed at night, do you worry about going to jail?” Is that a question to ask a former President? Did she think she was interviewing someone on one of NBC’s newsmagazine shows?

Trump launches into one of his winding defensives, but a coherent defense of his position. He then says “they” went to the AG of the United States and told them to indict him. Instead of asking Trump what evidence he has of that, she says “There is just no evidence of that.” Or how about who is the “they” to which he referred? Instead, she chose to debate him. That is only six minutes into the show.

After Trump provides his defense, she interrupts him to tell him she wants to focus on him. Then she actually asks an open-ended question.” What do you see when you look at your mug shot?” Charming. Then she asks him about his lawyers. “Some of your outside lawyers you said they had crazy theories, why were you listening to them?” OK, half a good question. She does not specify who she is speaking about, but it is an open-ended question. Before Trump can answer she asks, “Were you listening to them because they were telling you what you wanted to hear?”

She then switches the subject to abortion and asks him a loaded question about the subject. He gives a winding but coherent answer to the question and turns the tables, accusing the Democrats of wanting late-term abortions and citing Hillary Clinton. Her response was, “That is not part of anyone’s argument. Democrats don’t want that.” Trump repeated the assertion, and she then again said, “Democrats don’t want that.”

She is now in a full-out debate with him. She is asserting a position on behalf his political rivals. At 22 minutes into the show, I had enough. Why do I need to listen to someone who is not practicing journalism? She is a political advocate.

If you think I am just taking on the Left of Center Legacy Media, I am not. Fox News Sunday hosted by Shannon Bream did a deep dive into America’s crime explosion America on October 28th. She had on Eric Johnson, the mayor of Dallas. She obviously gets major credit for having him on since the other shows won’t as he left the Democrat Party and became a Republican. He gave a clear definition of why he made the change and explained that crime stops with mayors and police chiefs. He deserves credit for stating the buck stops with him as Mayor. But there was an obvious follow-up question she neglected to ask — regarding errant district attorneys not enforcing the laws and charging the criminals. Police Chiefs can only do so much. The absence of this key questioning shows the often poor quality of these interviews.

It is not only Welker’s interview of Trump. I watched her “interview” of Congresswoman Jayapal on October 29th, with Welker not willing to counter or question Jayapal’s position for a humanitarian ceasefire. I see how she is going to go in the remainder of her term. Softballs to Democrats, arguing with Republicans.

This is not journalism, and that is why our country holds the press in such low esteem.


This article was published by Flash Report and is reprinted with permission from the author.

Image Credit: White House


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Arizona GOP Lawmakers Hint At University Budget Cuts Over Free Speech Concerns thumbnail

Arizona GOP Lawmakers Hint At University Budget Cuts Over Free Speech Concerns

By Cameron Arcand

Editors’ Note: Free speech certainly is a major concern. However, it goes much deeper than that. The Left has established an intellectual monopoly on our campuses that will allow no diversity of viewpoints. Search committees, faculty senates, and departments all work in tandem to deny Conservative scholars from being hired.  Those who do have positions live in a world where they must largely keep quiet and keep their heads down. With about 75% of the population either saying they are Conservative or moderate, this monopoly does not serve the needs of the majority of citizens and must be broken up by lawmakers. Education is too important to leave in the hands of a narrow group of radicals. Recent weeks show how intolerant the Left has become and how easily they join forces with totalitarian movements. Major progress has been made in primary and secondary education to challenge the Progressive Establishment in education through the school choice movement. However, no progress has been made in higher education. Why not school choice at higher levels of education?

Arizona Republican lawmakers are reconsidering appropriations toward public universities in the state, specifically citing free speech concerns at Arizona State University.

The Joint Legislative Ad Hoc Committee on Freedom of Expression at Arizona’s Public Universities started in July after an event in February with Charlie Kirk, Dennis Prager, and Robert Kiyosaki at the T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development dubbed “Health, Wealth & Happiness.”

Sens. Anthony Kern and Sonny Borrelli, as well as Rep. Quang Nguyen, said they would be reexamining appropriations toward the universities. Kern and Nguyen co-chair the committee.

“I think it is time for this body to really consider future appropriations, and we also need to consider legislation so to hold ABOR’s [Arizona Board of Regents] feet a little closer to the fire,” Nguyen said.

Borrelli echoed a similar sentiment about appropriations.

“I’m open to suggestions on how much we gut from the university system,” Borrelli said.

The lawmakers, including Rep. Austin Smith, R-Wittmann, also criticized the Board of Regents.

“Shame on the entire Board of Regents, Michael Crow for their activity to condemn other conservative students, but not Students for Justice in Palestine,” Smith said. “That’s the state of public higher education.”

“I don’t know their purpose,” he added regarding the decision-making body that oversees the public universities– ASU, Northern Arizona University, and The University of Arizona.

Kern told reporters the hearing that legislation would be introduced in January related to campus free speech, but he did not get into details.

Following the backlash from the event from Barrett, The Honors College faculty, Tom Lewis pulled his funding from the school, and the center was shut down, The Center Square reported at the time.

The committee’s hearing on Monday focused mainly on recent actions from Students for Justice in Palestine, as well as greater concerns about the safety of Jewish students. The Center Square reported that a meeting of the ASU’s Tempe campus student government was disrupted by pro-Palestinian protesters earlier this month, and ASU is investigating.

It also continued to look at the events that led to the controversy surrounding the T.W. Lewis Center talk earlier this year. Lewis was one of the people who testified at Monday’s hearing, along with an attorney representing the university.

Before the hearing, Arizona’s legislative Democrats have decided to no longer participate in the joint committee.

“The last time the Senate and House Democratic Caucuses joined this ‘free speech’ committee on July 18 it unnecessarily lasted five hours with no discernable value to the public. This committee was nothing more than grandstanding with an attempt to further spread misinformation and division,” Senate and House Democrats said in a joint statement.

“We have no intention of dragging this out further: ASU has the responsibility – not only to their students but to the state – to follow proper protocols so all voices can be heard on campus. We know that ASU followed all traditional procedures to accommodate alt-right conservative speakers,” the statement added.

However, one Democratic lawmaker, Sen. Sally Ann Gonzales, tweeted that she did not agree with the press release, but she was not present at the hearing.

“Not all of us agree with this joint PR,” she said in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter. The Center Square reached out to the senator for comment, but she did not respond in time for publication.


This article was published by Center Square and is reproduced with permission.


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

How Can We Stop Serving Students So Poorly? thumbnail

How Can We Stop Serving Students So Poorly?

By Gary M. Galles

In 1942, there were 108,579 public school districts in the United States. By the 2020-21 school year, there were only 13,187.

That massive consolidation of school districts was propelled by the belief that economies of scale created by larger school districts would lower costs and serve students better. Those presumed efficiencies have not, however, been demonstrated in practice. As Stephen Coffin summarized,  “Large urban school districts generally have not been accountable for improving school and student performance…they have been constrained by their overly large scale…The typical large urban school district needs to be right-sized or disaggregated.”

Why has school district consolidation failed to perform as advertised? Because centralized administration creates more adverse incentives that overwhelm any advantages they might have.

One important reason is that teaching is an idiosyncratic art, practiced differently by people with different capabilities and approaches. One such difference is that younger teachers are closer in age to their students, but know fewer relevant illustrations than older teachers, who have often accumulated larger stores of knowledge over time, which faces them with a different issue: determining what works best for a particular class. Further, some seem to be far better storytellers than others.

As with other differences, these imply that there is no single set of teaching guidelines that can be imposed from above by a centralized decision-making authority, and attempting to do so will serve students poorly.

Centralized bureaucratic systems also tend to undermine teachers’ accountability to those for whom it is most important. They make teachers accountable to administrators rather than to students and their parents.

Noting the incentives created by large, centralized school districts, not to mention the many controversies that have arisen in public education helps us understand the increasing support for breaking up some of the largest school districts, which would reduce the “monopoly power” of their school boards. At issue? What is taught and how. Merely breaking larger monopolies into smaller monopolies, however, does not necessarily mean parents and students will end up with any more power over policies.

That inherent difficulty helps explain the growing support for charter schools, which are not subject to the same rules as traditional public schools. But as Thomas Sowell documents in Charter Schools and Their Enemies, even the far superior performance of charter schools in apples-to-apples comparisons may not be enough to withstand the increasing political dangers threatening charter schools under the flag of “reform,” which threatens to undermine “the urgent task of educating young people in the skills that will determine what kind of future they will have available as adults.”

Sowell illustrates both the “remarkable success” of charter schools and the hostility they face at the hands of public school teachers and administrators, their unions, schools of education, and politicians seeking union backing. For all of this, there is one simple explanation: “It is successful charter schools that are the real threat to the traditional unionized public schools.”

With charter schools so heavily opposed by the public school establishment, producing far too few spaces for those who wish to enroll in them, voucher programs may serve parents better. The portability of those resources could powerfully invigorate accountability by letting money move along with students when they leave poor teachers and schools for better ones. When resources don’t accompany students, financial punishment is visited upon more effective schools that must teach more people without more funds to do so. When resources do accompany those students, parents have far greater incentive to be involved, as their ability to redirect resources allows them to benefit from superior academic performance on behalf of their children.

Very large school districts have failed to serve parents and students, but have increased the rewards given to those responsible for that failure. Efforts to break them up have faced resistance, and even when break-ups are achieved, top-down policymaking often undermines the potential payoffs. Efforts to improve things with charter schools have shown some great results, and vouchers are attractive as a means to make educators more responsible to parents than to administrators. But we are still in the early stages of a very long struggle, and there are no quick, easy fixes.

With the powerful opposition every effort at effective educational reform faces, what we need are ways to decisively sever control of schools from the hands of special interests. And that effort faces the wild card of a sharply declining population of school-age students, which can provide yet another excuse to further consolidate educational provision that is already too centralized.  It is a daunting task, but our children’s future justifies facing it head-on.

Dr. Gary Galles is a Professor of Economics at Pepperdine.


This article was published by AIER, American Institute for Economic Research, and is reproduced with permission.

Image Credit: Pixabay


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Over One Million Muslim Americans Favor a Global Terrorist, and More Disturbing News thumbnail

Over One Million Muslim Americans Favor a Global Terrorist, and More Disturbing News

By Jihad Watch

On October 20, 2023, the polling company Cygnal released a report on Americans’ views about the early October Hamas terrorist attack on Israel. The report was titled Survey of General Population: Israel -Hamas Awareness and Attitudes.[1] The survey presented the same questions to six different groups: Jewish Americans, Muslim Americans, Evangelicals, Republicans, Independents, and Democrats, with the results being shown for each.

One of the disturbing results of this survey came in response to this question:

Below you will read a list of names of various people mentioned in the news recently. For each one, please indicate if you have heard of the person, and if you have, whether you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of the person. If you don’t recognize a name, choose so.

The name given was Ismail Haniyeh, a senior Hamas leader, and 38.6% of Muslim Americans had a favorable impression of him (of the other five groups, the closest favorable rating came from Democrats at 14.9%). There are an estimated 3.45 million Muslim Americans in the United States. This survey indicates that around 1.3 million Muslim Americans have a favorable impression of Haniyeh.

This is disturbing for two reasons. On October 8, 1997, the United States designated Hamas as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. And in January 2018, the U.S. State Department designated Ismail Haniyeh as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.

This favorable impression of Haniyeh was not due to a lack of information among Muslim Americans. The survey showed that when asked how closely they had followed events in Israel since the attack by Hamas on October 7th (“Hamas Awareness”), 30.9% of Muslim Americans responded “Somewhat Closely,” and 44.9% responded “Very Closely.”

When asked about being informed with regard to “Fatah, Hamas and Palestinian politics,” 65.4% of Muslim Americans considered themselves “Informed,” and 7.3% considered themselves “Expert.”

The survey showed that Muslim Americans were also aware of the following events regarding the October 7th attack by Hamas:

  1. “Over 1,200 people were killed in Israel, including women, infants, the elderly, and Holocaust survivors.” Very Aware: 36.4%, and Somewhat Aware: 41.9%
  2. “Over 250 people who were attending an all-night music festival were killed in Israel.” Very Aware: 33.7%, and Somewhat Aware: 42.7%
  3. “Over 100 people, including women and young children, were abducted from Israel and are being held hostage in Gaza.” Very Aware: 36.9%, and Somewhat Aware: 44.4%
  4. “Hamas militants decapitated young children during their attack in Israel.” Very Aware: 25.9%, and Somewhat Aware: 40%

So despite the extent of the knowledge among Muslim Americans about the above incidents, around 1.3 million Muslim Americans still had a favorable impression of Haniyeh, and by inference, HAMAS. It would have been very interesting to see the results if Cygnal had asked the Muslim Americans their opinions on the above incidents.

Another disturbing result came from the same question about favorability being asked, but this time the name was Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. He is a man with whom the chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” are closely associated. 31.3% of Muslim Americans had a favorable impression of Khamenei (of the other five groups, the closest favorable rating came from Democrats at 15.9%). So a little over one million Muslim Americans have a favorable impression of Khamenei.

Just as disturbing was the response to this question:

The Biden administration acknowledges that Hamas is nothing but a proxy for Iran and is funded and supported by Iran. Would you be more or less likely to vote for a political candidate who supports releasing billions of dollars in frozen assets for Iran to use any way it chooses?

32.6% of Muslim Americans were “More Likely” to vote for such a candidate (of the other five groups, the closest “More Likely” rating came from Democrats at 18.6%).

28.3% of Muslim Americans were “More Likely” to “vote for a political candidate who supports allowing Iran to evade sanctions and earn billions of dollars from oil sales” (of the other five groups, the closest “More Likely” rating came from Democrats at 15.9%).

And 44.7% of Muslim Americans support the recent pro-Palestinian protests and demonstrations across multiple cities in the United States (of the other five groups, the closest “Support” rating came from Democrats at 25.2%).


The results of this survey show a generally inverse relationship between the responses of Muslim Americans and the responses of the other five groups. In theory, there is nothing wrong with public differences in opinion, and that is one of the freedoms we cherish in the United States. However, it is a different matter when survey results reveal one group’s massive support for a global terrorist (and by inference, the foreign terrorist organization that he heads), massive support for the leader of a terrorist-supporting country in which the chants of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” are regular features, and massive support for that particular country to evade sanctions and receive billions of dollars in frozen assets to be used anyway that country chooses.

I have already shown in my book Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials,[2] that core tenets of Islamic Doctrine are in direct, irreconcilable conflict with the United States Constitution. The attitudes and beliefs of around one million or more Muslim Americans regarding terrorists and the support of terrorists shown in this survey raise serious questions about the security of the United States. This is especially so when considering that in fiscal year 2023, the Border Patrol encountered and released over 900,000 illegal aliens into the United States, and also estimated that during that same time period there were over 600,000 unidentified “gotaways” who had evaded the Border Patrol and entered the United States.[3] How many are unidentifed HAMAS or Iranian terrorists, and what kind of welcome might they be receiving?



Dr. Stephen M. Kirby is the author of six books about Islam. His latest book is Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials.

RELATED VIDEO: Evidence that Hamas is using hospitals as arsenals. Which is situation-normal for Muslims at war.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


[2]           Stephen M. Kirby, Islamic Doctrine versus the U.S. Constitution: The Dilemma for Muslim Public Officials (Washington D.C.: Center for Security Policy Press, 2019). A PDF copy of this book is available for download at

[3]           Adam Shaw, “Mayorkas confirms over 600,000 illegal immigrants evaded law enforcement at southern border last fiscal year,” Fox News, October 31, 2023,

Iran’s Regime Soon to Have Nuclear Bombs; Hezbollah Is Next

By Majid Rafizadeh

Iran is closer than ever before to obtaining nuclear bombs; meanwhile, the Biden administration’s only policy toward the ruling mullahs of Iran is to keep “rewarding” them with billions of dollars.

After the Iran-backed Hamas terror group launched its genocidal war against Israel and Jews, the Iranian regime ratcheted up its enrichment of uranium. The regime claims it now has enough enriched uranium to make three nuclear bombs, according to one of the two confidential reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and seen by Reuters.

On November 22, 2023, IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi warned in his latest report on verification and monitoring:

“Iran’s stockpiles of uranium enriched up to 5%, enriched up to 20% and enriched up to 60% – high enriched uranium – have all increased since we met in September with the increase of the 60% continuing at the same rate as I reported at the time of the last Board.”

The regime has also barred IAEA’s inspectors from entering Iran to monitor its nuclear activities. In a press briefing, Grossi said:

“Iran has ceased to implement lots of aspects and nuclear related obligations under the JCPOA [the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] and it’s not implementing mutually agreed additional measures under the joint statement of March 4th.”

The European Union and the Biden administration have been turning a blind eye to the escalation, ostensibly because they reportedly do not want to add “fuel” to the current hostilities in the Middle East (which Iran’s proxy Hamas started it in the first place). Nonsense. This is simply the most dangerous, disingenuous, cowardly appeasement policy in modern history. The West is basically saying, “Let’s not upset the mullahs! Instead, let’s allow the world’s top state sponsor of terrorism to continue its march toward having nuclear weapons in the hope that it will not use them.”

“There is a sort of paralysis, especially among the Americans… because they don’t want to add fuel to the fire,” said a senior European diplomat to Reuters on the condition of anonymity.

“The picture is pretty bleak, but the fact at the moment is that there is no appetite to provoke a reaction in Iran in the context of the war in the Middle East,” an unnamed senior diplomat told Agence France-Presse.

This feckless rush to appease aggressors and abdicate of responsibility for national security is exactly that Winston Churchill warned against: “Each one hopes that if he feeds the crocodile enough, the crocodile will eat him last.”

Once the Iranian regime gets access to nuclear weapons, it will most likely provide some of them to its proxies, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen. The threat of a nuclear-armed Iran must not be underestimated. Iran’s regime has frequently threatened to wipe a whole country — Israel — off the map, and is also increasing military cooperation with Venezuela and Cuba to threaten the US. Europe, too, remains a rich target for nuclear blackmail. Iran would not even have to use its nuclear bombs; the threat would be enough.

General Hossein Salami, the commander in chief of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has made the regime’s plans vehemently clear: “Our strategy is to erase Israel from the global political map,” he announced on Iran’s state-controlled Channel 2 TV in 2019.

In case anyone had a doubt, Iran’s Supreme Guide Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, published “Palestine,” a 416-page “guide to destroying Israel,” and railing against “The Great Satan,” the United States

It is high time for the Biden administration and the European Union at least to stop Iran from selling its oil. If not, much of the planet will soon see itself either in World War III or a surrender.

The present strategy of Western powers is no different than enriching Nazi Germany during WWII or the Soviet Union during the Cold War. For the expansionist, hegemonic Islamic Republic of Iran, concessions and appeasements mean only weakness. It would have been so much less costly in life and treasure to stop Hitler before he sent the German army across the Rhine in 1936. Perhaps US President Joe Biden is trying to bribe the mullahs not to create any more mayhem before next year’s US presidential election – but the only result of such timidity is that the price goes up – with a worse war to follow. Biden would not have won WWII.

The Iranian regime, through its proxies, has already attacked US forces in Iraq and Syria at least 74 times since October 17. US retaliation – against the proxies, not Iran – apparently could not impress Iran’s regime less. Someone else takes the bullet: that is why Iran has proxies in the first place. The proxies – Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Palestinian Islamic Jihad — are Iran’s human shields. The more the US and the EU give Iran a pass, the more belligerent it will become. The Biden administration is not only allowing to Iran’s mullahs to create a war cost-free, it is paying them to do it.

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a business strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US Foreign Policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu

Arizona News: December 5, 2023 thumbnail

Arizona News: December 5, 2023

By The Editors

The Prickly Pear will provide current, linked articles about Arizona consistent with our Mission Statement to ‘inform, educate and advocate’. We are an Arizona based website and believe this information should be available to all of our statewide readers.

Arizona’s Voter Rolls Need A Massive Clean Up

Maricopa Recorder [Stephen Richer] Tells Voters to Do More to Clean Voter Rolls

Study Shows Arizona Households Must Spend $13,329 More Annually To Get By

Overwhelming Border Surge Hampers Communication With Public

Border Surge Closes Lukeville Port, Hobbs, Sinema, Kelly Ignore Calls For National Guard Deployment

State 48 Is Up For Sale

Exclusive AZ Free News Voter Poll: Trump Leads Biden In AZ, Gov. Hobbs Low In Favorability

Hobbs Signs No Limits Abortion Ballot Measure Petition

Arizona grand jury indicts two Cochise County supervisors on election related charges

AG Mayes Accused Of Overreach For Indictment Of Cochise County Supervisors

Arizona GOP lawmakers hint at university budget cuts over free speech concerns

Nguyen explains possible legislation tackling free speech issues at Arizona universities

AZ Legislature: Rein-In Your Feral University and Its AWOL Regents

Judge Denies Kari Lake Challenge Of 2022 Election Results

20 of 21 Illegal Immigrant Sex Offenders Nabbed Recently Were Pedophiles


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

Hamas Atrocities in Israel Surface, Including Rape of ‘Beautiful Woman with Face of Angel’ Who Screamed To Be Killed thumbnail

Hamas Atrocities in Israel Surface, Including Rape of ‘Beautiful Woman with Face of Angel’ Who Screamed To Be Killed

By The Geller Report

What’s worse? These unimaginable horrors or the world braying for Jewish rape and blood?

Mass psychopathy: cheering these monstrous crimes while hand wringing and caterwauling about Gaza civilians when the large majority of Gazans support Hamas, support these atrocities. I have no sympathy for Gaza.

The world can no longer speak of human rights, the humane, or humanity. Their humanity is non-existent. They are the scum of the earth. It’s hard to know which is greater, their hatred of the Jews or their fear and admiration of Muslim supremacism.

Horrific new stories of Hamas attacks in Israel surface, including rape of ‘beautiful woman with face of angel’ who screamed to be killed

By: Ronny Reyes, NY Post, Published Dec. 3, 2023:

A “beautiful woman with the face of an angel’’ was raped by eight to 10 Hamas terrorists in Israel on Oct. 7, while another tragic victim was beheaded with a shovel trying to defend herself, a stricken survivor says.

Yoni Saadon, a 39-year-old father of four, told the UK’s Sunday Times that he is still haunted by the horrific scenes he witnessed at the Nova Music festival, when the Palestinian fiends slaughtered at least 364 festival-goers, including the gang-raped woman, who begged to be killed.

“I saw this beautiful woman with the face of an angel and eight or 10 of the fighters beating and raping her,” recalled Saadon, a foundry shift manager. “She was screaming, ‘Stop it already! I’m going to die anyway from what you are doing, just kill me!’

“When they finished, they were laughing, and the last one shot her in the head,” he said.

Saadon said he witnessed the gruesome act after pulling over him the body of a slain woman who had also been shot in the head — and smearing her blood on himself so it looked like he, too, was dead.

“I will never forget her face,” he said. “Every night I wake to it and apologise to her, saying. ‘I’m sorry.’ “

Saadon said he eventually joined others who had fled the site and hid in trees and bushes.

That’s when he witnessed two more Hamas gunmen attack another young woman who was fighting back from being stripped, he said.

“They threw her to the ground, and one of the terrorists took a shovel and beheaded her,” Saadon told the UK outlet. “And her head rolled along the ground. I see that head, too.”

Here are some accounts of the sexual assault against women on Oct 7 that the #metoo movement and @UN_Women don’t seem bothered by.

– “I saw this beautiful woman with the face of an angel and eight or ten of the fighters beating and raping her.“

“She was screaming,…

— Chaya Raichik (@ChayaRaichik10) December 4, 2023

Keep reading.


Pamela Geller


NEW PALESTINIAN POLL: 75% Support OCT 7 Massacre, 76% Have a Positive View of Hamas, 80% Support Annihilation of Israel Over “Two States,” 98.2% Have Negative View of America

NEW NATIONAL POLL: Close to 60% of American Muslims Support Hamas Atrocities Against the Jews

Most Recent Palestinian Poll: Over Half Would Vote For HAMAS

Gaza’s ‘Innocent Civilians’ Recaptured Israeli Hostage Who Escaped From Terrorist Captivity and Returned Him To Hamas


“Rape is too weak a word to define what was done to our women.”

— Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 (@MarinaMedvin) December 4, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Just How Good Are The Polls For Donald Trump? thumbnail

Just How Good Are The Polls For Donald Trump?

By The Daily Caller

Former President Donald Trump is enjoying unprecedented polling success compared to his 2016 and 2020 White House bids despite battling four criminal indictments, spelling bad news for President Joe Biden’s reelection chances in 2024.

Trump has already led the president in 91 national polls for a hypothetical head-to-head matchup, dwarfing his previous records against Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, which he won with 306 Electoral College votes, and Biden in 2020, according to polling data compiled by RealClearPolitics. Additionally, the former president is already faring better in crucial battleground states ahead of 2024 than he did in previous cycles when Trump outperformed the projections both elections, despite his 2020 loss.

This unprecedented polling success, coupled with the fact that Trump has often fared better than his polling average in certain states during previous cycles, bodes well for his chances to win a second term in 2024.

“The research indicates that he should be stronger in 2024 than in the past,” Dr. Charles Bullock, elections expert and political science professor at the University of Georgia, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “In the past, he has run ahead of his polls. So if here in the polls, he’s a few points ahead as opposed to a few points behind, that’s why I think he would be in an even better position.”

Trump was up against Clinton in a total 29 polls in the 2016 election, during which he briefly led in the RCP average during two separate periods, never surpassing a 1.1 point-margin. In 2020, Trump only led Biden in 5 polls all cycle, and never led in the RCP average.

The former president has already reached his largest RCP average lead for a general election as a Republican candidate, achieving a 2.6 point-advantage over Biden nationally on Nov. 26.

“The contrast between Trump’s policies — on the economy, on the border, on immigration, on crime, on national security — the country’s really benefited, and that strategy has worked very, very well. And that’s where these poll numbers come from, because it’s about issues. And he’s been really good,” John McLaughlin, CEO and partner of McLaughlin & Associates, told the DCNF. “He’s a better candidate today than he was in 2016 and 2020. He knows the issues, he’s focused on them, he knows the policies, he knows what he’s got to do … he’s focused on winning this election, and he’ll be a better president once the election is over. He’s making these poll numbers happen.”

The final RCP average for 2016 showed Clinton up by 3.2 points; however, she secured the popular vote by 2.1 points. In 2020, Biden was up by over 7 points in the 2020’s last RCP average, but he only beat Trump by 4.5 points.

The former president is also already faring better in crucial battleground states this year, most of which he won in 2016 and lost in 2020.

In 2016, Trump never led in the RCP average in WisconsinMichigan or Pennsylvania, yet won all three battleground states. The former president was only projected ahead of Clinton in two polls in Michigan and three polls in Pennsylvania, but didn’t lead in a single poll in Wisconsin for the entire cycle.

The former president’s largest lead in the RCP average for Ohio was 3.4 points, but he ended up winning by over 8 points. Trump also over-performed in North Carolina and Florida, winning by larger margins than predicted.

This cycle, Trump is already leading Biden in both Michigan and Pennsylvania for the RCP average by 2 points and 1.5 points, respectively. The former president has already led in four polls this year in Michigan, and in ten in Pennsylvania — nearly beating his records there for both entire cycles in 2016 and 2020.

While Biden is leading by 0.7 points in Wisconsin for the RCP average, Trump has already led in three polls, beating his 2016 record and almost eclipsing that of 2020.

“Americans are getting behind President Trump and his movement because they know this country can’t survive another four years of a disastrous Biden presidency that has divided the entire nation,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung told the DCNF in a statement. “Polls show President Trump beating Crooked Joe Biden in the general election because he’s the only person who can supercharge the economy, secure our border, safeguard communities, and put an end to unnecessary wars. Americans want to return to a prosperous nation and there’s only one person who can do that — President Trump.”

Jon McHenry, a GOP polling analyst and vice president at North Star Opinion Research, doesn’t believe the polling comparisons are necessarily indicative of Trump’s popularity over Biden.

“I don’t think the polls actually say a ton about the former president, other than he is running against a historically unpopular incumbent,” McHenry told the DCNF. “President Biden is flailing badly in trying to run on his record. Our survey in Arizona for the League of American Workers showed that voters view the term ‘Bidenomics’ unfavorably by a nearly two-to-one margin, and disapprove of the President’s job on the economy by a 60 to 38 percent margin. He’s going to be left with a negative campaign, and hoping that if it is former President Trump he’s carrying several convictions.”

Biden’s November approval rating of 37% is the lowest any incumbent president has had going into their reelection year in recent history, according to Gallup. Former Democratic President Jimmy Carter comes closest at 40% from November 1979, and he went on to lose to Republican President Ronald Reagan the following year by nearly 10 points.

The RCP average for a 2024 national Republican primary, based on polls conducted between Nov. 9 and Nov. 28, indicates Trump has a 48-point lead over the field, followed by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis at 13.6%, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley at 9.6%, conservative businessman Vivek Ramaswamy at 4.8% and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie at 2.2%.

In the Democratic primary field, which Biden has kept largely to himself, the president holds 69.7% support ahead of self-help author Marianne Williamson with 9% and Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips with 3.5%, according to the RCP average for the same time period.

Biden did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.





Meet the African-American filmmaker and historian who is Donald Trump’s NE Florida field operative

‘Certainly Has Been A Trend’: Trump Continues To Beat Biden In National, Swing-State Polls



— il Donaldo Trumpo (@PapiTrumpo) December 3, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

It Is A Civic Duty To Protect Your Community thumbnail

It Is A Civic Duty To Protect Your Community

By Michael Infanzon

Today, I’d like to discuss a subject close to all of our hearts: the right to bear arms. As we all know, this right is enshrined in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, as well as in Article 2, Section 26 of Arizona’s own Constitution. Both are crucial, but they come from different historical interpretations and serve different functions. Understanding these differences is key to defending our rights.

Let’s begin with the federal level. The Second Amendment reads: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” For years, scholars and courts have debated whether this safeguards an individual’s right to own firearms or merely protects the state’s right to maintain a militia. But what if I told you that the framers, like Madison and Hamilton, envisioned this not as an individual or collective right, but as a civic duty? Yes, a civic duty—an obligation that you owe to your state and your community to be prepared to defend them if the need arises.

Now, let’s look closer to home, at Arizona’s Constitution. Article 2, Section 26 states, “The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the state shall not be impaired.” The wording here is clear. In Arizona, your right to bear arms for self-defense is unequivocally protected, emphasizing personal liberty and autonomy. 

So, why is understanding these differences important, especially for a group of firearm supporters like us? It’s crucial because these interpretations shape our legal battles and public policies. At the federal level, the Second Amendment’s original intent as a civic duty can provide another line of defense against those pushing for restrictive gun control measures. In Arizona, our state constitution’s clear language on individual rights serves as a bulwark against any encroachments on our freedom to bear arms.

We’re living in a time where the interpretation of the Second Amendment is more contested than ever. Understanding it as a civic duty to the state and community can fortify our argument to preserve this right, not just for us but for future generations. The same applies to Arizona’s Constitution, which is explicit in its protection of individual rights. Together, these two constitutional provisions offer a robust defense against those who seek to limit our rights.

So, I urge you all to continue the fight. Educate yourselves and others about the historical underpinnings of these rights. Engage with your legislators, both federal and state, to safeguard these provisions. The right to bear arms is not just about owning a firearm; it’s about fulfilling our civic duty to our community and state, and it’s about exercising our individual rights to protect ourselves and our loved ones.

Thank you for your attention, and let’s keep fighting the good fight.


Michael Infanzon is a political and government policy contributor at The Prickly Pear.

 Michael writes about government policies that affect millions of Americans, from their introduction in the legislature to their implementation and how policies impact our everyday freedoms.

 Michael is the Managing Partner for EPIC Policy Group, located in Phoenix, AZ. EPIC has clients ranging from motorcycle rights organizations, firearms organizations, 2A rights organizations, veterans advocacy, chambers of commerce to agricultural products and personal freedoms among other policy issues.

 You can follow Michael on X/Twitter (@infanzon) and email him at


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

“Unrealized Losses” on Securities Held by Banks Jump by 22% to $684 Billion in Q3, Oh Lordy thumbnail

“Unrealized Losses” on Securities Held by Banks Jump by 22% to $684 Billion in Q3, Oh Lordy

By Wolf Richter

“Unrealized losses” on securities – mostly Treasury securities and government-guaranteed MBS – at FDIC-insured commercial banks at the end of Q3 jumped by $126 billion (or by 22%) from the prior quarter to $684 billion, according to the FDIC’s quarterly bank data release on Wednesday.

These unrealized losses were spread over the two accounting methods:

  • Unrealized losses on held-to-maturity (HTM) securities jumped by $81 billion from the prior quarter, to $391 billion.
  • Unrealized losses on available-for-sale (AFS) securities jumped by $45 billion from the prior quarter to $293 billion.

These paper losses occur predictably when interest rates rise. As yields rose in Q3, the market prices of those bonds fell, and the unrealized losses stacked up. For example, the 10-year Treasury yield jumped from 3.81% at the beginning of Q3 to 4.59% at the end of Q3. In periods when yields fell and bond prices rose, banks had “unrealized gains” (green).

“Unrealized losses” on securities held by banks don’t matter because at maturity in 7 or 10 or 25 years, banks will be paid face value, and the losses are only temporary, so to speak. They don’t matter until they suddenly do.

Banks, via a quirk in bank regulations, don’t have to mark these securities to market value but can carry them at purchase price. The difference between market value and the purchase price is the “unrealized gain or loss” that the bank must disclose in its quarterly financial filings, so that we the depositors can see them and get spooked by them and yank our money out, us billionaires and centimillionaires first, on the two fundamental principles of investing: 1, he who panics first, panics best; and 2, after us the deluge.

And thanks to today’s electronic fund transfers, the bank that we yank our money out collapses at lightning speed, see Silicon Valley BankSignature Bank, and First Republic.

The accumulated unrealized losses of $684 billion were not a record, but we are still $6 billion lower than the record in Q3 2022, because the FDIC took over the three regional banks earlier this year, and sold their assets, including their securities, at something close to market value, and thereby ate those paper losses…..

‘Righteous Crusade’: Trump Promises American ‘Comeback’ As He Rallies In Iowa Weeks Before Caucus Day thumbnail

‘Righteous Crusade’: Trump Promises American ‘Comeback’ As He Rallies In Iowa Weeks Before Caucus Day

By The Daily Caller

CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA — Former President Donald Trump promised voters that he would restore America in the “greatest comeback in history” during a rally in Iowa Saturday.

Trump was attending the “Commit to Caucus Event” in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, at a local community college, where he spoke to hundreds of voters in the key primary state. The former president said that it was time the fix the economy, close the southern border, crack down on Iran and China and keep gender ideology out of schools, rallying just weeks before the Jan. 15 Iowa caucus sets the tone for the primary season.

President Trump: “I promise you this: if you put me back in the White House, their reign will be over, and America will be a FREE NATION once again!”

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) December 2, 2023

“It’s going to be the greatest comeback in history — I’m not talking about comeback politically because I don’t care about that — it will be the greatest comeback for a country.”

Trump further described it as a “righteous crusade” that would “liberate” the American people from “Biden and the criminals in the Biden administration.” The statements were met with thunderous applause and cheering from the audience.

Trump took aim at Biden on several occasions during the event. He claimed that he would get rid of Biden’s executive order regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence and said he would “ban the use of AI to censor the speech of American citizens.”

Trump addressed foreign policy issues in Ukraine, China, Iran and Israel, the Oct. 7 terror attack on Israel “would never have happened” under his administration because Iran was “broke” and would have remained so if Biden hadn’t been elected. He said his administration’s sanctions prevented Iran from having the “money to fund Hamas and Hezbollah.”

Trump also targeted Republican rivals like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley, calling Haley “bird brain.” He also went after Haley for running against him and not being “loyal.”

“They told me no one cares about loyalty, but I said I think people do care about loyalty,” Trump told Iowa voters.

Voters who spoke with the Daily Caller News Foundation before the speech said that Trump was the only option for the GOP nominee due to his previous experience as president and his track record of getting things done. Several dismissed Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds’ and religious leader Bob Vander Plaats’ endorsement of DeSantis, saying that it will make little difference in the long run because Iowa voters, even religious voters, are behind Trump.

TRUMP: “I will direct a completely overhauled DOJ to investigate every marxist prosecutor in America for the illegal, racist-in-reverse enforcement of the law.”

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) December 3, 2023

Trump maintains a big lead in the Iowa polls as the caucus date approaches. The Cedar Rapids rally was Trump’s second of the day, as he campaigned in Ankeny hours before while DeSantis appeared before supporters in Jasper County, east of Des Moines.

“We will not bend, we will not break, we will not yield, we will never give in, we will never give up, and we will never, ever, back down,” Trump said.




RELATED ARTICLE: ‘He’s Proved Himself’: Iowa Voters Tout Trump’s White House Experience Ahead Of Cedar Rapids Speech


What a sight.

Pastors and faith leaders from all over Iowa PRAYED over President Trump.

Only GOD can save our country…

— Graham Allen (@GrahamAllen_1) December 2, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

The Video that Could Unravel the January 6 Committee’s Conclusions thumbnail

The Video that Could Unravel the January 6 Committee’s Conclusions

By Amil Imani

I just happened to stumble upon this video on Twitter, and it’s not your typical cat meme.

Wonder why the J6 Committee never showed this video?

Watch as police throw 3 concussion grenades into a peaceful crowd

The man at the end says everything was peaceful until police did this

I’ve never seen cops throw flashbangs into peaceful crowds

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) November 30, 2023

The video captures the unsettling scene of police hurling not one, not two, but three concussion grenades into an apparently peaceful crowd at the Capitol on January 6.

In this eye-opening footage, the peaceful atmosphere is shattered by the deafening blasts of concussion grenades.

It made me wonder, “Why hasn’t this been shown?”

It’s the kind of reality check that sends shivers down your spine. But here’s the kicker: the January 6 Committee, the supposed guardians of truth in the aftermath of the Capitol insurrection, has kept this video, and probably, many others, under wraps.

The Jan. 6, 2021, narrative was that the Capitol had seemingly turned into a battlefield, and the January 6 Committee was assigned to untangle the mess left after the insurrection.

How are we to make any sense of it all, with this video, a piece of the puzzle, showing police tossing concussion grenades into what looks like a peaceful crowd? But why did the January 6 Committee keep this nugget from us?

Lack of evidence – is that we are to understand? Because that’s the committee’s first line of defense. They’re on a mission to decipher what happened that fateful day, not a sideshow of unrelated incidents.

Fair enough, but how about this video and probably several others we haven’t seen to provide a sneak peek into the broader story? Did they leave stones unturned?

We can understand if the committee has to walk a tightrope, juggling legal standards and ethical norms. But this isn’t just any video – it clearly shows the police force, and this video, by itself, is the smoking gun, showing a pattern of aggressive tactics that fueled the chaos. Shouldn’t ethical concerns push them to expose potential misconduct?

Or maybe the committee wants the cold, hard facts. That is understandable, considering the gravity of the situation. But what if this video is a fact, a stark reality of how force was used that day? Does it not deserve a seat at the truth-telling table?

The committee might argue about the availability of other evidence or maybe just that other videos are more relevant and reliable. But what if this one is unique, capturing a moment of truth that others missed? Shouldn’t they explore every avenue to present a complete picture?

The January 6 Committee delved deep into emails, text messages, internal communications, depositions, and what-not. They claim they turned over every stone in their quest for truth.

But what about the video that could speak volumes without a single word?

As we navigate this maze of investigations, it’s not just about the committee. It’s about those who swore an oath to protect and serve, resorting to force against peaceful crowds. What consequences should they face?

If the use of force was unreasonable, criminal charges are on the table. But what if these charges are the exception, not the rule? Do we need a systemic shift in how we evaluate the use of force?

Officers can be held accountable for damages by way of civil lawsuits. But accountability isn’t just about compensating victims – it’s about redefining the relationship between the police and the people they serve.

Citing internal investigations, departments can have their internal checks. But these investigations might resemble something of a fox guarding the henhouse. Should external scrutiny be the norm?

True, videos can shape public perception. And we can’t just brush them aside, saying that such snippets lack context. And it is prerogative that we look to the complaints from other officers – fellow officers, as the whistle-blowers, overcoming the code of silence that might prevail. Shouldn’t we foster an environment where speaking up is the rule, not the exception?

We should – with “professional consequences,” which are violators losing benefits or even getting terminated. But what if the consequences aren’t consistent across the board? Shouldn’t justice be impartial to the badge?

As we grapple with these questions, no doubt, the January 6 Committee stands as a symbol of our collective pursuit of truth. But in their quest, let’s not forget the videos like this that might hold the missing pieces. It’s not just about the events of January 6; it’s about the lessons we learn and the changes we demand. Ultimately, it’s about reclaiming a sense of justice that extends beyond the hallowed halls of the Capitol.

©2023. Amil Imani. All rights reserved.

Why Anything Short of Total Eradication of Hamas Isn’t Enough thumbnail

Why Anything Short of Total Eradication of Hamas Isn’t Enough

By Josh Hammer

For a week now, the world has watched a high-stakes, emotionally draining, and dangerous game being played out in Gaza.

What began as a mediated four-day “truce” and swap of 50 Israeli civilians held hostage by Hamas in exchange for 150 convicted Palestinian-Arab terrorists has now been dragged out much further.

Hamas, unusually self-aware for a jihadist outfit, has savvily dangled the possibility of the release of ever-more hostages in exchange for further “truce” extensions. Israel, which so greatly values human life that it once infamously bartered more than 1,000 terrorists in exchange for captured soldier Gilad Shalit, is all but forced to go along.

But as tantalizing as it is to see more hostages reunited with their families, there are extraordinary costs if Israel prolongs these swaps and continues to indulge the fantasy of a “cease-fire.”

There is the concrete threat of the convicted terrorists being freed from Israeli prison. Among those freed during the Shalit swap was Yahya Sinwar, the current leader of Hamas in Gaza and mastermind of the Oct. 7 pogrom. (He is subordinate to Hamas’ Qatar-based top brass.)

On Thursday, in his first publicized statement since the assault, Sinwar minced no words: “The leaders of [Israel] should know, Oct. 7 was just a rehearsal.” That’s quite a threat. How many future Yahya Sinwars have already been freed from this go-around? The Times of Israel noted that 55% of the first 117 terrorists released during the current swaps had been held for violent crimes, including attempted murder, and 21% belonged to a jihadist outfit.

Tragically, it is not difficult to see what this looks like in practice. On Thursday morning, two terrorist brothers killed three Israelis and wounded six others at a Jerusalem bus stop. Hamas claimed credit, and it turns out the brothers had previously been imprisoned for planning terrorist attacks on behalf of Gaza-based jihadists. Let’s pray this isn’t predictive of what will come from the current swaps. But more to the point: Some “truce” this is, with Hamas openly taking credit for killing more Jews in cold blood.

Then there are the horrific incentives and massive warfighting costs that an extended “truce” entails. Israel’s open negotiation with a terrorist organization, even if conducted via American and Qatari intermediaries, necessarily incentivizes more future hostage-taking and exacerbates the peril for Israel Defense Forces soldiers in Gaza. Even more important, the obvious—indeed, intended—effect of this weeklong “pause” in fighting, from Hamas’ perspective no less than from the Biden administration and Qatar’s perspective, is to habituate the so-called international community to relative calm.

Thus, for each and every day the “truce” is extended, Israel will face increased pressure and hostility when it resumes military operations. Hamas has every incentive to string out the “truce.” The Biden administration, which would like to navigate an off-ramp to the conflict in the face of discontent from the Democratic Party’s Jew-hating progressive base, shares the same incentives. President Joe Biden may publicly claim to support Israel, but his deceitful actions belie his hollow words.

Israel cannot realistically turn down hostage swaps, at least at face value, no matter the tangible benefits to Hamas. But with Hamas now transparently violating the “truce” and calling all the shots, the Jewish state must regain the upper hand in this conflict immediately. Anything less than an unmitigated Israeli victory in Gaza would be catastrophic.

But Israel is losing the war right now: It is waging war on Hamas’ terms and capitulating to the Biden administration and Qatari pressure.

Israel, a nation once vaunted for its military and intelligence prowess, appears extraordinarily weak. The optics of abiding by the “truce” while Hamas manifestly does not do so plays right into Hamas’ hands. Hamas is taunting Israel, further sullying its reputation and undermining its deterrent posture. Hassan Nasrallah and Ali Khamenei are surely laughing.

Especially after Thursday’s slaughter in Jerusalem, Israel has no choice but to put on its blinders, tune out the “international community,” and immediately reestablish deterrence by revving back up the IDF tanks and warplanes to eradicate Hamas in Gaza.

In the aftermath of the Hamas Holocaust of Oct. 7, anything short of complete eradication is inexcusable. No citizen in a First World country can live with such a genocidal specter constantly looming.

Eradication of Hamas is also necessary to deter Hezbollah, a considerably more dangerous foe than Hamas, to say nothing of the regional “head of the snake,” the Iranian regime itself.

Israel’s destruction of Hamas would also have salutary global repercussions: The global jihad that has been emboldened since Oct. 7 would be subdued, and Jews all over the world facing skyrocketing antisemitism would finally feel a little bit safer at home.

This is an extraordinarily difficult position for an Israeli leader to be in. But Benjamin Netanyahu is Israel’s longest-serving prime minister ever, and he comes from a famed Zionist family. The future viability of Zionism now hangs on his next moves.


This article was published by Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission.


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.

FBI Whistleblower Is Exposing Deep Corruption, Political Bias thumbnail

FBI Whistleblower Is Exposing Deep Corruption, Political Bias

By Catherine Salgado

The U.S. government is preparing to turn its political, technological, and even military might against its own citizens, warned FBI whistleblower Steve Friend.

Steve Friend is a former policeman and FBI agent who exposed FBI abuses around the investigations and prosecution of the Jan. 6 political prisoners. He is the author of “True Blue: My Journey from Beat Cop to FBI Whistleblower.

At a private event in Phoenix, Arizona, on November 29, Friend explained how his dream job became a nightmare when he accidentally discovered the depth of corruption and dishonesty now completely poisoning the FBI and endangering the American people.

Friend first detailed the FBI’s pernicious “quota” system, which incentivizes agents to entrap individuals and create crimes that didn’t exist by requiring agents to pursue a certain number of cases to meet arbitrary statistical goals. This encourages abuses where agents pursue pointless cases or go looking for crimes that aren’t there while ignoring truly dangerous crimes. Friend, for instance, was switched from child sex abuse cases, at a time when child trafficking and exploitation are among the biggest crime epidemics facing America, to Jan. 6 cases. After challenging the use of SWAT teams for Jan. 6 suspects who were not dangerous, Friend ended up being a target of his own agency. He prioritized his oath to the Constitution over “loyalty to the agency,” and paid the price.

Friend also explained how the FBI falsely inflates the alleged political problem of white supremacist, MAGA “domestic terrorism.” Whereas 9/11, with its 3,000 deaths and over a dozen actual terrorists, was treated as just one case by the FBI, now each and every single person who was at or around the Capitol on Jan. 6 is considered a separate case. That standard fits non-criminal citizens from all around the country, allowing the FBI to claim that they are seeing a crisis of “domestic terrorism,” when they simply changed the way they operate to push a political narrative.

According to Friend, the FBI is almost entirely filled now with individuals who are either political zealots or willing to follow orders to keep a job; and the agent training is geared toward worsening the weaponization. That’s the situation in multiple government agencies, he said, and it is infecting the military as well. Not to mention the government agencies like the FBI collude with private entities, such as Big Tech companies. All in all, the government is now gearing up to target every single American who doesn’t comply meekly, completely regardless of Constitutional or legal restrictions.

Individuals who support Donald Trump, are conservative, are religious, and are military veterans now constitute particular targets of FBI surveillance and persecution, Friend stated. Whether you’re political or just living a Judeo-Christian, conservative lifestyle, the FBI is coming after you. The FBI project to spy on traditional Catholics and the FBI surveillance and harassment of parents challenging school boards are two exposed examples of this insane anti-Constitutional campaign.

Nor are ordinary citizens the only targets of the FBI. Friend stated his conviction that Donald Trump will be convicted and jailed, no matter what the evidence is. In his opinion, Americans must focus on the local level to save this country. School boards, mayors, and sheriffs can do a great deal of good—even block federal authoritarian nonsense. He gave the example of a sheriff who refused to provide manpower to assist the FBI, which had to give up its woke project in that county because of the finite number of its agents.

Each and every one of us has to step up. We are Americans, and we must do what our Founding Fathers did, and take charge of our own destiny. We can no longer just hope that a single political or social leader or a cadre of elites will rescue us. As Friend urged, it is time for us all to take on the responsibility to be active in the public square, working to rescue this country from the Police State authoritarians starting at the local level, as our forefathers intended.

Watch The American Radicals podcast on Rumble with Steve Friend for more shocking details on the corruption of the FBI and federal government.


As we move through 2023 and into the next election cycle, The Prickly Pear will resume Take Action recommendations and information.